Close together in time, same author. In chronological order; here, here and here.
Money talks; Clinton talks; what lingers?
Saturday, June 18, 2016
Friday, June 17, 2016
Four Elizabeth Warren short video segments from hearings which collectively provide questions and a context for reading Ms. Clinton's Goldman Sachs transcripts, once she releases them to the public.
Once pigs fly? Can she get away with such shameful hubris? Likely, but unfortunate.
First segment - while GE has from time to time paid no federal taxes; what has the government been doing that yields it a substantial cash flow? Answer: screwing students on student loans. Ask Hillary about that shameful truth.
Further segments - no Wall Street criminal has been prosecuted; while too big to fail was a theme in bailout largess times; and what about all that stuff, Warren asks.
So somebody knows the questions, and asks. Will it not be reassuring to see the Clinton six-figure speech transcripts to see how she'd equally held feet to the fire as Warren would? Wouldn't that make the sun shine brighter and the birds sing finer?
TRANSCRIPTS. WE WANT TRANSCRIPTS. SOONERBEATS TRUMPS LATER; LATER BEATS TRUMPS NEVER.
_____________________________
The online Warren-YouTube items are here, here, here and here. A brief nobody fired as well as nobody jailed bonus item, here. A longer bonus item, Warren and Krugman, here. Don't be a wuss and dodge it because it runs longer than an hour. Last: Bernie, here.
___________UPDATE_____________
Warren puts Ms. Clinton in perspective; with one credible and impressive, the other Clinton. More here.
Bernie. He questions oligarchs. The Clintons ARE oligarchs. Of that camp.
Representing that camp? Oligarchs can say much that ends up happening differently from what is said, earlier. Lying is lying, errors in prediction - changing circumstances - adaptation - all are, at heart, words that in hindsight can be used to deny lying. Would speech transcripts, if released, fit campaign rhetoric? That is a fine question. Will final post-convention campaign rhetoric be little but a constant din of what's wrong with Trump? We can guess and we shall see. Pop goes the weasel is my guess, but even more, pop, pop, pop, pop and more pop, pop, pop. A tireless weasel, rather than Warren-like good sense.
FURTHER: Clinton views of Obamacare [a.k.a. Romneycare] is step-wise incrementalism toward better ways; Warren, here, on healthcare perspectives you will not hear in Clinton campaigning. We're moving to better and better is something of a glide and slide whereas Warren addresses the elephant in the room. It's broken. It's not working. It's fiction to say be happy.
FURTHER: As to expectations, I expect not to be surprised by another Clinton presidency, should it come about. I expect others who have listened to Ms. Clinton's campaigning may be in for a jolt, (if they at all can feel the rain whereas most others will only get wet). There will be no more New Deal, with a stacked deck as with the Obama services to the rich, they will instead only play cards among themselves.
Try this; ask yourself, how many big payday speeches has Elizabeth Warren been invited to give to Wall Street?
Legitimacy matters. Warren has it. Contrasts exist.
As to legitimate and decent past conduct; Trump University, has less than Warren's record; while getting rich as a career politician has even less - Trump hustled chumps, chumps for Trump, whereas the Clintons took money out of politics - in their way, not as Bernie means when he says, "Take the money out of politics."
How it is, is not how it should be; and that AIPAC demo of Ms. Clinton's tell 'em what they want to hear accords with big money for Goldman Sachs speaking gigs. Of her promises, a belief that she will keep the ones Goldman Sachs bought is a sound outlook. To avoid future buyer's remorse know the product. If Gloria Steinem and Madeline Albright would have been viewed as useful Clinton props at AIPAC they'd have been there. But AIPAC, while another speech given in anticipation of a payback; differed from the Goldman Sachs stints because the Wall Street money-making gigs, each of them doubtlessly like some of her university speaking engagements, were fully contracted for down to travel and lodging detail in advance - and for the Wall Streetsters, given behind closed doors.
When you see a woman as completely legitimate and entirely honest in her concern for the bulk of Americans as Elizabeth Warren is, and you see the political process giving us Hillary Clinton instead, something is wrong with that process. The 1% owns the process and the players in it, that might be a place to begin analysis, but Why NOT Warren??? Go figure.
FURTHER: We're being taken for a ride, again. Three short videos touching on the legitimacy vs. bought -&- quality vs. connectedness issues, in a logical sequence, and please look beyond the manner of the first video presenter to the substance of what he is saying; then Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! which we all should respect; last, a bit of a timely chuckle; here, here and then here.
This is the feature movie the Dem inner party wants to push upon us. Instead of Bernie who is as sincere and trustworthy as Elizabeth Warren although she'd likely make the better President. Inner party offensiveness? That's for you to figure out for yourself. Trump University promised the secret of how to make a fortune trading in real estate. While not too much a secret beyond withheld transcripts, the Clintons are a lesson in how to make a fortune trading in politics. Which offends more?
FURTHER: Two more video items. 1- Speeches and Transcripts. 2- Emails.
First segment - while GE has from time to time paid no federal taxes; what has the government been doing that yields it a substantial cash flow? Answer: screwing students on student loans. Ask Hillary about that shameful truth.
Further segments - no Wall Street criminal has been prosecuted; while too big to fail was a theme in bailout largess times; and what about all that stuff, Warren asks.
So somebody knows the questions, and asks. Will it not be reassuring to see the Clinton six-figure speech transcripts to see how she'd equally held feet to the fire as Warren would? Wouldn't that make the sun shine brighter and the birds sing finer?
TRANSCRIPTS. WE WANT TRANSCRIPTS. SOONER
_____________________________
The online Warren-YouTube items are here, here, here and here. A brief nobody fired as well as nobody jailed bonus item, here. A longer bonus item, Warren and Krugman, here. Don't be a wuss and dodge it because it runs longer than an hour. Last: Bernie, here.
___________UPDATE_____________
Warren puts Ms. Clinton in perspective; with one credible and impressive, the other Clinton. More here.
Bernie. He questions oligarchs. The Clintons ARE oligarchs. Of that camp.
Representing that camp? Oligarchs can say much that ends up happening differently from what is said, earlier. Lying is lying, errors in prediction - changing circumstances - adaptation - all are, at heart, words that in hindsight can be used to deny lying. Would speech transcripts, if released, fit campaign rhetoric? That is a fine question. Will final post-convention campaign rhetoric be little but a constant din of what's wrong with Trump? We can guess and we shall see. Pop goes the weasel is my guess, but even more, pop, pop, pop, pop and more pop, pop, pop. A tireless weasel, rather than Warren-like good sense.
FURTHER: Clinton views of Obamacare [a.k.a. Romneycare] is step-wise incrementalism toward better ways; Warren, here, on healthcare perspectives you will not hear in Clinton campaigning. We're moving to better and better is something of a glide and slide whereas Warren addresses the elephant in the room. It's broken. It's not working. It's fiction to say be happy.
FURTHER: As to expectations, I expect not to be surprised by another Clinton presidency, should it come about. I expect others who have listened to Ms. Clinton's campaigning may be in for a jolt, (if they at all can feel the rain whereas most others will only get wet). There will be no more New Deal, with a stacked deck as with the Obama services to the rich, they will instead only play cards among themselves.
Try this; ask yourself, how many big payday speeches has Elizabeth Warren been invited to give to Wall Street?
Legitimacy matters. Warren has it. Contrasts exist.
As to legitimate and decent past conduct; Trump University, has less than Warren's record; while getting rich as a career politician has even less - Trump hustled chumps, chumps for Trump, whereas the Clintons took money out of politics - in their way, not as Bernie means when he says, "Take the money out of politics."
How it is, is not how it should be; and that AIPAC demo of Ms. Clinton's tell 'em what they want to hear accords with big money for Goldman Sachs speaking gigs. Of her promises, a belief that she will keep the ones Goldman Sachs bought is a sound outlook. To avoid future buyer's remorse know the product. If Gloria Steinem and Madeline Albright would have been viewed as useful Clinton props at AIPAC they'd have been there. But AIPAC, while another speech given in anticipation of a payback; differed from the Goldman Sachs stints because the Wall Street money-making gigs, each of them doubtlessly like some of her university speaking engagements, were fully contracted for down to travel and lodging detail in advance - and for the Wall Streetsters, given behind closed doors.
When you see a woman as completely legitimate and entirely honest in her concern for the bulk of Americans as Elizabeth Warren is, and you see the political process giving us Hillary Clinton instead, something is wrong with that process. The 1% owns the process and the players in it, that might be a place to begin analysis, but Why NOT Warren??? Go figure.
FURTHER: We're being taken for a ride, again. Three short videos touching on the legitimacy vs. bought -&- quality vs. connectedness issues, in a logical sequence, and please look beyond the manner of the first video presenter to the substance of what he is saying; then Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! which we all should respect; last, a bit of a timely chuckle; here, here and then here.
This is the feature movie the Dem inner party wants to push upon us. Instead of Bernie who is as sincere and trustworthy as Elizabeth Warren although she'd likely make the better President. Inner party offensiveness? That's for you to figure out for yourself. Trump University promised the secret of how to make a fortune trading in real estate. While not too much a secret beyond withheld transcripts, the Clintons are a lesson in how to make a fortune trading in politics. Which offends more?
FURTHER: Two more video items. 1- Speeches and Transcripts. 2- Emails.
From a headline we can foresee Paul Ryan as believing his GOP colleagues will be wholly rudderless with regard to questions surrounding Donald Trump.
This link.
_____________UPDATE____________
Whatever the scorn some have toward Trump, there will be good arising too from his presumptive candidate status when his party convenes in Cleveland to nominate him to run under their banner for President:
[link in original - image from linked item] What better backdrop than a warship?
Rudderless, or just mothballed?
(The ship that is.)
_____________UPDATE____________
Whatever the scorn some have toward Trump, there will be good arising too from his presumptive candidate status when his party convenes in Cleveland to nominate him to run under their banner for President:
While the host committee says it is on track for funding, other big-name donors plan to skip out on the Cleveland event, too. David Koch, one of the biggest backers in Tampa, announced that he and his brother Charles will not fund this year’s convention, and a number of major GOP figureheads, including both former presidents Bush and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), have said they won’t be attending.
Rudderless, or just mothballed?
(The ship that is.)
YEAH. SURE. A SOFTWARE ACCOUNTING ERROR. NOTHING ELSE TO SEE HERE.
Old news, from June 1 this year, but still interesting news. Strib, here, these paragraphss near the end of the report:
In the film version Bruch Willis will play the disgruntled former employee; Matt Damon as BCA head; William H. Macey as the company owner. Matt Dillon and Snoop Dogg the firm's dispensary head and armored vehicle driver respectively. These are the favored folks per Dayton's we-need-another-study approach to legalization. Somebody's gonna be favored folks, so we pick with caution . . .
_______________UPDATE_______________
More software "glich" distress; our military; luckily not in pay grade and promotion e-records. Here and here. Lockheed Martin yet again proves itself an exemplary military contractor. One to emulate. The Coen brothers are working on the film version; a musical, similar to Oh Brother Where Art Thou. Less snow a part of the plot, in comparison to Fargo. Snow of a differing nature.
Officers with the state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension searched the dispensary and the company’s armored vehicle. BCA officials saw that the CMO made several transfers in December — mostly after hours — totaling more than 5,580 grams of cannabis oil out of Otsego with no destination listed. Health officials could not laccount for the missing oil and learned that after-hours transfers are “out of the ordinary.”
The company responded to the search warrant by releasing a two-page statement saying the missing cannabis oil was destroyed and that the New York facility was not short on inventory. The company said the discrepancies stem from software designed for the accounting of marijuana plant material, not oil. Those limitations result in a lack of destinations for dozens of entries into the system, “not just the small number of entries cherry-picked by the disgruntled former employee.”
In the film version Bruch Willis will play the disgruntled former employee; Matt Damon as BCA head; William H. Macey as the company owner. Matt Dillon and Snoop Dogg the firm's dispensary head and armored vehicle driver respectively. These are the favored folks per Dayton's we-need-another-study approach to legalization. Somebody's gonna be favored folks, so we pick with caution . . .
_______________UPDATE_______________
More software "glich" distress; our military; luckily not in pay grade and promotion e-records. Here and here. Lockheed Martin yet again proves itself an exemplary military contractor. One to emulate. The Coen brothers are working on the film version; a musical, similar to Oh Brother Where Art Thou. Less snow a part of the plot, in comparison to Fargo. Snow of a differing nature.
Confusion in a war horse suggests it is past time to pasture.
WaPo, within a laughable context, publishes:
That is a generic enough statement to stand on its own. For those demanding a context, the item is titled, "John McCain: Obama is ‘directly responsible’ for Orlando attack - -By Mike DeBonis June 16 at 3:59 PM."
Anything for the 33 long years in beltway banter, to get away from, "Your guy really is going to be Donald Trump, isn't he?" A younger McCain, years ago, would have said "Hillary Clinton ..." because Obama is yesterday's hero.
Clearly, Clinton's Libya = Mateen's murders. As clear as Obama's Iraq Shutdown = Mateen's murders.
The logic is fit for pasturing, and there is that unnamed primary challenger WaPo mentioned, as well as a named Dem general election contestant.
33 years in beltway give and take. Most of the student loan sufferers have not even been sucking air 33 years, and McCain punts on any of their distress; business as usual being McCain as usual. Pasture him.
_____________UPDATE______________
In the fine Trumpian tradition of genuineness and quality, a suggestion for a TV weekly show, "Ask the Admiral," (being Trumpian even so far as exagerating the highest military rank McCain attained), where things are asked of the gentleman, with suitable preamble, such as:
The question for the Admiral then being, "Your guy really is going to be Donald Trump, isn't he?"
_________________________
image of excerpted online reporting is from here
McCain, who lost to Obama in the 2008 presidential election, is seeking a sixth term in the Senate this year and faces a competitive Republican primary in August.
The likely Democratic nominee in the race, Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, issued a statement Thursday saying McCain “cross[ed] a dangerous line in comments that undermine our Commander in Chief on national security issues — at the very moment the president was in Orlando to comfort victims’ families.”
“It’s difficult to imagine the old John McCain being this reckless with something so serious,” the statement said. “John McCain has changed after 33 years in Washington.”
That is a generic enough statement to stand on its own. For those demanding a context, the item is titled, "John McCain: Obama is ‘directly responsible’ for Orlando attack - -By Mike DeBonis June 16 at 3:59 PM."
Anything for the 33 long years in beltway banter, to get away from, "Your guy really is going to be Donald Trump, isn't he?" A younger McCain, years ago, would have said "Hillary Clinton ..." because Obama is yesterday's hero.
Clearly, Clinton's Libya = Mateen's murders. As clear as Obama's Iraq Shutdown = Mateen's murders.
The logic is fit for pasturing, and there is that unnamed primary challenger WaPo mentioned, as well as a named Dem general election contestant.
33 years in beltway give and take. Most of the student loan sufferers have not even been sucking air 33 years, and McCain punts on any of their distress; business as usual being McCain as usual. Pasture him.
_____________UPDATE______________
In the fine Trumpian tradition of genuineness and quality, a suggestion for a TV weekly show, "Ask the Admiral," (being Trumpian even so far as exagerating the highest military rank McCain attained), where things are asked of the gentleman, with suitable preamble, such as:
The question for the Admiral then being, "Your guy really is going to be Donald Trump, isn't he?"
_________________________
image of excerpted online reporting is from here
Thursday, June 16, 2016
Evangelist Franklin Graham whines in St. Paul big time about the political process. No dog in the hunt, apparently.
He should track down his good friend George W. Bush and have his portrait painted.
Strib; here.
In St. Paul ginning up some cash, or what? To criticize the Orlando shootings?
Or simply just there to whine about secularism without any cash flow?
That is difficult to imagine.
Strib; here.
Minnesota is the twenty-ninth state on Graham's tour. The crowd assembled ranged from elderly people in lawn chairs, to families with children, to a few workers from the State Capitol construction project in fluorescent yellow vests. Many waved small U.S. flags during a chorus of "God Bless America."
In St. Paul ginning up some cash, or what? To criticize the Orlando shootings?
Or simply just there to whine about secularism without any cash flow?
That is difficult to imagine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)