Jump to content

RichardFeynmanLives

Member
  • Content Count

    50
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:
    Democrat

Profile Fields

  • Website URL
    microsoft.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    M
  • Location
    Florida
  • Interests
    Politics

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't think the Trump Cult should worry about whether "Russians" are indicted or not. They should worry about Trump. The Mueller Report shows ten instances of criminal obstruction of justice, and four of them include all that is usually necessary to convict Trump in a court of law. We won't know if there is more under the redacted portions of the report until Trump leaves the presidency. But these four cases on their own are enough to lock him up for 80 years (20 each). Of course, we know this DOJ decided not to indict Trump while he's in office. But the evidence is clear. I posted the following to a different forum a while back. 1- The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel (Page 77) Mueller says: "Substantial evidence indicates that the President's attempts to remove the Special Counsel were linked to the Special Counsel's oversight of investigations that involved the President's conduct - and, most immediately , to reports that the President was being investigated for potential obstruction of justice [...]There also is evidence that the President knew that he should not have made those calls to McGahn." 2- The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation (Page 90) Mueller says: "Substantial evidence indicates that the President 's effort to have Sessions limit the scope of the Special Counsel's investigation to future election interference was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President ' s and his campaign's conduct." 3- The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation (Page 107) Mueller says: "There is evidence that at least one purpose of the President 's conduct toward Sessions was to have Sessions assume control over the Russia investigation and supervise it in a way that would restrict its scope." 4- The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel (Page 113) Mueller says: "Substantial evidence indicates that in repeatedly urging McGahn to dispute that he was ordered to have the Special Counsel terminated , the President acted for the purpose of influencing McGahn 's account in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny of the President's conduct towards the investigation." Mueller cited ten cases of obstruction. But for these four he includes all the elements normally required to convict: act, nexus and intent. The other six still require one of these elements. The report includes instructions to Congress on what is needed. And this is why Trump is stonewalling the investigation.
  2. It's sort of a "cult" movie. I'm not sure I would've understood some of it before reading the book. It's a huge book. It has maps, and family trees and even a geological history of Arrakis. Difficult to summarize in just one movie. Though I thought they did a good job of capturing the relevant aspects. Maybe if you watch the 2000 TV series. It might be available somewhere. It wasn't as great, but it's longer so it probably covers more detail.
  3. Unfortunately, right now that's a monopoly in our country. There are only two choice: cable, or your phone company. Unless you are one of the lucky ones who happens to live in one of the few limited areas where they offer FIOS. Otherwise, I would definitely not recommend the phone company. If Comcast offers services with no contract, I would suffer with their lamentable customer service for a while until 5G comes of age. That will be a game-changer, but it's not fully implemented yet. When you see companies like Google or Verizon offering Internet access for homes, that's when you'll know it's time to change. But don't fall into a long-term contract with anybody. Because you'll be stuck with them when real 5G is available.
  4. My favorite SF book of all time. And I think that the original movie (the one with Sting) was underrated. The TV series... only so-so. I read the book twice. First several years before I watched the movie, and again after. So that was about 35 years ago. I can try to answer any questions, but I'm not sure my memory will serve me right. But I'm looking forward to the new release.
  5. I saw this subject pop up in the "Member Debate" room. But it looks like this came up before I joined, and the topic was closed while I was still trying to find my way around, and it was closed before I could respond. So I hope I'm not infringing any forum rules. It's not my intention to debate here whether man-made climate change (AGW) is real. That would be a different topic. But I thought it would be important to explain what the main problem that Climate Change addresses is.... And, not surprisingly, that's changes to the Earth's climate. "Change" being the operative word. The topic I am referring to asked people to state some "ideal" surface temperature. But that's misses the issue. Human civilization, as a whole, can adapt to just about any temperature. Or, better said, "temperature range". But the process of adapting is painful. People those who cannot adapt quickly enough, die. Some because of the shifts in temperature between summer and winter. Others because of disease caused by species (usually insects) that thrive in warmer environments and carry diseases. Other just get caught up in the additional atmospheric disasters: hurricanes, tornadoes, longer drought periods, forest fires, rising tides, ... and so on. There have been many periods in the past in which human beings have had to adapt to changes in climate. Most of them before the industrial era (it's even more difficult for industries to adapt to changes than it is for people). If we are hit by an asteroid, climate could change abruptly, and there would be little we could do about it. But, in this case, we can do something about it. So the slower the environment changes, the less "painful" (the less death) adapting to those changes becomes. Change is happening today at an extremely rapid pace. It's not reversible anymore (not in any of our lifetimes, anyway), but if we can slow it down, that will give more people time to adapt. And this is what green initiative seek: to slow it down without causing other problems like famine, or any type of heavy economic impact.
  6. I'm still curious. And since Hillary seems to be your favorite topic, I thought I'd ask. I've heard more lunatic conspiracy theories about this fantasy "Deep State" (which only makes sense if you are referring to the red tape in government bureaucracy., but not as some "organized" initiative in the pocket of .... anybody) then you will ever fabricate on your own. But there is one question none of them addresses. This "Deep State' conspiracy would explain away why Hillary is not in prison. But not why she hasn't been charged with any crimes. Why has she not been charged? If you believe that Bill Barr is part of the Deep State (believing that would require a huge leap of faith), any prosecutor could initiate charges. They could at least bring them to a Grand Jury. And even if you were to argue that they would be thrown out by this.... "Deep State", the fact of bringing them forward would force CNN and the rest of the "nasty" MSM to report all this wonderful "proof" that you have. And if the case is thrown out "ad-portas", even after soooo much compelling evidence that you say you have against her, you will have a great argument to support your "Deep State" conspiracy theory. So please explain why... despite the fact that Barr acts like an unconditional Trump supporter who believes that the powers of the President are almost "infinite"..... and, if not him, the fact that Trump has appointed scores of prosecutors. And despite "lock her up" being Trump's favorite campaign rally chant... Why have no charges ever been brought against Hillary in this administration? I expect an answer full of insults, ad hominems and repetition of the nutty "Deep State" conspiracy. So please don't let me down by submitting some sort of serious response that actually addresses all the points I have made
  7. I completely agree that they would be rogue by doing what they are doing now in an abusive way. And shielding themselves from intervention by the other powers. The current regime, I believe, has reached the threshold.. Regardless of this characterization, the problem is that half the country agrees with the current regime. So it will only be a "rogue regime" to half the people (broadly speaking) So, in theory, that could create a civil war. But I don't think that's what you were referring to. We are in a health crisis. Governors making emergency orders are upholding the Constitution. I don't believe we create "a more perfect union" by not doing whatever it takes to keep "we the people" alive. Quite the contrary governors who are not making emergency orders. I'm sure you know that impeachment is not a criminal process. This Department of Justice has decided (correctly or incorrectly) that Trump cannot be charged with a crime while he is President. But his proven crimes are many. By "proven" I don't mean in court, of course. I mean they have been proven to the expectation of any reasonable person who views the facts objectively. The Mueller report depicts many prosecutable crimes that meet all judicial requirements to imprison Trump for decades. Especially obstruction of justice. Very likely others that are currently "redacted". Lawsuits are under way that might (or maybe not) be resolved before the elections. I'll be honest. If it were up to me, I'd outlaw all possession of firearms (with a few proper exceptions) But to accomplish this, there is no need for any government to go under full-on gun confiscation mode. Because I don't think that's possible and I'd be extremely suspicious of a government even attempting to do anything like that. I would oppose such policy. There are other ways....
  8. Oh! The Conspiracy Theory, of course. A very selective "Deep State" that also protects Trump when he commits real proven crimes. Conspiracy Theories are great for the intellectually weak. Because nihilism explains away anything you want. And sometimes you wish they were true. Because a Deep State like the one conspiracy theorists tout would have had Trump's ass on a platter a long time ago. But a Deep State that one day hands over the presidency to Trump by announcing that they are "opening an investigation" ten days before the election, but then seek to protect her is just the fantasy of idiots who live in a cult. Trump says that you should not believe your eyes and ears. His Apostle Saint Ruddy Giuliani says that reality is not reality. Those are the only precepts that anybody like you need because it helps them avoid the extenuating task of having to think for yourself. And the Fox Noise echo-chamber gives you a host of links to throw at anybody who questions The Messiah. So it's a pre-canned, all-in-a-box conspiracy theory that doesn't require you to think by yourself about anything. Just choose the link or past-copy the text that they have pre-made just for you. Dictatorships are the product of lazy minds. And we hope the safeguards in our Constitution will help us avoid the one idiots like you are embracing. But we do have to be vigilant because, even though "good guys" always win in the end, weak minds can leave behind great devastation. Nobody believed that Mueller would bring down Trump. I have said this on many forums only days after his appointment. But he did show that he's a criminal. Courts will bring down Trump when he's no longer President. Mueller is a big part of this.
  9. I was a Sanders supporter against Hillary. Undecided when Sanders withdrew and before voting here in Florida started. So I didn't have to make up my mind. but I think some Sanders supporters need to chill or they're going to get Trump re-elected. That would be tragic. Having said that, I also think Biden has not handled this well. Not a bit. What's all the crap about not releasing the University of Delaware documents? Why is he getting himself into that rabbit hole. Just say yeah! I'm all for it! And then have a surrogate say that they can't do that because they contain this or that confidential information. And Biden just says "Oh well... I tried!" He needs to stop giving Trump supporters weapons to attack him.
  10. Leave it to a dumb Republican to not get it! Yep! There is no such thing as "The Democrat National Committee". There is a DNC. Keep trying! Maybe you'll get it without too much smoke coming out from your ears.
  11. Not sure what the purpose of defining "Modern Firearms" would be in this discussion. What would need to be better defined is "Rogue Regime". Not that I dispute your definition, but it needs to be extended. How would a regime become rogue in this country? I think we now have the closest we will ever come to a Rogue Regime. We have a President who has acted unlawfully, and because of bureaucratic red tape. Especially in the Judicial power who can't come up with resolutions fast enough. So anybody who wants to defend the Constitution just gives up. Red tape wins! Anyway... to stay on topic, I don't think there will ever even be an attempt by the armed population to use any type of firearms to defend the Constitution. If any group of people or states ever decided to rise against a federal government, at a minimum half the people and the states will oppose them. That's a tie. The difference will be who controls the armed forces.
  12. The problem is this: NASCAR makes their money on image. On showing famous people. Winning races is just an "accessory" to the main product which is fame. So when a racer tarnishes his/her image, it's spoiled goods. Doesn't matter how good they are because they can't use their image for anything.
  13. Oh wow! You know who the Chair of the DNC is. So?
  14. That's beyond "no hold barred". That's vulgar. Seek help!
  15. Oh my God! And you think that's the "Democrat National Committee"? BTW, I know you're just pulling names out of your ass. But you have no real quotes. Just so you know you are fooling nobody.

No holds barred chat

  • Hey kfools.. does this help? 


  • By Vegas

    Liberals are going to hell.


  • grgle



  • Where’s at @slideman?


  • Hola


  • I know this one, this new chat thing. I've seen it called the "shoutbox" among other things in my past. Very hard to hide from the chat box. The question is asked, there's no time to go search what other folks think, this is real time. Only seconds should be between chat box replies. This one is made for me. In the chat box one has to be quick on their feet with stuff at the ready. This chat box is the worst nightmare of anyone trying to deal with ol' teach. 


  • By pmurT

    hey @teacher that sounds like too much work for me LOL I need that useless thing called *time* in order to authenticate facts and truths which get posted by deceitful Dems


  • What does the red number refer to? currently, on my screen it says 2

     


  • Where does it say 2?


  • So. In the chat....if you tag a member the text afterwards should be a private message. 


  • How do? I'm teacher. If I'm online and the powers that be can figure out how to make it immediately apparent to me that whatever I've said here has been replied to I'm gonna show up right quick and kick some teeth in. It's the chat box, all this is new and scary. I know this gig. This starts now. 



  • Hey kfools, did you lose your securtiy cert? On my browser it is saying your site is not secure?


  • Mine too. I'm looking into it.


  • Mine too. 


  • I thought it was my location.. 


  • Just gave to renew the security cert. No big deal I'll do it tonight


  • OK thanks

     



  • Happy Anniversary, America... on your Civil Union.


  • All lives matter.


  • Double post deleted.


  • By teacher

    Scroll the other way for a while and you'll see me saying that these days the chat box ain't gonna work as one has to be quick on one's feet. The question is posed, there ain't no stinkin time for ya'll to refer to your betters for the answer, ya'll don't understand these things, this political debate, ya'll don't have the answer at hand, ya'll haven't thought this through, ya'll ain't ready for the next question I'll ask,  ya'll can't handle the pace that a bloke such as I can bring it in the chat box, ya'll can't handle this format.

     

    This one is made for me. 


  • By teacher

    Being offended does not make one correct. 


  • By teacher

    Some few days before the next election Mr. Fools is gonna pin my horse thread. it's gonna be horrible, I shall endevour every day to bring some some fresh. 

     

    I still own this cat box.


  • By teacher

    "I'm coming to you for ask a quick favor."


  • By teacher

    "Anyone that places a color in front of their name is racist." That one is not mine, got it from another member. 


  • Where’s all the hot bitches? 


  • By teacher

    Kidding me? 


  • How do I get rid of this chatroom box?


  • How do I get rid of this chatroom box?


  • Get me out of Chatbox!


  • By jefftec

    The chatbox stays expanded and is a nuisance blocking screen images. What setting is there to control/collapse chatbox?


  • By kfools

    Just click the no holds barred to collapse it.


  • diddle dee dee


  • By teacher

    Like Jesse Ventura said to all that would not take a chew in the movie "Predator." LF.org is a political debate forum. This chatbox just ups the opportunity to go at it. Ya'll have your political views, seems to me that ya'll should have thought these things out and be ready to battle. 


  • By teacher

    Is real time political debate a thing ya'll hide from? What do you morons do if you happen to run into some one with opposing political views on the street? 


  • By teacher

    I've never ran into anyone, in real life,  that said Obama lied. I run into folks that tell me Trump lies. I'm at work. I didn't bring it up. I don't reply, I'm representing a company. Not my place. 


  • By teacher

    Lookie there, all I have to do is get out and come back. Why is it that liberals, when they have a company man before them decide they that is the time they go off? Why would ya'll put a company man into that position? 


  • By teacher

    Chatbox is mine. 


  • By teacher

    There is no such thing as "reverse discrimination." There is only discrimination. To imply that black on white discrimination is reverse discrimination sort of lends some justification to the idea of so-called "reverse discrimination." Any discrimination is wrong. Original idea supplied to me by a man called Kyle. Credit where credit is due.


  • By teacher

    How do? I'm teacher. I told you unwashed masses long ago in this, the chat box what the rules were.  Told you all that I would rule the chat box. Go check it out. Scroll some. The chat box is supposed to be a place where debate can happen damn near instantaneously. At the onset I said that the chat box wouldn't fly and that is because the chat box demands that all needs to be ready for real time debate. Everybody but I fails.


You don't have permission to chat in this chatroom
×
×
  • Create New...