Donald Trump and US politics

"

morbo wrote:

"

faerwin wrote:

The main problems come from China, India and the vast majority of Europe actually. The concentration of population in these areas vs the amount of land that can be used for crops is not sustainable.
...
There also need to be serious repercussion to those that harvest resources without any regard for the management of the reserves (Read, China).

The Western world has below replacement birth rates. The only reason the populations are stable or growing, is because of immigration from the 3rd world, where they breed like crazy.

If you want to stop the growth of consumption and lessen the impact on the environment, you only need to stop all immigration, drastically cut welfare programs and stop all foreign aid. As long as welfare is used to incentivize the birth rates of the poor, the low IQ and militant expansionist cultures, you will have more an more consumers. But the liberal left in not prepared to cut welfare, nor stop immigration and thus has no right to complain about the human impact on the environment.

It's not the top 1% monocle rich hwite males, the ones who need to burn millions of tons of coal for their electricity consumption or the ones who need millions of km2 for their food production, right?

The western world also waste humongous amounts of food on a daily basis. Reports say it's around 95-115 kg of food that are wasted every year per citizen (210-255 lbs). That number alone is like increasing the population by 30-40%.

Cutting immigration wouldn't stop the consumption growth at all. You have to eat no matter where you are in the world.

For welfare, there actually need to be more of it but they need to be done differently. France has done something really good by making it illegal for supermarkets to throw away food (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/04/french-law-forbids-food-waste-by-supermarkets). This effectively reduces food waste by a good amount while helping the people that needs it. This is something that the whole western world should adopt as it would help tremendously in the current over-exploitation of our resources.

Cutting foreign aid isn't exactly useful. That aid is generally used as leverage for trading deals and the likes. I don't know too much about how much is spent there but I doubt it's a lot and I doubt it's a real problem.

Cutting in the welfares systems isn't a solution. Getting smarter systems and better programs is the solution.

Actually, yes, it's mostly them that need to burn tons of coal to power their industries. The biggest pollution factor comes from factories, then cars. There's also the ones that have absolutely no regards towards environment and keeps polluting the rivers, streams and even tap water (just look at oil industry and fracking, there's numerous US cities in which their water needs to be imported in bottles because the tap water is heavily polluted). However, they generally aren't the ones consuming high amount of food (transformation of food isn't consumption).

"

faerwin wrote:

Actually, yes, it's mostly them that need to burn tons of coal to power their industries. The biggest pollution factor comes from factories, then cars.

Factories that produce what? Cars? Which are driven by who? The 1% monocle wearers have so many factories, because there are so many consumer to sell stuff to.

I thought that you agreed that the problem of over-exploitation of natural resources & global pollution, is overpopulation? If you want to stop overpopulation, then you need to stop helping people to breed like crazy.

1.) An ever growing world population
2.) No poverty, everyone is equal
3.) Clean environment, no global environmental impact

You can't have all three.

I don't think Seth Rich was assassinated, by the way. Even though I strongly suspect he is the DNC leaker.

Imagine for a moment that your with Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson trying to solve an untimely death. The facts are: In the pre-dawn hours of a summer morning in a temperate climate, 27-year-old white male is on the phone with his girlfriend walking home and abruptly ends call a block from his residence after "voices or something" are heard in the background of the call; he tells her not to worry as he hangs up. Two minutes later, around 4:18a, he is shot twice in the back after a physical altercation that leaves bruises and tears the victim's watch strap. No valuables are taken, to include the afforementioned (and expensive) watch, iPhone, and wallet. By 4:20a police are alerted, and arrive on the scene to find the victim "talkative" despite his injuries. He is taken to hospital and is evaluated by a surgeon who believes the gunshot wounds are not fatal and the patient can pull through. Despite this, this man is pronounced dead at 5:57a, one hour and 39 minutes after the shooting.

Now if you were to posit to Mr. Holmes that this was a professional assassination, I feel confident he would laugh at your stupidity. A professional assassin does not wait for his target in full view of him such that the target sees the assassin, nor follows him in such a way that the target notices and tells his woman not to worry. A professional assassin does not get in a fistfight with his target. A professional assassin uses a silencer; given the time between death and police response, shots were probably heard. And above all, a professional assassin does not leave the victim alive with wounds he might survive.

At the same time, the robbery hypothesis has issues, too. If the assailant(s) intended to rob the man without killing him, then leaving valuables behind makes sense; there is considerably more risk fencing property from a murder victim than from a mere robbery. However, if the assailants intended to murder their target from the outset, then leaving valuables behind is nonsensical. If the intent didn't include murder, then the same principles as the professional assassin, except the last, apply; the robbers would want to avoid identification, and since ski masks and the like would be conspicuous given the weather, this would mean avoiding being viewed by the target, approaching from behind and introducing oneself by putting the gun on the target where he can feel it.

The shots to the back seem consistent with this. As does the phone conversation; the response to being held at gunpoint in the middle of a phone call would naturally be to end the call quickly in a way that doesn't cause alarm to the mugger.

However, our victim fought back. He didn't just give up his wallet, but responded in a way consistent with someone who thinks there is no way he's getting out alive, that his only slim chance is by fighting and somehow winning.

This, there are essentially two possibilities:
1. Seth Rich was murdered without intent to rob, but by a rank amateur, not a professional. This would indicate either a crime of passion or a corrupt DNC that is as incompetent at assassination as it is at covering up illegal email servers and at rigging elections. Such cases are normally easy to solve as the murderers​ are stupid.
2. Seth Rich was murdered by a mugger who did not intend to kill, but Rich mistook such a person for an assassin and responded accordingly.

I personally believe #2 is significantly more likely. But both of them increase rather than decrease the likelihood that Rich was involved in the DNC leaks.

"

morbo wrote:

"

faerwin wrote:

Actually, yes, it's mostly them that need to burn tons of coal to power their industries. The biggest pollution factor comes from factories, then cars.

Factories that produce what? Cars? Which are driven by who? The 1% monocle wearers have so many factories, because there are so many consumer to sell stuff to.

I thought that you agreed that the problem of over-exploitation of natural resources & global pollution, is overpopulation? If you want to stop overpopulation, then you need to stop helping people to breed like crazy.

1.) An ever growing world population
2.) No poverty, everyone is equal
3.) Clean environment, no global environmental impact

You can't have all three.

No, the problem of natural resources (food) is bad management of said resources (food). The current practices were fine when we had less population but the increasing population isn't the root of the problem (yet).

That said, I do agree that under the current circumstances, the population growth through the world should be slowed down until our practices/methods of growing food (and consuming it) catch up with what the planet can give annually.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Spoiler

I don't think Seth Rich was assassinated, by the way. Even though I strongly suspect he is the DNC leaker.

Imagine for a moment that your with Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson trying to solve an untimely death. The facts are: In the pre-dawn hours of a summer morning in a temperate climate, 27-year-old white male is on the phone with his girlfriend walking home and abruptly ends call a block from his residence after "voices or something" are heard in the background of the call; he tells her not to worry as he hangs up. Two minutes later, around 4:18a, he is shot twice in the back after a physical altercation that leaves bruises and tears the victim's watch strap. No valuables are taken, to include the afforementioned (and expensive) watch, iPhone, and wallet. By 4:20a police are alerted, and arrive on the scene to find the victim "talkative" despite his injuries. He is taken to hospital and is evaluated by a surgeon who believes the gunshot wounds are not fatal and the patient can pull through. Despite this, this man is pronounced dead at 5:57a, one hour and 39 minutes after the shooting.

Now if you were to posit to Mr. Holmes that this was a professional assassination, I feel confident he would laugh at your stupidity. A professional assassin does not wait for his target in full view of him such that the target sees the assassin, nor follows him in such a way that the target notices and tells his woman not to worry. A professional assassin does not get in a fistfight with his target. A professional assassin uses a silencer; given the time between death and police response, shots were probably heard. And above all, a professional assassin does not leave the victim alive with wounds he might survive.

At the same time, the robbery hypothesis has issues, too. If the assailant(s) intended to rob the man without killing him, then leaving valuables behind makes sense; there is considerably more risk fencing property from a murder victim than from a mere robbery. However, if the assailants intended to murder their target from the outset, then leaving valuables behind is nonsensical. If the intent didn't include murder, then the same principles as the professional assassin, except the last, apply; the robbers would want to avoid identification, and since ski masks and the like would be conspicuous given the weather, this would mean avoiding being viewed by the target, approaching from behind and introducing oneself by putting the gun on the target where he can feel it.

The shots to the back seem consistent with this. As does the phone conversation; the response to being held at gunpoint in the middle of a phone call would naturally be to end the call quickly in a way that doesn't cause alarm to the mugger.

However, our victim fought back. He didn't just give up his wallet, but responded in a way consistent with someone who thinks there is no way he's getting out alive, that his only slim chance is by fighting and somehow winning.

This, there are essentially two possibilities:
1. Seth Rich was murdered without intent to rob, but by a rank amateur, not a professional. This would indicate either a crime of passion or a corrupt DNC that is as incompetent at assassination as it is at covering up illegal email servers and at rigging elections. Such cases are normally easy to solve as the murderers​ are stupid.
2. Seth Rich was murdered by a mugger who did not intend to kill, but Rich mistook such a person for an assassin and responded accordingly.

I personally believe #2 is significantly more likely. But both of them increase rather than decrease the likelihood that Rich was involved in the DNC leaks.

DC is a cesspool of crime, both political, and the more common-and-garden variety. To walk the streets there late at night is dangerous. However-

You assume that a "professional" assassin would have been engaged to perform a hit on a traitor to Hillary's cause. I could just as easily imagine some trusted intermediary handing a gang-banger a wad of money and a picture of the target, either to save a few bucks, or, more likely, to sever any chain of direct association between hitter and hirer. Plausible deniability carries a premium in those circles. ='[.]'=

"

ChanBalam wrote:

It looks like "crooked Kushner" is going down. "Lock him up!!!"

LoL!

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/05/26/reuterswashington-post-publish-evidence-of-obama-spying-on-trump-campaign-and-unmasking-americans/#more-133381

"

Reuters/Washington Post Puts a Slice of Kushner Cheese on Russian Nothingburger and simultaneously prove the Obama Administration was spying on the Trump campaign.

The extent of the U.S. media’s straw-grasping is boundless, but this one is going to backfire. HOPEFULLY. For the most recent example consider the Washington Post and Reuters claiming President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner participating in a proposal to set up a back-channel with Russia for communication after the November 8th election.

"

[…] FBI scrutiny of Kushner began when intelligence reports of Flynn’s contacts with Russians included mentions of U.S. citizens, whose names were redacted because of U.S. privacy laws. This prompted [FBI/Comey] investigators to ask U.S. intelligence agencies to reveal the names of the Americans, the current U.S. law enforcement official said.

Kushner’s was one of the names that was revealed, the official said, prompting a closer look at the president’s son-in-law’s dealings with Kislyak and other Russians.

FBI investigators are examining whether Russians suggested to Kushner or other Trump aides that relaxing economic sanctions would allow Russian banks to offer financing to people with ties to Trump, said the current U.S. law enforcement official.

The head of Russian state-owned Vnesheconombank, Sergei Nikolaevich Gorkov, a trained intelligence officer whom Putin appointed, met Kushner at Trump Tower in December. The bank is under U.S. sanctions and was implicated in a 2015 espionage case in which one of its New York executives pleaded guilty to spying and was jailed.

The bank said in a statement in March that it had met with Kushner along with other representatives of U.S. banks and business as part of preparing a new corporate strategy.

Officials familiar with intelligence on contacts between the Russians and Trump advisers said that so far they have not seen evidence of any wrongdoing or collusion between the Trump camp and the Kremlin. Moreover, they said, nothing found so far indicates that Trump authorized, or was even aware of, the contacts.

There may not have been anything improper about the contacts, the current law enforcement official stressed.

The Left would have us believe that there is something inherently illicit in having any contact with Russia at all, simply because "Muh Roosha!"

Keep gobbling that MSM slop. =^[.]^=

@Raycheetah: we are not going to agree on the propriety of the multitude of Russian contacts by Trump agents and what harm may or may not have been done. Nor are we likely to agree on how Trump's Russian business interests have affected his politics, but I think we will learn the truth.

We might agree, though, that this is serious business. The worst case for Trump and his associates is evidence of treason. The best case for him will be exoneration within a few more months. Neither of those is the most likely end.

Putting any guilt or innocence aside for the moment, Trump's problem is that he (and his team) keep making it look like he is covering stuff up. If he is innocent he should be forming a war room to pass legislation and not one to defend himself. He should release his taxes for the past 20 years, and sit before congress with his staff and tell his side of the story under oath to the American people. That's what an innocent person would do. Put it all out in the open. Trump's narcissistic pride gets in his way so he not only looks guilty, he spills more blood into the water every day. That blood only attracts more sharks.

"looks guilty" thats a new one. Shouldn't the pres be talking non stop with someone who has 6000 thermonuclear warheads pointed at us?

I would. Call me crazy. Keep your friends close but your enemies closer...

I dont like trump but this is a non issue... deep state wants rid of him for pushing any kind of peace as it goes against trillions of corporate contracts. JMO i could be wrong.

Remember how media/govt officials wanted to suck his cock after he bombed syira to Russians disappointment?

"

Raycheetah wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Spoiler

I don't think Seth Rich was assassinated, by the way. Even though I strongly suspect he is the DNC leaker.

Imagine for a moment that your with Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson trying to solve an untimely death. The facts are: In the pre-dawn hours of a summer morning in a temperate climate, 27-year-old white male is on the phone with his girlfriend walking home and abruptly ends call a block from his residence after "voices or something" are heard in the background of the call; he tells her not to worry as he hangs up. Two minutes later, around 4:18a, he is shot twice in the back after a physical altercation that leaves bruises and tears the victim's watch strap. No valuables are taken, to include the afforementioned (and expensive) watch, iPhone, and wallet. By 4:20a police are alerted, and arrive on the scene to find the victim "talkative" despite his injuries. He is taken to hospital and is evaluated by a surgeon who believes the gunshot wounds are not fatal and the patient can pull through. Despite this, this man is pronounced dead at 5:57a, one hour and 39 minutes after the shooting.

Now if you were to posit to Mr. Holmes that this was a professional assassination, I feel confident he would laugh at your stupidity. A professional assassin does not wait for his target in full view of him such that the target sees the assassin, nor follows him in such a way that the target notices and tells his woman not to worry. A professional assassin does not get in a fistfight with his target. A professional assassin uses a silencer; given the time between death and police response, shots were probably heard. And above all, a professional assassin does not leave the victim alive with wounds he might survive.

At the same time, the robbery hypothesis has issues, too. If the assailant(s) intended to rob the man without killing him, then leaving valuables behind makes sense; there is considerably more risk fencing property from a murder victim than from a mere robbery. However, if the assailants intended to murder their target from the outset, then leaving valuables behind is nonsensical. If the intent didn't include murder, then the same principles as the professional assassin, except the last, apply; the robbers would want to avoid identification, and since ski masks and the like would be conspicuous given the weather, this would mean avoiding being viewed by the target, approaching from behind and introducing oneself by putting the gun on the target where he can feel it.

The shots to the back seem consistent with this. As does the phone conversation; the response to being held at gunpoint in the middle of a phone call would naturally be to end the call quickly in a way that doesn't cause alarm to the mugger.

However, our victim fought back. He didn't just give up his wallet, but responded in a way consistent with someone who thinks there is no way he's getting out alive, that his only slim chance is by fighting and somehow winning.

This, there are essentially two possibilities:
1. Seth Rich was murdered without intent to rob, but by a rank amateur, not a professional. This would indicate either a crime of passion or a corrupt DNC that is as incompetent at assassination as it is at covering up illegal email servers and at rigging elections. Such cases are normally easy to solve as the murderers​ are stupid.
2. Seth Rich was murdered by a mugger who did not intend to kill, but Rich mistook such a person for an assassin and responded accordingly.

I personally believe #2 is significantly more likely. But both of them increase rather than decrease the likelihood that Rich was involved in the DNC leaks.

DC is a cesspool of crime, both political, and the more common-and-garden variety. To walk the streets there late at night is dangerous. However-

You assume that a "professional" assassin would have been engaged to perform a hit on a traitor to Hillary's cause. I could just as easily imagine some trusted intermediary handing a gang-banger a wad of money and a picture of the target, either to save a few bucks, or, more likely, to sever any chain of direct association between hitter and hirer. Plausible deniability carries a premium in those circles. ='[.]'=

I covered that possibility under the "murderers are idiots" scenario.