U.S. Politics megathread (merged)

[JFK-1]

1 minute ago, Justin Z said:

This doesn't surprise me in the slightest. We had a poster not too long ago trying to argue  that ICE and DHS are not at their core racist.

 

I couldn't argue for or against that proposition. But that was my experience. "waltzed in" no questions asked.

I have vague memories of questions being raised in Britain regarding foreigners and what they called "health tourism", Americans were bracketed in that issue. Accusations of Americans coming to Britain for healthcare which back home would cost a bundle.

Have you ever heard of this unusual case from back in 2015? Who was the abandoned man with no memory?

[J.T.F.Robertson]

2 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

Well, I had six months following the end of my master's programme last September to find work and was unable to. Nearly every company I applied to, they didn't want to deal with the hassle and cost to bring on a foreign worker in the UK immigration system. The few that did bring me in for an interview, every one of them seemed reticent about it, and I never got an offer.

 

I would hope if anything I'd ultimately apply for Scottish citizenship, if you catch my meaning.

 

 

 

More malcontents.  

(kiddin', kindo)

[Justin Z]

 

[ri Alban]

6 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

I would sure hope to. At the very least I need to come back for a wee bit if nothing else to sell my house. But I'd much prefer to just stay. I think I will plan on applying for some sort of tourism visa and see what happens. If things flare back up in the US whilst I'm there, I might apply for a waiver to let me stay in Scotland for longer if that's made available.

Go luck! 👍 Hope everything works out for you bud. 

[JFK-1]

7 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

I would sure hope to. At the very least I need to come back for a wee bit if nothing else to sell my house. But I'd much prefer to just stay. I think I will plan on applying for some sort of tourism visa and see what happens. If things flare back up in the US whilst I'm there, I might apply for a waiver to let me stay in Scotland for longer if that's made available.

 

Try claiming asylum. Impress them with a Churchill quote from the blood, toil, tears and sweat speech. Say you're requesting asylum from an orange tyrant. "a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime"

[JFK-1]

And speaking of the orange tyrant I began to wonder why he has a head that looks pumpkin coloured. And came across this photo from February of this year. Note that there's white around his pumpkin coloured big baw face. 🤣



 Taken from this tweet.
 

 

[chuck berrys hairline]

 

Hes got no chance. Why would you elect a pedo? Groping a minor on TV what does he do behind the scenes 😳

Edited August 18, 2020 by chuck berrys hairline

[Jambos_1874]

21 minutes ago, chuck berrys hairline said:

 

Hes got no chance. Why would you elect a pedo? Groping a minor on TV what does he do behind the scenes 😳

 

That is unbelievably creepy.

 

It has been said many times on this thread, but it is absolutely astonishing that these are the two candidates for the next term in the White House. Mindboggling.

[Ron Burgundy]

3 minutes ago, Jambos_1874 said:

 

That is unbelievably creepy.

 

It has been said many times on this thread, but it is absolutely astonishing that these are the two candidates for the next term in the White House. Mindboggling.

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

3 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

And speaking of the orange tyrant I began to wonder why he has a head that looks pumpkin coloured. And came across this photo from February of this year. Note that there's white around his pumpkin coloured big baw face. 🤣



 Taken from this tweet.
 

 

[Maple Leaf]

This election is going to be a mud-slinging embarrassment and the world will be watching.

 

It's incredible how far America has fallen in stature.

[Cade]

1 hour ago, Maple Leaf said:

This election is going to be a mud-slinging embarrassment and the world will be watching.

 

It's incredible how far America has fallen in stature.

 

USSR bogey-man/straw man no longer exists.

EU has grown, especially in it's international diplomacy role.

USA is becoming obsolete. We don't need them any more.

[JimKongUno]

2 hours ago, Cade said:

 

USSR bogey-man/straw man no longer exists.

EU has grown, especially in it's international diplomacy role.

USA is becoming obsolete. We don't need them any more.

 

the EU has shrunk by 1 member and is toothless internationally 

[JFK-1]

2 hours ago, Cade said:

 

USSR bogey-man/straw man no longer exists.

EU has grown, especially in it's international diplomacy role.

USA is becoming obsolete. We don't need them any more.

 

Russia would annihilate the EU in a military confrontation. And you can be guaranteed Putin would be threatening if it weren't for the US.

[SwindonJambo]

3 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Russia would annihilate the EU in a military confrontation. And you can be guaranteed Putin would be threatening if it weren't for the US.

It is truly astonishing how many people are unaware of this. The US has its faults and not a few of them, but their huge military provides Western Europe with protection for free, at vast expense to themselves. Far too many NATO members underspend on their military, relying on America to protect them for free. I utterly despise Trump, but imho in this instance he's right to slate them for failing to pull their weight.

 

Putin is a threat. He'd like nothing better than to see Western Europe weakened and he wouldn't be as slow to bully and exploit it.

[JFK-1]

14 minutes ago, SwindonJambo said:

It is truly astonishing how many people are unaware of this. The US has its faults and not a few of them, but their huge military provides Western Europe with protection for free, at vast expense to themselves. Far too many NATO members underspend on their military, relying on America to protect them for free. I utterly despise Trump, but imho in this instance he's right to slate them for failing to pull their weight.

 

Putin is a threat. He'd like nothing better than to see Western Europe weakened and he wouldn't be as slow to bully and exploit it.

 

Russia have around 3.5 million military personnel. Contrast that to the UK which is one of the most powerful probably the most powerful Western European military force with around 230,00. Not to mention Russia's 20,000 or so tanks to the entire EU count of around 8,000.

Russia around 6,500 nuclear warheads. UK around 200 or so. It's a no contest and is exactly why Putin will be over the moon when he hears Trump talk about withdrawing from NATO. The US being in NATO is all that keeps him in check.

And all that's not even mentioning China and their millions of military personnel.  

[Jambo-Jimbo]

4 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Russia have around 3.5 million military personnel. Contrast that to the UK which is one of the most powerful probably the most powerful Western European military force with around 230,00. Not to mention Russia's 20,000 or so tanks to the entire EU count of around 8,000.

Russia around 6,500 nuclear warheads. UK around 200 or so. It's a no contest and is exactly why Putin will be over the moon when he hears Trump talk about withdrawing from NATO. The US being in NATO is all that keeps him in check.

And all that's not even mentioning China and their millions of military personnel.  

 

Along with the French, who are on par with us British in terms of fighting capability, and what I mean by that is being able to pack a punch, the rest of Europe, nowhere near.

[Dawnrazor]

23 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

And all that's not even mentioning China and their millions of military personnel.  

I saw on the TV a documentary about China, it reckoned the a big percentage of thier military was for keeping thier own population in check and not really a "fighting force" Army as we know it, still big numbers though.

[ri Alban]

1 hour ago, JimKongUno said:

 

the EU has shrunk by 1 member and is toothless internationally 

The EU is better off without England. 

[ri Alban]

30 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Russia have around 3.5 million military personnel. Contrast that to the UK which is one of the most powerful probably the most powerful Western European military force with around 230,00. Not to mention Russia's 20,000 or so tanks to the entire EU count of around 8,000.

Russia around 6,500 nuclear warheads. UK around 200 or so. It's a no contest and is exactly why Putin will be over the moon when he hears Trump talk about withdrawing from NATO. The US being in NATO is all that keeps him in check.

And all that's not even mentioning China and their millions of military personnel.  

The UK

[ri Alban]

31 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Russia have around 3.5 million military personnel. Contrast that to the UK which is one of the most powerful probably the most powerful Western European military force with around 230,00. Not to mention Russia's 20,000 or so tanks to the entire EU count of around 8,000.

Russia around 6,500 nuclear warheads. UK around 200 or so. It's a no contest and is exactly why Putin will be over the moon when he hears Trump talk about withdrawing from NATO. The US being in NATO is all that keeps him in check.

And all that's not even mentioning China and their millions of military personnel.  

Russia, China and the USA all have the same thing in common. They have the world believing they're more powerful than they really are. 

Jihadis are a small group in comparison and they could feck them up at the blink of an eye. And wee tiny N Korea doesn't give a feck what they think. 

When did America last beat anyone of any note. Japan? 

[JFK-1]

35 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Along with the French, who are on par with us British in terms of fighting capability, and what I mean by that is being able to pack a punch, the rest of Europe, nowhere near.

 

One thing that puzzles me is that the EU as a whole actually spends around 4 times as much as Russia does on defence. Now I have no idea where that money goes, all I do know is that they're massively outnumbering us in tanks which are a crucial component.

And probably combat aircraft as well, another crucial component. Where does all that money go? Maybe much higher wages? I don't know.

Another thing about Russia is that they have a national service system. All males must spend a year in the army between the ages of 18 and 27. That keeps their numbers up and on top of that means they have millions out there who while not in the army anymore are trained and effectively a ready to go at any time reserve.

I wondered if our equipment may be better and that's where the money goes. That came into my mind because I once read a report from the second gulf war. A British tank battle with Iraqi forces which was in fact the first British tank battle since WW2.

Six challenger tanks are out on patrol in the desert when they encounter 20 Iraqi tanks which were supplied by Russia. Outnumbered almost 7 to 1 you might think it's time to run for it. But that's not how it played out.

The six challengers engaged them and destroyed 19 while not taking a single hit themselves. The 20th only escaped the carnage because he fled and they were ordered not to pursue. How does this happen?

Well it's because the challenger is a highly sophisticated weapon of war with a state of the art suspension system on the main gun and a computer controlled targeting system. They can be charging across uneven ground at top speed. Twisting and turning and that gun always remains stable and on whichever target they decide on.

The Russian tanks the Iraqis are in on the other hand can't do that. To get off a shot they have to completely stop to stabilise the gun then take aim. A death sentence when you're up against these constantly moving gun platforms computer targeting you with ease even as they move. You're now a stationary target as they buzz around.

But in saying that I mentioned this to an American friend who is a historian and actually has contacts in the Pentagon and who knows a lot more about this stuff than I ever will. He said that the likes of those Iraq tanks are export models with an M designation rather than the T designation given to Russian tanks not for export.

He explained that these tanks with the M designation the Russians actually derisively refer to as 'monkey tanks' may look like their T models but they're not the same.

They're a stripped down version regularly annihilated by Western equipment in any confrontation in the middle east. And not to be compared with their own T versions.

So there went that theory and I still don't know where all the money goes.

[The Real Maroonblood]

17 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Russia, China and the USA all have the same thing in common. They have the world believing they're more powerful than they really are. 

Jihadis are a small group in comparison and they could feck them up at the blink of an eye. And wee tiny N Korea doesn't give a feck what they think. 

When did America last beat anyone of any note. Japan? 

[JFK-1]

12 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Russia, China and the USA all have the same thing in common. They have the world believing they're more powerful than they really are. 

Jihadis are a small group in comparison and they could feck them up at the blink of an eye. And wee tiny N Korea doesn't give a feck what they think. 

When did America last beat anyone of any note. Japan? 

 

You're being extremely naive if you think their activities with jihadi groups can be compared to what would happen if they were up against an actual rival military force. You think they fight these jihadis in the same way they did Nazi Germany and Japan?

Operations against these groups are like playing at war in comparison to the all out total war waged on Nazi Germany and Japan. When entire cities like Dresden are razed to the ground overnight. No one gives a flying about collateral damage when they're in an existential struggle.

Jihadis are like fleas on a dog that have to be scratched off from time to time but may still return to cause an itch at another time.

[Mysterion]

1 hour ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Russia have around 3.5 million military personnel. 

 

I reckon a lot of them would abandon post at the first sign of trenches. At that size there will be a huge amount made up of people taking a wage rather than commitment to their country.

 

A military force based on size and ego of its dictator rather than necessity.

[Maple Leaf]

There's a video going around of Trump trying to take Melania's hand as they walk down the stairs of Air Force One, but she keeps her hand clear.  Trump gives her a long quizzical look in response.  It's giving some of us Trump haters a few cheap laughs.

 

His wife might despise the adulterous fat rat, but it doesn't matter.  The evangelical Christians love him and will vote for him, and there are tens of millions of those.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 hour ago, JFK-1 said:

 

One thing that puzzles me is that the EU as a whole actually spends around 4 times as much as Russia does on defence. Now I have no idea where that money goes, all I do know is that they're massively outnumbering us in tanks which are a crucial component.

And probably combat aircraft as well, another crucial component. Where does all that money go? Maybe much higher wages? I don't know.

Another thing about Russia is that they have a national service system. All males must spend a year in the army between the ages of 18 and 27. That keeps their numbers up and on top of that means they have millions out there who while not in the army anymore are trained and effectively a ready to go at any time reserve.

I wondered if our equipment may be better and that's where the money goes. That came into my mind because I once read a report from the second gulf war. A British tank battle with Iraqi forces which was in fact the first British tank battle since WW2.

Six challenger tanks are out on patrol in the desert when they encounter 20 Iraqi tanks which were supplied by Russia. Outnumbered almost 7 to 1 you might think it's time to run for it. But that's not how it played out.

The six challengers engaged them and destroyed 19 while not taking a single hit themselves. The 20th only escaped the carnage because he fled and they were ordered not to pursue. How does this happen?

Well it's because the challenger is a highly sophisticated weapon of war with a state of the art suspension system on the main gun and a computer controlled targeting system. They can be charging across uneven ground at top speed. Twisting and turning and that gun always remains stable and on whichever target they decide on.

The Russian tanks the Iraqis are in on the other hand can't do that. To get off a shot they have to completely stop to stabilise the gun then take aim. A death sentence when you're up against these constantly moving gun platforms computer targeting you with ease even as they move. You're now a stationary target as they buzz around.

But in saying that I mentioned this to an American friend who is a historian and actually has contacts in the Pentagon and who knows a lot more about this stuff than I ever will. He said that the likes of those Iraq tanks are export models with an M designation rather than the T designation given to Russian tanks not for export.

He explained that these tanks with the M designation the Russians actually derisively refer to as 'monkey tanks' may look like their T models but they're not the same.

They're a stripped down version regularly annihilated by Western equipment in any confrontation in the middle east. And not to be compared with their own T versions.

So there went that theory and I still don't know where all the money goes.

 

Training, training, training.

 

Put a poorly trained conscript against a professionally trained soldier and there is only one outcome.

[JFK-1]

34 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Training, training, training.

 

Put a poorly trained conscript against a professionally trained soldier and there is only one outcome.

 

Soldiers are going to be the least of it in the near future. Even in WW2 machines largely won the war when Germany couldn't keep up with anything like the combined production of the allies.

Britain alone was out producing Germany in aircraft before even factoring in US and Soviet production. In 1944 alone the allies produced 163,000 aircraft. Germany 41,000 and that was their wartime annual peak. No contest.

Future wars will be fought by autonomous machines. A missile launching drone is halfway there. A human gives the order to fire but they will become autonomous.

Effectively flying robots and whoever has the best machines will win. The best might amount to who can develop the best AI. But even right now the US military are developing combat robots. They will be constantly improved.

They will come in all shapes and sizes and will have a stealth profile resistant to detection by radar. They will be covered in a type of tiny reflecting cell that mimics their surroundings like a chameleon. You wouldn't be able to see this thing unless you were almost right on top of it.

In this video is what you might call a prototype and bear in mind this is only what they're actually letting us see. There will be much more we may never see till it's actually in combat. The video is 10 years old. You can expect the technology to have greatly advanced in a decade.
 

 

 

A more maneuverable faster moving version.

 

 

[JFK-1]

53 minutes ago, Maple Leaf said:

There's a video going around of Trump trying to take Melania's hand as they walk down the stairs of Air Force One, but she keeps her hand clear.  Trump gives her a long quizzical look in response.  It's giving some of us Trump haters a few cheap laughs.

 

His wife might despise the adulterous fat rat, but it doesn't matter.  The evangelical Christians love him and will vote for him, and there are tens of millions of those.

 

If that's recent it's not the first time. They were caught on video right at the start of his tenure when he tried to take her hand and she just pushed it away. He repulses her and she's not going to play the part.

[SwindonJambo]

2 hours ago, ri Alban said:

The EU is better off without England. 

 

The UK was the EU's 2nd biggest net contributor. They've had to slash their budget by about €15bn.a year. They were desperate for us to stay. This means a drastic reduction in grants being dished out to the 15 nations out of 27 who are net recipients.

 

Joining the EU will be nowhere near as beneficial to an independent Scotland (or any other new applicant) as it was previously. There are a lot of hungry mouths around the table already, with a big reduction in food to dish out.

 

I firmly believe an indy Scotland would be much better off with a Norway type deal i.e. EEA membership. In the single market but under no obligation to join the German racket that is the Euro.

 

As for defence, joining NATO asap is vital for all the reasons previously discussed. Scotland is a minnow in World terms and it's closest ally will be rUK. It's a dangerous World out there with all sorts of threats out there. It's only thanks to the strength of NATO that we've had 75 years of peace. It has 30 members and about 10 are smaller than Scotland. It would be daft for it not to be. They have always been and will always be out biggest trading partner by a country mile.

 

Scotland could do fine on its own but good relationships with other countries will be crucial. As it is for other successful small countries.

 

I don't know why you hate the English so much. It really isn't healthy. Yes, I don't cheer on their sports teams either despite nearly 40 years here and take stick for it but I far from dislike them. Apart from Boris and other assorted overpriveleged self entitled wankers, the great majority are really not much different from us at all.

Edited August 18, 2020 by SwindonJambo

[Cade]

Cross-party Senate report into Russia/Trump links published and it's

 

Far more detail than Mueller's report and as it's from the Senate, which is Republican controlled, it's harder for Trump to shrug off.

Manafort met with a GRU agent and gave him US election polling data. Report can't work out why.

GRU implicated in hacking and dumping of Democrat e-mails.

Report actually states that there was a high-level of co-ordination between Russian agents and the Trump 2016 campaign.

Roger Stone was working with Wikileaks, who would inform him in advance of leaks so the Trump campaign could have messages ready to go.

 

[JFK-1]

US Postal Service halts controversial changes amid voting furore

 

The US Postal Service has suspended new policies that were decried as an attempt to sabotage the 2020 election.

 

Postmaster General Louis DeJoy said on Tuesday he would reverse operations changes that critics say would hamper mail-in voting.

 

The u-turn comes as Mr DeJoy is due to testify to Congress and at least 20 states were preparing to sue.

 

There is a fierce debate over postal funding in 2020, as record numbers of Americans are expected to vote by mail.

 

The US Postal Service (USPS) under Mr DeJoy had begun what it said were cost-cutting measures in recent months.

 

However, in a sharp reversal, Mr DeJoy has now said that post office hours would not be cut, and post boxes and sorting machines would stop being removed.

 

Mr DeJoy, a former Republican donor, also said overtime pay would continue to be approved to ensure deliveries arrive on time.

 

"To avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail, I am suspending these initiatives until after the election is concluded," Mr DeJoy said in a statement.

 

The development comes as the row over the politicisation of the most popular US government agency has become the top issue in the 2020 presidential campaign.

Over the weekend, former President Barack Obama - in what was regarded as his most high profile criticism of his successor to date - accused Mr Trump of trying to "actively kneecap" the postal service.

Policies that were begun under Mr DeJoy included removing mail boxes, cancelling delivery runs and closing down sorting centres.
 

Defenders of the changes said they were necessary to help the USPS get out of financial debt. Its budget shortfall has risen to $160bn (£122bn) amid a decade-long decline in mail volume.
 

However, Mark Dimondstein, the president of the American Postal Workers Union which represents more than 200,000 postal employees, told Fox News on Tuesday that the changes "are truly slowing down mail, the customers see it... the postal workers see it - mail is getting all backed up".
 

Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, cheered the postmaster's volte-face on Tuesday, telling reporters: "They felt the heat and that's what we were trying to do, make it too hot to handle." On Sunday, Ms Pelosi had recalled the House from a recess in order to investigate the USPS policies.
 

Mr DeJoy, a major political donor who was appointed by Mr Trump to lead the USPS in May, is due to testify to a Republican-led Senate committee on Friday, and then to a Democrat-led House committee on Monday.
 

Last week, President Trump said he rejected a funding boost for the USPS to shore up a predicted influx mail-in voting, claiming without evidence that it would lead to voter fraud and help Democrats.
 

Voting by mail is not new to the US. According to Reuters, approximately one in every four voters cast ballots by mail in 2016.

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-53829347

[JFK-1]

2 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

Last week, President Trump said he rejected a funding boost for the USPS to shore up a predicted influx mail-in voting, claiming without evidence that it would lead to voter fraud and help Democrats.

 

The stupidity of that would be baffling if it weren't Trump saying it. Is he saying that making it easier for people to vote during a pandemic will help Democrats because the voters want to vote for them? And he wants to stop them voting?

He's actually saying that out loud? Don't his own voters know how to stick a stamp on an envelope? How can it possibly help one more than another?

The reality is that if every American eligible to vote did indeed vote Trump would lose in the most humiliating landslide in US election history.

That wont happen, they wont all vote, but it's obviously in his interest to hinder people actually voting. And he has the nerve/stupidity?, to say it out loud when normal corrupt people would keep it in their head.

[JFK-1]

A nation divided and in turmoil, and this is what the Republicans have invited to speak at their convention.

They should just go all out. Trump can pardon Derek Chauvin and invite him along to join them.

[JFK-1]

A new bipartisan report raises the question: If this isn’t ‘collusion,’ what is?
 

Apart from “I” and “me,” there may be no two words President Trump has repeated more often during his presidency than “No collusion.”

Trump believed, not without reason, that repetition of this phrase would create a fog enshrouding the actual evidence of what he, his family members, and those who worked for him did in the 2016 election, and how they approached Russian President Vladimir Putin’s campaign to get him elected president.

On Tuesday, the Senate Intelligence Committee — which, we must stress, is controlled by Republicans — released its fifth and final report on Russian interference, which they describe as “the most comprehensive description to date of Russia’s activities and the threat they posed.” Combined with what we already knew, what the report describes is, indeed, collusion between Trump, his campaign and the Kremlin.

Let’s begin with what the committee found:

Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort was a primary point of contact between the campaign and Russia. During his time working for a pro-Russian politician in Ukraine, he “formed a close and lasting relationship that would endure to the 2016 U.S. elections and beyond” with Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian national who is usually described as someone with “connections to Russian intelligence.” But the committee’s report goes further: “Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer.”

 

While in charge of the campaign, Manafort shared confidential polling and strategy information with Kilimnik. The committee found that Manafort’s “proximity to Trump created opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign,” and that this helped contribute to “a grave counterintelligence threat.”

 

The committee obtained “information suggesting Kilimnik may have been connected to the GRU’s hack and leak operation.” The GRU is Russian military intelligence; the “hack and leak operation” refers to the Russian hacking into Democratic systems and passing of documents to WikiLeaks so they could be released to damage Hillary Clinton.

 

The committee found: “While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump’s electoral prospects.” This included seeking “advance notice about WikiLeaks releases,” building “messaging strategies” around them, promoting and sharing materials from them, and encouraging “further leaks.”

 

Trump and senior campaign officials “sought to obtain advance information about WikiLeaks’s planned releases through Roger Stone. At their direction, Stone took action to gain inside knowledge for the Campaign and shared his purported knowledge directly with Trump and senior Campaign officials on multiple occasions.”

 

The Trump campaign “publicly undermined the attribution of the hack-and-leak campaign to Russia and was indifferent to whether it and WikiLeaks were furthering a Russian election interference effort.”

 

Trump has denied he ever spoke to Stone about WikiLeaks. But the committee — which, again, is controlled by Republicans — essentially calls Trump a liar: “Despite Trump’s recollection, the Committee assesses that Trump did, in fact, speak with Stone about WikiLeaks and with members of his Campaign about Stone’s access to WikiLeaks on multiple occasions.”

 

The infamous Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner was “part of a broader influence operation targeting the United States that was coordinated, at least in part with elements of the Russian government.”

 

So here’s what we’re left with. The person running the Trump campaign had a close associate who is a Russian intelligence officer, with whom he was sharing confidential campaign information as Russia mounted its effort to help Trump get elected.

 

As part of that effort, Russia broke into Democratic systems, then passed damaging information to WikiLeaks for carefully timed release. The president’s longtime friend had a line into the “leak” part of Russia’s hack-and-leak, through which he learned the subject and timing of upcoming leaks and kept Trump personally informed.

 

If that’s not “collusion,” what is?

 

Republicans will reject this verdict. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), the acting chair of the committee, insisted that “the Committee found absolutely no evidence” that Trump or his campaign “colluded with the Russian government.”

 

But he was using a torturously narrow definition of “collusion” to exonerate Trump.

 

That definition says that only a carefully planned, coordinated and executed criminal conspiracy counts as “collusion,” and anything short of that does not. But as we now know — through copious evidence collected by the special counsel’s team, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and journalists — the Trump campaign eagerly accepted the help provided by Moscow.

 

The campaign’s efforts were slapdash and chaotic. But to whatever degree this didn’t rise to an even more serious level, it doesn’t appear to have been for lack of trying.

 

Yet to this day, the position of Trump, his attorney general, the conservative media and most of the GOP is that the entire Russia investigation was a hoax, a scam, a ruse. When the FBI learned that the Kremlin was trying to sabotage our election, they want us to believe, the bureau should not have bothered to investigate.

 

And they continue to do everything they can to discredit that investigation, not just in its particulars — where there may have been corner-cutting or worse — but in its basic premise, that when a hostile foreign power tries to manipulate our election to help its favored candidate, that’s something we might want to look into.

 

This latest report proves something important about this president: The further you dig, the worse it gets. There’s a lot else going on right now, but this was one of the worst attacks on American democracy one could imagine, and the president appears to have helped it happen. We can’t ever forget it.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/08/18/new-bipartisan-report-raises-question-if-this-isnt-collusion-what-is/

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

2 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Soldiers are going to be the least of it in the near future. Even in WW2 machines largely won the war when Germany couldn't keep up with anything like the combined production of the allies.

Britain alone was out producing Germany in aircraft before even factoring in US and Soviet production. In 1944 alone the allies produced 163,000 aircraft. Germany 41,000 and that was their wartime annual peak. No contest.

Future wars will be fought by autonomous machines. A missile launching drone is halfway there. A human gives the order to fire but they will become autonomous.

Effectively flying robots and whoever has the best machines will win. The best might amount to who can develop the best AI. But even right now the US military are developing combat robots. They will be constantly improved.

They will come in all shapes and sizes and will have a stealth profile resistant to detection by radar. They will be covered in a type of tiny reflecting cell that mimics their surroundings like a chameleon. You wouldn't be able to see this thing unless you were almost right on top of it.

In this video is what you might call a prototype and bear in mind this is only what they're actually letting us see. There will be much more we may never see till it's actually in combat. The video is 10 years old. You can expect the technology to have greatly advanced in a decade.
 

 

 

A more maneuverable faster moving version.

 

 

This one is two years old and particularly scary.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W1LWMk7JB80

[JFK-1]

7 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

This one is two years old and particularly scary.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W1LWMk7JB80

 

You can see it evolving to become smaller and more streamlined. Imagine that thing carrying weapons. Bristling with machine guns. And also keep in mind that's a commercial model. We wont see what the military are developing and they're always way ahead of the commercial market.

That robot looks pretty much like this one recently deployed in Singapore to encourage social distancing. First version of 'robo cop"?

Ten years from now it will be like okay 2 metres apart, i'm measuring. One warning then I machine gun your arse and dump your carcass in a disposal truck.
 

 

[JFK-1]

You know i'm becoming ever more convinced a lot of people are going to end up in the slammer when they get Trump out of that office. Unless of course he can compile an entire catalogue of what you might call pre pardons for himself and his family too. Among many others.

I found a mention of something that Washington Post article I posted didn't mention. And it was in Reuters no less. First let me give you a Media Bias/Fact Check analysis of Reuters.

 

 

Quote

LEAST BIASED

These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes).  The reporting is factual and usually sourced.  These are the most credible media sources.

 

Then for a little contrast Trump News, sorry I meant Fox news. Freudian slip.

 

Quote

Overall, we rate Fox News strongly Right-Biased due to editorial positions and story selection that favors the right. We also rate them Mixed factually and borderline Questionable based on poor sourcing and the spreading of conspiracy theories that later must be retracted after being widely shared.

Further, Fox News would be rated a Questionable source based on numerous failed fact checks by hosts and pundits, however, straight news reporting is generally reliable, therefore we rate them Mixed for factual reporting.

 

So Fox don't even achieve mostly factual when it comes to reporting news. Now the comment I saw on Reuters which even the Washington Post article didn't mention and incidentally the WP is ranked High when it comes to reporting news.
 

Quote

Overall, we rate The Washington Post Left-Center biased based on editorial positions that moderately favors the left and factually High due to the use of proper sources and a reasonable fact check record.

Reuters.

CRIMINAL REFERRALS

The Committee made referrals to law enforcement about “potential criminal activity” it uncovered but an annex about these referrals was redacted in total.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-senate-findings-fact/factbox-key-findings-from-senate-inquiry-into-russian-interference-in-2016-u-s-election-idUSKCN25E2OY

I would always advise using this website to check the reliability of any news source you may be unfamiliar with. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/

 

And for giggles their report on Alex Jones and infowars.

 

 

Quote

Overall, InfoWars/Alex Jones is a crackpot, tin foil hat level conspiracy website that also strongly promotes pseudoscience.

The amount of fake news and debunked conspiracy claims, as well as extreme right wing bias, renders InfoWars a non-credible source on any level.

 

[Beni]

13 hours ago, Maple Leaf said:

There's a video going around of Trump trying to take Melania's hand as they walk down the stairs of Air Force One, but she keeps her hand clear.  Trump gives her a long quizzical look in response.  It's giving some of us Trump haters a few cheap laughs.

 

His wife might despise the adulterous fat rat, but it doesn't matter.  The evangelical Christians love him and will vote for him, and there are tens of millions of those.

 

Not for the first time either. For the first few months of his presidency Melania refused to move into the White House, allegedly they were hammering out more favourable terms to her post-nup agreement before she would deign to play the happy wife. It obviously doesn't contain a touching in public clause.

 

 

[JFK-1]

 

[I P Knightley]

6 hours ago, fancy a brew said:

 

Not for the first time either. For the first few months of his presidency Melania refused to move into the White House, allegedly they were hammering out more favourable terms to her post-nup agreement before she would deign to play the happy wife. It obviously doesn't contain a touching in public clause.

 

 

If I were being kind, I would say that that last one was her attempting to stop her coat/dress from blowing up around her head in the wind. I could have handled having that happen and getting a good look at her blart.

[Tazio]

He really is shockingly unaware.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/18/trump-calls-out-new-zealands-big-surge-on-day-it-records-nine-covid-cases?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0cc9we3Xy82zaJTHDTRQzIQrrF32PVu1WTG02Op5oqI7pZFh5fJkiwTTY#Echobox=1597706138

[Justin Z]

This is not satire

 

[Cade]

Trump once again confirms that he sent troops into Syria "to get the oil"

Said the same thing a few times last year.

 

This would be a war crime.

 

 

[Beni]

1 hour ago, I P Knightley said:

If I were being kind, I would say that that last one was her attempting to stop her coat/dress from blowing up around her head in the wind. I could have handled having that happen and getting a good look at her blart.

 

I think you can get a quick glimpse.

Look to her right, he's trying to grab her arm.

[milky_26]

55 minutes ago, Tazio said:

He really is shockingly unaware.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/18/trump-calls-out-new-zealands-big-surge-on-day-it-records-nine-covid-cases?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0cc9we3Xy82zaJTHDTRQzIQrrF32PVu1WTG02Op5oqI7pZFh5fJkiwTTY#Echobox=1597706138

trump "“Big surge in New Zealand, you know it’s terrible, we don’t want that, but this is an invisible enemy that should never have been let to come to Europe and the rest of the world by China.”"

 

anyone want to guess how many cases this big surge in new zealand is?

 

[Cade]

32 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

trump "“Big surge in New Zealand, you know it’s terrible, we don’t want that, but this is an invisible enemy that should never have been let to come to Europe and the rest of the world by China.”"

 

anyone want to guess how many cases this big surge in new zealand is?

 

 

 

It's about 20 new cases.

 

 

[JFK-1]

A total of 22 people have died of covid in New Zealand. Currently around 42 an hour dying in the US. To quote the Trumpet, "it is what is" 

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

He'll be hoping the NZ cases go through the roof, to aid his election campaign, Then he can use that as evidence that what he's done right, yada yada yada.

The Evangelicals will love it. And refuse to wear masks.

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

6 hours ago, Justin Z said:

This is not satire

 

 

Party of Lincoln. 

 

What a sad state of affairs. Republicans just all in on culture warring. No policies, no ideas, no vision. They literally have nothing left to offer except grievance, bitterness, and hate. 

 

The most astonishing part is that that will be enough for almost half the voting public.