yoink

I've seen nothing so far about the source of the Manchester leaks. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40048565

At this point I think it needs some sort of grand gesture from the White House. Tweets or a written statement will just be ignored as business-as-usual. I think Trump should call a press conference, say he's making a statement and that there won't be any questions about it at the end, then simply leave once he's done. He should then release a recording of it directly on the internet. Any commentary or edits that the media then make can be shown to be manipulative. The message needs to be clear and unambiguous.

I completely agree. This is the problem with all the political leaks that have been happening - I think that it's easy for it to enter the public consciousness as the common way of doing business with the media, rather than what should be the exception, and the media think it is their right to publish whatever leaks come their way without thought. Politics is one thing, but for terrorism we're all supposed to be on the same side. I'd like to see a statement directly from Trump on TV in which he says 'Without condoning it I understand why leaks about our administration might be happening, but I want to make this clear to everyone - if you come into possession of information regarding a terrorist attack you keep your fucking trap shut. You do not post it on facebook or twitter. You do not phone the media. You do not publish it. You report it to the authorities and then you pretend you never had it. By releasing information like this you are directly responsible for any consequences - terrorists escaping capture or additional attacks occurring. This is unacceptable and it stops. Now. Further leaks will be prosecuted with the charge of aiding terrorism. "

annnd yet another thread drifts from the topic into talking about Ron... *applause

We looked at it. I asked a few real estate agents in my area about the likely increase in value and the responses varied from $5k to $20k. I guessed at a likely break-even when I was thinking about it. So yeah, after the 12 years there would be an increase in value to the home, but not a hugely significant one compared the the increase simply by the market value increasing by itself. I think it's also likely that by that time there will be cheaper and better systems that we would be able to install if that was a big added value for the buyer and would realize a larger ROI on the house sale. It's also a significant chunk of money to outlay. $15k gone in a single shot is a big dent to the bank balance compared to ongoing yearly electricity costs of about $1200... This is all about purchasing a system outright. We specifically didn't want a leased system which would change the financials drastically. I suspect that's the way to go for most people, to be honest.

Actually I think making a big deal out of his family background and linking that to immigration policy is disingenuous. If you look objectively at the stats, 99.9999% of all sons of sunni-muslim immigrants aren't terrorists. I refuse to be part of a society that discriminates against people because of their family background. How far back do we go? 3 generations? More? You start getting to the 'You're not British enough to be in our parliament' type of comments made by ex-UKIP leader Nigel Farage... I also don't think the report you linked shows the attitude of the father you're stating. It reads to me more like disbelief - a natural reaction for any father being told his son is a terrorist.

I looked into Solar last year for my house in San Diego. It was going to cost about $15k after rebates for an install that we would own - so no lease payments, no liens on the house etc. The ROI on that was about 12 years based on our electricity usage. It makes more sense to me to invest that money in the market as my return over that time should be larger. Quite significantly.

Current reports are that it was a home-grown, university educated Briton who perpetrated the attack.

Why bring a level? My gin and tonic stays perfectly flat through most flights. PROOF! This guy sucks as a scientist.

The internet is a perfect example of what happens when you give people perfect anonymity - some of them inevitably use it to become assholes and settle scores. This may not be the case here but it might be and we have to take that into account. The approval society currently has for anonymous leaks in general worries me - I think it can very easily be abused and will inevitably lead to a decline in the accuracy and trustworthiness of the information it's providing. In this case for example I don't know these sources. I don't know if they're a janitor, a remnant of Obama's staff or Mike Pence himself - and it matters. That information is one of the yardsticks by which we gauge the likely accuracy of the information and what actions should be taken as a result of it. It also bothers me that these 'whistleblowers' seem to go straight to media outlets rather than a legitimate avenue such as the Senate or FBI if they think a crime has been committed. That choice also makes me more skeptical. All that said, if one anonymous leak says Trump is setting fire to babies in the oval office it should be given only dubious credibility. If 30 anonymous sources say the same thing it's probably time to start paying attention... Trump's definitely getting there. I'm not saying anonymous leaks are the devil. Just that they seem to instantly be given complete credibility at the moment - Look at the way Bill phrased his post: "More evidence that Trump was actively trying to obstruct an investigation" Those are powerful words. But it's not evidence. Not yet. It's not been proven as fact. I don't think that easy leap from anonymous accusation to evidence is a healthy position for society.

I'm not usually a fan of using gifs as a full reply, but this one says it all. https://media.tenor.co/images/8649bfdb2397853fcf21de96b7c24772/tenor.gif

shit. You're right. My brain is fried. Don't read cogent social science is the lesson of the day! I'm actually curious if the reviewing editor actually reviewed the paper at all. Doesn't look good on his peer review resume!

Link still works for me. But still, Emphasis mine. But publishes a 'paper' written by an algorithm that ties together random buzzwords.... http://www.acsh.org/news/2017/05/19/hoax-science-paper-says-penis-social-construct-worsens-climate-change-11302 Directly attributed to the authors: edited to attach paper

It's more hearsay evidence but shouldn't be held as fact until the memos are actually out. I'm a little suspicious of all the anonymous sources of late. If you think your boss, the sitting president, is doing something that you don't agree with so strongly that you're willing to leak information about it then I think you should have the balls to either resign or to attach your name to information you leak so that you can be questioned about it in the light of day. This cloak and dagger shit needs to stop.

Well, we've already seen that he can't say no when Trump asks him to do a job. Doesn't he hold about a dozen positions in the white house?

I really hope it's Pence.

The biggest problem I have is the precedent for the media that this all sets. I think it's fair to argue that the media made a significant contribution to the election of Donald Trump with their continal coverage, and if he does eventually step down it will be in a large part, due to the over-the-top microscopic coverage of every single thing the president does. Trump has made a lot of mistakes, but I agree with him on this: No other president has suffered the scrutiny that he is being subjected to. Everyone makes mistakes. To err is to be human and all that... You can only hope that with a world leader the mistakes are things like misquoting someone, forgetting a date or getting a name wrong - mistakes everyone makes all the time and are typically ignored as routine, rather than accidentally pressing the 'End The World' button while meaning to order a coke to the Roosevelt room... One of these types of accidents would be news. The other wouldn't, but could be made to seem to be. 'Trump snubs Japanese premiere by calling him the wrong name!' 'Trump shows more disrespect for Israel by forgetting when Palastine was created! Unfit!' or the like... I do think there is a certain amount of this going on, in parallel with (as Newt Gingrich put it) the switch from real journalism to the deliberate seeking of 'gotcha moments'. This is particularly disturbing if Trump steps down because imagine the future - the media outlets could legitimately go to a presidential candidate and say 'We've made presidents, and we can break presidents...' Imagine what that level of influence does to us as a society. I also think that IF Trump gets impeached the first thing Pence needs to do is issue a pardon, a la Ford. There is absolutely no chance Donald Trump could receive an impartial, fair trail for any crime he might have committed. Edited for 8,000 spelling mistakes. Posting before coffee...

Then the democrats should quit sucking so much. I'm just as angry at those fuckers. I'm sure they're all rolling in the aisles at the current trainwreck, but let's not forget that they're the imbeciles who put forward possibly the only person in the country who could lose to Donald Trump in an election. I want them to be on the news proposing solutions. At the moment they're taking the Republican playbook of pointing fingers and laying blame but not being prepared for when the inevitable happens.

I have never called for his impeachment. I do think there should be a number of investigations based upon his documented behavior and some of the details that are now in the public realm in just the same way that you called for investigations into the Hillary emails. I think that Trump doesn't understand the details of the laws he is obligated to follow any more than you or I do and therefore it's likely he's making mistakes. Those investigations may or may not lead to an impeachment depending upon what they find (or don't). As you say - all we have to go on are accusations at this point. (actually you don't say this, but you should... I'm assuming that's what 'LOL!' means.) However, saying something didn't happen based on those accusations is just as ridiculous as saying it did. The knee jerk defense to every situation only shows that you haven't even bothered to consider a position. The only correct answer is 'Ok - an accusation has been made. So we need to look into it, but personally I think it's garbage because x, y & z.' and to hold off on judgement until that happens. All of that is separate from what I have said about Trump. That he's a narcissist who does not have the political or oratory skill, experience or temperament to be playing games on the highest stage. I do not want a leader, Republican or Democrat, who can be manipulated as easily as Trump can. Him responding in anger directly to tweets, or using public speaking engagements to whine about how difficult his life is are exactly the proofs I needs to make that judgement. You see - this is the way discussion works. If you ask a serious question and take the response seriously, then people will take you more seriously in return. If you continually respond LOL!, But Obama... or any number of your other typical nonsensical off topic replies then people will continue to ignore or ridicule you. I shouldn't have to educate you on this shit. It's communication 101.

I've been thinking a little more about this and I have an addition - it's not Trump specific, but it is related. I think we as a society are all so caught up in the trainwreck that is the current administration we're neglecting the biggest problem - that no matter what happens about 50% of the population will feel disenfranchised with the result, and that the government is not acting in the interests of what they consider to be the population. 50%. As numbers go that's about as dangerous as it gets. A society can handle 20% or 30%; somthing like that. That's to be expected. But 50% is an incredibly unstable state. It's equal pressures being applied to two groups who both feel put upon. The only thing that is holding that pressure together is the shared belief in the fairness and justness of the systems that are in place. If that belief becomes eroded (and that's what I see happening through the 'fake news' headlines, the various conspiracy trends and the political sniping that has reached unbelievable levels) then I think there's an increased likelihood that fairly large scale civil unrest could happen. At a time when we need to be coming together as a population I only see us being driven into more polar opposite positions. If I were President I'd run on reducing that figure to 55-45, and even that would be a massive achievement. This is something that is going to take decades to even stop, let alone reverse.

This is a good example of dangerous news. As of that report it's just one guy's opinion, no matter how he's placed in the party - We have no idea what caused him to have it. That Ryan shut down the conversation is interesting but predictable and that's about it. I'd expect that conversation to have gone 'unless you have some pretty fucking specific evidence to back up that allegation, I suggest you shut your trap. We're supposed to all be on the same side here.' That's what Id have said if I were Ryan. The media will probably make it into something far larger than that without taking the time to do the proper research.

Sorry to point this out but, you are already there. Mods - Can we just ban this troll? His replies don't even make sense anymore. They're specifically designed to get a rise from the poster which is the definition of trolling.

You know nothing about me or my background. You have no idea if I belong in what you derogatorily term 'the intellectual elite' or in your precious 'talented, capable and resourceful' class. But this is a fascinating look into your mind.

You should have worded your question a little more carefully then - As we're learning every day through the media the choice of words you use to communicate is a very powerful thing. The presidency of Trump doesn't even come close to my worst overall fears. My specific worst fear for this presidency is that Trump allows himself to be manipulated into some sort of catastrophic event based on a fit of pique. This might be military, economic or social. That absolutely should not be a fear one should have of their president, but the ego of this man is so fragile that I have to consider it a possibility. He is far too ready to act without thinking things through. 'Winging-it' is not a good trait for a world leader. There are other concerns of course, but that's the big one - The rise of nationalism and racism. The continued devolution of the electoral process into a media-circus. The precedent Trump is setting for future presidents to outright lie to their people and the complete lack of middle ground partisanship from the major political parties.