Phil1111

Fixed it for you. An absolute predictable response for the trump gang of misfits, unconvicted-felons and supporters.It that the response is always lie, deny and cover up.

Design of the canopy is as important as WL. How old the used equipment is also a consideration, besides the number of jumps. If you get a reasonable deal on used equipment and make 200 jumps a year. You shouldn't loose more than $500. For that year and period of time. If you are on the lookout for deals, know equipment and values. Its possible for sell it for more than what you pay for it. Don't buy something too advanced just because its a deal. Just buy used!! But talk to riggers, instructors and other gear heads about what to look for and values.

Rudy Giuliani, an Italian, has one job for the WH. He gets out ahead of the bad news and scandals. Then paints them all with the same garlic paint brush. The brush that chefs use to put the garlic butter on bread and other foods. He attempts to diffuse, distract and flavor the arguments. In a way that garlic does to cooking. Its similar to what lawyers do in court when they throw a whole series of unrelated, implausible theories at a jury. hoping that some of it sticks to sow doubt. It has proven effectiveness on less agile minds.

Because of the revolving nature of WH personnel, insiders and advisors. IMO its always been pretty clear. For trump and his family its about making money and appeasing influential groups.. Including foreign governments, i.e. Russia, Saudi.. Beyond that its "who the f**k knows". Because there has never been a central ideology of government. FOX news celebrities are missed from your equation. They will become more important in the next and final year of the trump regime. Trump whisperers: are Stephen Miller and Fox keeping the shutdown alive?

" The Constitution elsewhere specifies that treason against the United States consists “only in levying War” against the country or in giving the country’s enemies “Aid and Comfort.” ... At the Constitutional Convention, an early draft included “treason, bribery, and corruption,” but it was shorn of that last item by the time it arrived on the floor. George Mason, of Virginia, spoke up. “Why is the provision restrained to Treason & bribery only?” he asked, according to James Madison’s notes. “Treason as defined in the Constitution will not reach many great and dangerous offences … Attempts to subvert the Constitution may not be Treason as above defined.” Mason moved to add “or maladministration.” Madison, though, objected that “so vague a term will be equivalent to a tenure during pleasure of the Senate.” Gouverneur Morris further argued that “an election of every four years will prevent maladministration.” Mere incompetence or policy disputes were best dealt with by voters. But that still left Mason’s original concern, for the “many great and dangerous offences” not covered by treason or bribery. Instead of “maladministration,” he suggested, why not substitute “other high crimes & misdemeanors (agst. the State)”? The motion carried. Constitutional lawyers have been arguing about what counts as a “high crime” or “misdemeanor” ever since. The phrase itself was borrowed from English common law, although there is no reason to suppose Mason and his colleagues were deeply familiar with its uses in that context. The Nixon impeachment spurred Charles L. Black, a Yale law professor, to write Impeachment: A Handbook, a slender volume that remains a defining work on the question. Black makes two key points. First, he notes that as a matter of logic as well as context and precedent, not every violation of a criminal statute amounts to a “high crime” or “misdemeanor.” To apply his reasoning, some crimes—say, violating 40 U.S.C. §8103(b)(2) by willfully injuring a shrub on federal property in Washington, D.C.—cannot possibly be impeachable offenses. Conversely, a president may violate his oath of office without violating the letter of the law. A president could, for example, harness the enforcement powers of the federal government to systematically persecute his political opponents, or he could grossly neglect the duties of his office. That sort of conduct, in Black’s view, is impeachable even when it is not actually criminal." Above from: Impeach Donald Trump Starting the process will rein in a president who is undermining American ideals—and bring the debate about his fitness for office into Congress, where it belongs.

Right in the first paragraph. Too pessimistic in the second. Its all about the base of trump support. trump lost an important vote this week on the lifting of sanctions on one of Putin's oligarch friends. House Republicans join Democrats to rebuke Trump on Russia moves The latest polls show 57% of voters will vote against trump in any possible 2020 election. Republican congressmen will have to face voters as well. Now they are reluctant to cross him. When disclosures in hearings and the Mueller report comes out. As trump cult support crumbles. Republican senators will jump ship. Which brings me back to your correct perceptions of his behaviors in your first paragraph. He will go down in the sinking ship with Donald JR., Kushner and Ivanka. Everyone forgets that Mueller has Allen Weisselberg, CFO of the trump Organization, as a co-operating witness.. You call that game, set and match. Now I bring up a idea core to many trump supporters of guns and the law. The US constitution. Which states: "Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This clause, known as the Take Care Clause, requires the President to enforce all constitutionally valid Acts of Congress, regardless of his own Administration’s view of their wisdom or policy. The clause imposes a duty on the President; it does not confer a discretionary power. The Take Care Clause is a limit on the Vesting Clause’s grant to the President of “the executive power.” The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in an opinion handed down just last year striking down the President’s assertion of authority to disregard a federal statute, provided a succinct description of the President’s obligations under the Take Care Clause, as follows: Under Article II of the Constitution and relevant Supreme Court precedents, the President must follow statutory mandates so long as there is appropriated money available and the President has no constitutional objection to the statute. So, too, the President must abide by statutory prohibitions unless the President has a constitutional objection to the prohibition. If the President has a constitutional objection to a statutory mandate or prohibition, the President may decline to follow the law unless and until a final Court order dictates otherwise. But the President may not decline to follow a statutory mandate or prohibition simply because of policy objections. Of course, if Congress appropriates no money for a statutorily mandated program, the Executive obviously cannot move forward. But absent a lack of funds or a claim of unconstitutionality that has not been rejected by final Court order, the Executive must abide by statutory mandates and prohibitions. " The President’s Duty to Faithfully Execute the Law The law and trump. By definition and by actions. Separate in every form, from the aforementioned articles of the US constitution. trump is making an announcement today about his self made crisis at the border. Keep in mind the above quote and SC interpretation of the Constitution. Because you can rest assured. Despite over 30 lawyers in trump's personal employment in the WH. trump won't. Finally, the US constitution sets out the standards for impeachment. Its not what many quote "high crimes and misdemeanors". Instead it states: " The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. " Numerous reports have been made with regards to the Moscow Tower project. Which trump had been trying to build for decades. The reports suggest that President Putin would receive for free. The penthouse suite, if the project was approved. "While legal experts scramble to decipher what might be going on in the shady minds of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi — and the even more shadowy Roger Stone, a Trump confidant — too little attention has been paid to the more basic question of what President Trump and his team have been doing as part of an increasingly obvious conspiracy to obstruct the investigation into the Trump campaign’s collusion with Russia during the 2016 presidential election. It seems clear that President Trump has been dangling tantalizing hints, if not outright offers, of future pardons from federal prosecution to Manafort, Corsi, former national security adviser Michael Flynn, Manafort associate Rick Gates, and anyone else who might incriminate him. Reporting by The New York Times suggests that these characters might harbor damaging information about Trump’s involvement with Russia in the treacherous, if not literally treasonous, effort to attack computer systems in the United States, weaponize information stolen by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, and deliver Trump the 2016 election. The Times story shows how Manafort’s offer to cooperate with Mueller was a complete ruse, concocted in coordination with Team Trump to enable the president to plant Manafort inside Mueller’s office as a mole. With Manafort agreeing to this scheme in likely exchange for the prospect of a full pardon, many observers are discussing the respects in which the coordinated effort of the two supposedly adverse defense teams to influence one another’s testimony in Mueller’s investigation, even after Manafort abandoned his defense, might amount to witness tampering or other forms of criminal obstruction of justice atop the Russia inquiry. In our recent book, “To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment,” my coauthor Joshua Matz and I concluded that the “corrupt exercise of power in exchange for a personal benefit defines impeachable bribery.” Apart from treason, bribery is the only abuse of power expressly singled out in Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution as a basis to impeach, convict, and remove a president. Whatever else may count as a “high crime and misdemeanor,” bribery is specifically designated as one of the two paradigm offenses for which a president is removable through the impeachment process. That’s why, in what might now appear to be an understatement, we observed that using “the pardon power as part of a plan to prevent witnesses from testifying, or to discourage them from telling the truth, might well be impeachable.” Dangling the pardon is the quid; getting help in obstructing justice to shield the president is the quo. Quid pro quo: bribery. Notably, when the Supreme Court, in McDonnell v. United States, in 2016, narrowed the definition of what counts as an “official act,” for purposes of federal bribery statutes, to “formal exercises of governmental power” — which would surely include issuing a pardon — it did not similarly narrow what counts as “an exchange for a thing of value.” On the contrary, the court made clear that receiving “a thing of value knowing that it was given with the expectation” of a future “official act” like a pardon would constitute criminal bribery." above quote from: Is Trump guilty of bribery?

trump appears to be wanting to distract and desperately pander to his shrinking base again. "Important announcement this evening".

Nyet, fear not. Everyone would assume that your SC account had been hacked by Marc's Russian speaking friends and co-workers.

As usual, Marc's reading comprehension has failed him. The special council's office said the report was inaccurate, not false. There is a difference.Marc and trump are like two naked sailors in the south Atlantic. A category five hurricane rages around them and all they cling to for flotation. Is a single packing peanut each. Cohen lied about the Moscow Tower project and other matters when he testified to Congress. Those lies were solely for trump's benefit.As trump was under investigation for some time prior to this. Its only logical that coordination of everyone's stories would be made. Excepting the fact that the lies pour out of trumps mouth continuously..

Well I stand corrected. FOX does have the odd journalist laying around who will ask tough questions! Th senior editor of Buzzfeed was on CNBC this morning. Joe was grilling him because the same journalist had to retract a couple stories before. The senior editor stated that he had checked and verified the same sources himself. Regardless of trump's denials. It seems clear that Cohen did lie to Congress. So if the lies didn't benefit himself and only acted to protect trump. The question becomes WHY? Cohen has a bit of a history of , how can we say it. Protecting himself with regards to trump's propensity to lie. In addition its alleged in the story that trump's other legal council helped concoct the lies at the base of said testimony.

Yah forgot "RAT". Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump Remember, Michael Cohen only became a “Rat” after the FBI did something which was absolutely unthinkable & unheard of until the Witch Hunt was illegally started. They BROKE INTO AN ATTORNEY’S OFFICE! Why didn’t they break into the DNC to get the Server, or Crooked’s office? 126K 8:39 AM - Dec 16, 2018 An obvious reply to trump's tweet. Is because a judge has to sign off on it. But for the trump base. Its just more meat and since trump's serving it, rotten meat. Meanwhile in Russia. Pravda Which means "truth" in Russian. So you know its got to be true. trump has gotten dumped under the bus as well: Dumped by the Trump that Americans Deserved

Without belaboring the point. I agree that its not good journalism. I would add that FOX doesn't employ journalists. They are a mouthpiece for trump, his base and the far right. Right being in the Rand Paul area of politics. He scores 100 on the Conservative Union rankings. The American Conservative Union

Not poor journalism. Reporting on what MSM is reporting saves them from criticizing their meal ticket. There is a old saying; "Never write a letter, save every letter you ever receive" They have a agenda, a horse in the race so to speak. They will ride it till the end.

Take your cue from FOX. Cohen is a convicted liar, Russia could have hacked trump Corporation e-mails to discredit trump personally. trump is not responsible for what Cohen says because Cohen "hardly ever worked for me". The deep state could have fabricated those documents. Trump calls Cohen a liar after bombshell BuzzFeed report ...Help me here Marc & Ron.

Equally important was that Ivanka, trump Jr. were also briefed, aware and participatory in the Moscow trump Tower dealings. What Cohen represents in testimony in the House, Congress and trial(s). Is likely to just carry less weight than the e-mails and internal trump corporation documents. It takes but minutes at trial to destroy President trump's credibility given his propensity to lie. IMO its important to hold the other participants in these crimes to account. The trump family. Donald Jr. testified under oath. I'm not sure if Ivanka did or not?

Yes they are more docile thats why student canopies are large. Although the design of the canopy is an equal consideration. Lots of discussion about when to buy, or rent, use the search. You just have to look for a larger used rig. Don't buy new, as a used rig could work for you for years and hundreds of jumps. The savings pay for 1/2 of them.

Ability to conduct poll?

As Mueller's findings draw closer to full disclosure. trump's psychosis will manifest itself in increasingly desperate actions to appease his shrinking base. New Deputy National Security Adviser Was Longtime Board Member of Anti-Muslim Hate Group The Center for Security Policy (CSP) is a far-right,[3][4]Washington, D.C.-based think tank. The organization's founder and current president is Frank Gaffney Jr.. The organization's mission statement is "To identify challenges and opportunities likely to affect American security",[5] where main activities are focused on exposing and researching what it believes to be jihadist threats to the United States; a number of these beliefs have been widely discredited, such as its false claims about American ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. The CSP has been criticized by the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center, among a wide variety of other media and research organizations, for propagating conspiracy theories and Islamophobia, and described as a hate group, a label the organization disputes. First lady Melania flies to Florida on government jet after Trump postpones Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Afghanistan due to shutdown

That could present big problems for trump cultists. If you can't get gun purchases, suppressors, etc. approved. Their lives could become unsafe, even endangered

Ocasio-Cortez rips Trump in first House floor speech: 'It is not normal to shut down the government when we don’t get what we want' https://thehill.com/homenews/house/425766-ocasio-cortez-rips-trump-in-first-house-floor-speech-it-is-not-normal-to-shut and get ready.....!!! Wall Street, Brace Yourself: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Is Joining House Financial Services Committee http://fortune.com/2019/01/16/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-house-financial-services-committee/ Yeah Iago, Bwaaaahahahahahaha!

UK Economy Could Take 10.7% Economic Hit with No-Deal Brexit: Gov’t Report https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2018/11/28/510227.htm Yet UK citizens have been borrowing like they fear not the abyss. "As a corollary of this, the household sector has moved into a net financial deficit, borrowing more than it is saving for the first time since 1988. Households clearly think Brexit will not hurt their finances and are spending as if the income squeeze of 2017 and 2018 was just a pinprick. The danger for the economy is that if households seek to save at normal levels once again — the 50 year average is around 9 per cent rate — spending will take a big knock as will the wider economy"... Yet business fear said abyss: "The latest data show a downbeat picture, with investment only 2 per cent higher than at the time of the Brexit vote and 0.2 per cent lower than a year ago. Before the referendum, the BoE had expected business investment to have grown more than 13 per cent over the two-year period from 2016...." Investors, like business dislike steep precipices: "International investment in UK shares is best measured in dollar terms by the FTSE 250 index, which is made up by companies that collectively get most of their revenues from the UK. This has slid 0.3 per cent since the 2016 Brexit vote. (In sterling terms it has risen 12 per cent.) In the meantime the stock markets of other developed economies have risen 26 per cent, showing that investors have devalued UK assets." https://www.ft.com/content/cf51e840-7147-11e7-93ff-99f383b09ff9 So anti brexit politicans, UK business, UK govt. economists and investors are scared s**tless. But many citizens are still unconcerned.

Given that the #1 and #2 Google searches in Britain right AFTER the vote were "what is Brexit?" and "what is the EU?" - it is safe to say that many knew very little about what they were voting on. "an inability of low information voters to recognize liars and con-artists. " IMO thats not quite accurate. Pro exit campaigners sold a bill of goods. That brexit was easy. That the benefits of EU integration could be achieved without costs. That the absolute freedoms of UK actions could exist simultaneously with the benefits of EU trade. That is not the case. The EU has negotiated a position for which some UK politicians, won't accept. They insist that they can get a better brexit deal. For which there is the slight possibility of this happening. But the most likely case is that the whole exit idea is viewed by most as a bad deal. So A. Hold a new referendum with the May governments deal on the table. B. Exit with no deal and accept the financial consequences. Or. A. Turn it over to the opposition geniuses that think the EU will give them something better. B. Which likely goes with a new election. The confidence vote today suggests this option is temporarily DOA. Or. Postpone leaving till the next election and brexit is a important issue.

How about Trump destroying the translator's notes in his conversations with Putin? Aren't there a lot of chapped asses over Hillary having disposed of the her old phones and electronics. Anyway, her emails are there for any investigative body to see and none of them have found anything damning. Sure, some were not recoverable but the thing is she wasn't able to selectively block investigators from recovering any specific email. Mostly lost emails were recovered on the other end from recipients along with standard recovery efforts of the digital material. Investigators were then left with a cross section of her previously deleted emails which again showed nothing damning. The people still chanting the "Lock Her Up" BS need to come to grips with the fact that there's nothing to send her to jail for. Its "Judicial Watch (JW) is an American conservative activist group[1] and self-styled watchdog group[2][3] that files Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits to investigate claimed misconduct by government officials. ... Activities and controversies Judicial Watch’s main targets have been Democrats, particularly Bill and Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration.[14] " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Watch Which has initiated ZERO actions against the trump crime family. None against any trump official. I will quote from the first sentence of this Judge's opinion: "On his first day in office. President Obama set a worthy standard for his administration's compliance with the Freedom Of Information Act" Marc and this conservative hatchet group are fishing in a dry mud hole. trump could have ordered and investigation of HRC on day one as promised. They refused to do so. Both Marc and trump have refused to answer why.

Voters who want a free meal and expect that such things exist. Both the UK and America are learning that there is no free meal. Although the $trillion tax cut bill for rich Americans. Was certainly a free meal for them. At the expense of everyone else.