True, I would be sad to do without my pomegranates, walnuts, and grapes, but I could also get by with peaches, peanuts, watermelon, potatoes, apples, peas, okra, tomatoes, oranges, blueberries, pears, rice, beans and stuff.
Oh please, put the pitchfork down. I didn’t say they were a helpless welfare state. I said many cities and towns rely on federal funding, which they do. Not only that, the Federal Govt is by the far the largest land owner in CA by a huge margin. CA gets a large chunk of water from the Colorado River. And even if it’s diverted from NorCal, what happens when that region wants to stay in the US? All in all, it’s just a retarded temper tantrum by CA coastal liberals because they got their panties in a wad over Trump. It was just as dumb as when Texas Republicans wanted to do it during Obama’s tenure.
I wouldn't... because they want to leave, but still get all the benefits, and the rest of Canada won't put up with it. They've been told that they would then have to get their own currency, passports, military, etc, and here's a bill for all the shit that the Federal Government is providing them. While a fair number of stupid people demand to be separate, they have no clue what that actually means, and there's no way in hell it ever happens, other than as a sensationalist news story, or as a social platform to use as leverage for "French Rights". As it is, a ton of big companies pulled out of Quebec when they were really vocal about it, and they learned quite quickly that political/social instability doesn't do much for retaining big business and jobs. As a result they had to pivot a bit and offer stupidly huge tax breaks for software companies (which is why you see a ton of video game companies in Quebec), because they are the quickest/easiest to import as they have no need for special infrastructure or construction... just office space, which they have plenty of.
No, it's a Russian-backed effort to foment unrest. That said, the situation we have now where total Republican control is being used to explicitly target Democrat-voting states cannot stand forever. Republicans need to act like Americans again.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/fisa-court-denied-record-surveillance-orders-trump-first-year/ So does this mean that the Trump administration has said no the nsa/fbi can't wire tap someone, where all the other government for the past 40 years have said yes?
Only one FISA court judge has been seated in the Trump era: Robert Kugler of the New Jersey District in May 2017, and the law has not changed (in fact it was reauthorized at the end of 2017), so I doubt the court is any more likely to deny a request than it was previously. It seems likely that the Trump Administration is just more aggressive about seeking FISA warrants and sloppier in their legal justifications, as is a pattern.
The Trump administration is the body asking the FISA court for the orders, through the NSA & FBI. The two departments are part of the executive branch and both report to the president, and they have to get warrants approved by the judicial branch - in the case the FISA court. Like Aetius said, the most likely explanation is that the volume of unjustified request has increased substantially under Trump.
In other news, North and South Korea have agreed to end their war. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/27/kor...ement-promising-to-eliminate-risk-of-war.html
I never would have thought that I'd have to give credit to this whack-job for brokering peace: Spoiler
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment...-sexual-misconduct-accusations-192325174.html And you thought the president shot off his mouth with ill advised reactionary digital communications? It was all going well until he starts taking pot shots at her career. Any valid argument he might had about the overreacting digital lynch mob goes out the window with petty insults. Should have let his wife and daughters proof read it first.
I’m being flippant but as reactionary as the mob has been on this topic (see: Matt Damon), you would have thought his delivery would have left little for the mob to grab onto. He comes off as vindictive and unless I’m missing someone angle of the story leaves himself open to be run out of public life on a rail. I mean I don’t agree with the overreacting nature of the people that would do this to him but you have to know that that is the reality we live in and should be a factor on how he responds.
I agree. However, it won’t reflect well on him for attacking her selectivity with regards to how she reacted(or didn’t) to the accusations against Ailes and others at Fox. It sounds like Brokaw is engaging in whataboutism which takes away some credibility to me. I could see how he’s angry and what feels like a meaningless character attack against him. Especially because it doesn’t seem to rise to the level of what Ailes and Weinstein have done. If we want to attack people for not taking ownership of issues and instead playing the game of precedents where “if asshole A did this, you can’t get mad at me for a similar behavior”, it applies to all. His attacks on her career were just a more articulate form of what Trump does.
Obviously you don’t do your own research like the social media journalists. It was all Trump’s doing.
I freely admit that this is not my thread, I don't enjoy the conflict among people that I like. Having said that, I just saw the bit on NBC news about Tom Brokaw. Dude tried and failed to KISS a girl 23 years ago, and he is being torn up in the media. Fuck that. That sucks. He was unwelcome, but a failed kiss? C'mon. I was kissed today but a lady sitting outside the convenience store when I hugged her and gave her some cash. I am not going to the news. I am more resilient than that.
My rule of thumb with these accusations is to just wait to see if other accusers come forward. These types of assaults are rarely one-off things; they're almost always part of a pattern. Once the dam of the first accuser breaks, others usually come forward.
Do you think Brokaw would have come forward so forcefully in his rebuttal if there were others? What I’m thinking is maybe no. The other school of thought is that if another accuser sees the kind of attacks the first accuser got, it might scare off others from coming forward. Tom Brokaw comes from the tail end of Mad Men type of office environments. Who knows what went down?