Jump to content
The Education Forum

The inevitable end result of our last 56 years


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 10.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Here we go.

The Bloomberg factor.

20 hours ago — President-elect Joe Biden's transition team in recent weeks has quietly brought aboard alumni of Wall Street titan Goldman Sachs, tech giants ...
Missing: appoints ‎| Must include: appoints

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2020 at 10:04 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

One of my reasons for asking Dennis and Jim D. for their top 10 presidents is because it seemed to me that they'd be unable to pick that many whose presidencies they could stomach.

Is this you admitting you were wrong Sandy? Apology accepted.

 

On 12/16/2020 at 1:31 PM, James DiEugenio said:

The way you guys coddle DLC types like Obama and Clinton makes me wonder if you are already warming up to embrace Obama part 2, Joe Biden.  Let us see how long it takes Joe to get us out of Syria and to denounce what MBS is doing in Yemen, let alone for the murder of Khassoggi.

 

Let's also watch as Biden likely ignores one of the better genuinely Democratic proposals that Tulsi has introduced. The excess profits bill. This is exactly the type of thing that will show what has happened to the Democratic party. I hope I'm wrong and millions of well informed Democrats will call their congressman and tell them to support this, but more likely is another bill that would bring us one step closer to New Deal type Democratic action goes unnoticed.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/18/tulsi-gabbard-redirect-profits-from-corporations-allowed-to-remain-open-to-small-businesses-forced-to-close/

Jeff has already posted regarding Tulsi's Patriot Act repeal bill. Putting these two bills together exposes Joe Biden in my view, unless I'm wrong and he suddenly champions them. Only immense pressure from a badly misguided mainstream left could push these bills through all of the corrupt pressure that Biden likely has little intention of challenging like Gabbard would have. Not to mention, Gabbard would have definitely pulled us out of Syria, her DNC star fell because of her statements after having actually gone over there and investigated the situation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 You remember that ole Sonny And Cher song?

And The Grift Goes On ... And The Grift Goes On

Greed keeps pounding an urging to the brain

la de da de da...la de da de da 

1 day ago — EXCLUSIVE: Jared Kushner helped create a Trump campaign shell company that secretly paid the president's family members and spent $617 ...
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been no shortage of talk this election about Hillary Clinton's ties to Wall Street or the fact her campaign has received $21.4 million from the financial services sector.

So it was surprising when, on Wednesday, Clinton seemed like she'd been caught off guard when asked during a CNN Democratic town hall why she had accepted $675,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs.

Here's the exchange between Clinton and the host, Anderson Cooper:

Cooper: "You were paid $675,000 for three speeches (to Goldman). Was that a mistake? Was that a bad error in judgment?"

Clinton: "Look, I made speeches to lots of groups. I told them what I thought. I answered questions."

Cooper: "But did you have to be paid $675,000?"

Clinton: "Well I don’t know. That’s what they offered ... Every secretary of state I know of has done that."

Cooper: "But that's usually when they're not running for office ... you must have known?"

Clinton: "To be honest I wasn't — I wasn’t committed to running. I didn’t know whether I would run or not."

 

There are a few problems with Clinton's explanation.

For one, the year in question is 2013. Yes, Clinton had stepped down from her government position as secretary of state. But she said at the time she was already openly considering running for the White House. And even if she hadn't been, it's hard to imagine neither she nor the banks expected her to again be in a position of power.

"Politicians often leverage their political talent and celebrity for personal financial gain, and paid speeches are common after they leave office," said Josh Stewart, deputy communications director for the Sunlight Foundation. "What is unique is a potential presidential candidate choosing to accept top dollar from one of the nation's largest investment banks."

Then there's the question of how much she was paid. In the above exchange, Clinton suggests that she didn't have a role in ensuring that she received a certain amount from Goldman. But as Gawker's Ashley Feinberg points out, Clinton's minimum speaking fee was $200,000.

In some ways, Cooper's question actually undersells the amount of money Clinton received. Including the $675,000 from Goldman, Clinton pulled in $2.3 million from speaking to a handful of firms in 2013, including Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley, Fidelity Investments, and Bank of America, according to the Intercept.

Why do those firms give so much money to potentially powerful figures?

By saying that she doesn't know why Goldman Sachs paid her $675,000, Clinton is exposing herself to one attack line while shielding herself from another.

Her enemies have long alleged that she's coy about revealing her true motivations. Saying she has no idea why she received this money plays into this critique, and contributed to the round of negative headlines that followed her remarks Wednesday night.

This influence is sometimes hard to pin down. It doesn't entail a strict quid pro quo, but rather makes it more likely that Clinton will turn to someone from Goldman for advice when formulating policy related to investment banking, and more likely that Goldman will be able to reach out to her, according to campaign finance experts.

In the long term, Biersack said, that could pay big dividends for the investment bank.

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2020 at 3:47 PM, Steve Thomas said:

Nuclear weapons agency breached amid massive cyber onslaught

And Donald Trump has done NOTHING. He needs to be removed today, before he destroys this country.

Steve Thomas

I stand corrected.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 12/19/20

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump

The Cyber Hack is far greater in the Fake News Media than in actuality. I have been fully briefed and everything is well under control. Russia, Russia, Russia is the priority chant when anything happens because Lamestream is, for mostly financial reasons, petrified of discussing the possibility that it may be China (it may!). There could also have been a hit on our ridiculous voting machines during the election, which is now obvious that I won big, making it an even more corrupted embarrassment for the USA.”

 

I'm surprised he didn't blame the dead guy from Venezuela.

Steve Thomas

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks,

   At this festive time of year, I would like to share a little holiday ditty that I composed for 2020. 🤥

Rudolph the Red-Nosed Wanker
(sung to the tune of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer)
 
Rudolph the Red-Nosed Wanker,
had a very sweaty mug,
and if you ever saw him,
you'd know his father was a thug.
 
All of the other mobsters,
used to call him up for deals.
In the old Cosa Nostra,
nobody ever squeals.
 
Then one foggy election year,
Donald came to say,
"Rudolph, with your shameless spiels,
won't you help me Stop the Steal?"
 
Then how the Trump Cult loved him,
as they shouted out with glee,
"Rudolph the Red-Nosed Wanker,
you'll go down in infamy!"
 
rudy.jpg?itok=dMSm3Ovw&resize=450x200
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump's Friday Night Oval Office Meeting Devolves Into Screaming Match Chaos! 

Which is what turns on this disturbingly desperate man who is obsessed with trying to create another reality other than the true one of him being one of the all time biggest ( one term only ) LOSERS in the history of U.S. Presidents.

 

2 days ago — Donald Trump's presidency by the numbers. By Maegan Vazquez, Christopher Hickey, Priya Krishnakumar and Janie Boschma, CNN. Updated ...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/20/americas/chile-president-fine-intl-scli/index.html

Chilean President Sebastian Pinera was slapped with a $3,500 fine on Friday after posing for a selfie on the beach with a bystander without wearing a mask as required during the coronavirus pandemic, health authorities said.

Chile has strict rules on mask wearing in all public places and violations are punishable with sanctions that include fines and even jail terms.

Pinera apologized then turned himself in shortly after the selfie surfaced on social media in early December.

The president explained he had been walking alone along the beach near his home in the posh Chilean seaside town of Cachagua when a woman recognized him and asked for a photo together.

The selfie shows the president and the woman standing very near to one another on a sunny day, neither wearing masks.

 

No comment.

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...