false equivalency equivalency and chess for tyros

[cleaver]

if i may... a few SHORT responses at once...

Since your narrative hasn't assigned a culprit let me help *** BARACK OBAMA***

i assigned no culprit - for it was observation, truly.
i have made no secret that i am no fan of the president.
but, that does not preclude my finding his presidency fascinating in many ways...

obama had his faults - certainly... but he most certainly is not a bad man.
there is much of his presidency that is quite admirable...

too simple to blame... it becomes sloppy shorthand most times.
to understand takes a bit more work, should any of us have time to do so...

our times - perhaps from the sheer deluge of instant information available -
have unfortunately cultivated a culture of quick beatification/vilification.

we simply 'haven't the time' to give deeper thought to almost anything...

oooooh... squirrell!

Ideology and emption Trump reason in every way.
That is why I have so long compared abortion to a religion.
The sense of belonging, in this case to the perceived educated an enlightened
truly create an inability to see a world more subtle, one
of the good, the bad and the ugly.
I have asked cleaver to explore the notion that the grey palette always tend to black.
We see it in the comforting conformity to the group-think always pulling always leading
away from the light because they just assure themselves, the world is really grey.
The mentality of "No one I knows thinks that way," so those whom do are indeed evil.

strangely, i think the above answer, to docoral kind of goes into this...
if the grey is the black - for the group(non)think of it... perhaps.

my grey is that place away from absolutism.

for simple example:
trump vilification... it blinds many from being able to consider the whole... where there is/can be something of value to be gleaned.

the villain is reflexive flashthink... where reflex alone predetermines the outcome of any consideration. it is a trap...

in honesty, the president himself is a master of exploiting this very thing...

This may turn out to be one of those 'retro' Lit discussions.

Cleaver; Studied, yes. Emulated, maybe. The press has taken it upon itself to define what is "presidential." So much so that virtually all of our recent presidents, going back to TR, try to fulfill the presses prototypical (archetypal?) image. I think that this in part explains why the press is basically behaving in a bat shit crazy manner. Trump doesn't come from a political background and definitely doesn't behave as the press has defined the office. Virtually all of the 2020 dem front runners are career politicians that have squeezed themselves into the mold. So the question re. emulation going forward is, "Can a politician behave as a non-politician?"

yes.
obviously, a politician can behave as a non politician...
but it too is an act of sorts...

and as fascinating as it is, keeping on board with an outlier act
can become tiring. (wait. what did i write above?)

in trump's case, trump fatigue is going to be very difficult to outrun.
it will be as much on the ballot as any democrat...

for there are roles and molds
and an entire world of them that depend upon a certain consistency
(lazy shorthand if you will) to get on to other issues...
certain offices are like work uniforms...

i know that this may seem antithetical to...
the deeper meanings of what i scratched with sc above...

you bring up tr.
it really is the closest example we have contemporaneously
to trump coming to the office...
he broke the mold up to his time...
steamrolled a very progressive (old school var.) agenda...
faced criticism within and without his party...
cultivated a popular following and a very vocal opposition...

and...
redefined the office.

although a retrenchment naturally came after.

just as tr was not as much a movement as a unique personality
cultivating change...
so will be trump...

egos both.

unsustainable as a movement without the personality.
the mold, even transformed - the custom and practice - need not be confining to the office holder...
if they stand in for a lack flamboyance and ego.
it's all props anyway.
different actors different shows.

Ann; Re. "Pulling the strings." No one is pulling Trumps strings. If they were Trump would be behaving more and more like the typical pol. That just doesn't seem to be happening. And as far as ability I'd refer to the recent non-story of his companies losing $1 billion some 30 years ago. In reality it was probably more than the sum reported. But that's not the story, the story is is how he guided his companies out of that mess and back to prosperity. That's the real story and no one was pulling his strings then.

of this last part, i will disagree.
for i have first hand knowledge of this.

trump was a multiply bankrupt blowhard
who loved seeing his name on page six of the ny post
almost more than he loved himself...

it took a bunch of bankers to...
prop up the face of a nascent brand
which they figured could be more valuable
than the liquidated parts of his failures...

he was restrained.
put on a strict allowance.
was an employee of his brand
until the apprentice...

the tax story debunks the legend...
the more recent ones - no doubt even more so.

 

[cleaver]

Shorter version of a long reply I decided not to write.

Cut the crap and accept defeat.

what defeat?
explain...
i was trying to discuss dynamics
not a binary test of some sort.

 

[Aquagal]

He’s surely devious enough to spin this top, but not entirely sure he has given enough forethought into being the master marionettist. I may pick your brain on this.

Is there a writer's strike going on or something?

I giggled.

 

[SpeareChucker]

The gray tends to the black, lets examine the issue abortion again because it arouses the greatest passion.
You get to the Gosner-Tiller crowd in gradual steps because we have pride in our step taken as reasonable. When you take up position A and trade it to B to join in compromise, then it is easier to point C because that's where the fixated abide and behind them, the radical who cannot, will not in their frenzied fixation, whom await at point D. And, if it is a true compromise, you have to keep moving towards them, lest your position is picked off the list because "they" now won;t have a damned thing to do with you.

There is black and white, and if you refuse to believe that, then you will accept grey and let me tell you gray tends to black for when you say ∃ of anything is a good function of government then ∃ is everything ¬∀ and while you may be able to advocate for ∃ you won't be allowed to define it and in this manner its limit will be ∀ for ∑f(∪∃)i [i=from you to the total population] will never tend to ∅ by definition so it is easy to see that it is, indeed, an ∀ or ∅ when it comes to government. (Now, the ∑f(∩∃)i [i=from you to the total population] will tend to ∅ but that is politically unattainable for the obvious reason that the more ∃ is defined, the smaller the ∩∃ becomes.)
​

 

[SpeareChucker]

I just used that as an example, but try substituting in the example taxes...
immigration/migration

Or any other, take one.
It's always the people most motivated and radical that drives the positions of only slightly vested in the issue.

The taxpayer is overwhelmed by those who want more and those who don't pay them.
The citizen is overwhelmed by "intelligentsia' and the desire to help others, but again, once you enter into the gray are, in order to be a nuanced thinker who operates from the white, you find yourself compelled to shift your stance to maintain a sense of "community."

 

[bellisarius]

The whole business loss thing is a matter of record cleaver. All in the late 80's, early 90's. I'll just refer to that period as the "Casino Years." Trump never went into personal bankruptcy. Those particular properties and business's were under the microscope of the courts and the banks, but just THOSE properties and any that may have been used as grantees. Trump divested himself of those burdens as quickly as possible then moved off in new directions. It is fair to question the notion that anyone could build a Las Vegas East in New Jersey.

That being said it's obvious that Trump is a high risk player. A trait that he shares in common with virtually all of our notable past presidents. The 'forgettables' can be said to be 'place holder' presidents. So far, as far as actual actions in office, he's doing well. The problem with Trump, as I see it anyway, is that once he's dealt with the most obvious and pressing problems he'll move on and create new problems of his own making.

 

[HisArpy]

what defeat?
explain...
i was trying to discuss dynamics
not a binary test of some sort.

Your test of dynamics is based on a failed premise that somehow you can undo the past by reinterpreting it and then trying to argue that the new viewpoint is true reality.

Which is merely statue toppling.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Your test of dynamics is based on a failed premise that somehow you can undo the past by reinterpreting it and then trying to argue that the new viewpoint is true reality.

Which is merely statue toppling.

And remember, folks, only Timmeh knows TEH TRUTH.

 

[Rightguide]

Shorter version of a long reply I decided not to write.

Cut the crap and accept defeat.

^^^

The bottom line that Cleaver and other losers cannot accept.

 

[HisArpy]

And remember, folks, only Timmeh knows TEH TRUTH.

Not my fault you can't keep up with the rest of the class.

 

[cleaver]

The whole business loss thing is a matter of record cleaver. All in the late 80's, early 90's. I'll just refer to that period as the "Casino Years." Trump never went into personal bankruptcy. Those particular properties and business's were under the microscope of the courts and the banks, but just THOSE properties and any that may have been used as grantees. Trump divested himself of those burdens as quickly as possible then moved off in new directions. It is fair to question the notion that anyone could build a Las Vegas East in New Jersey.

That being said it's obvious that Trump is a high risk player. A trait that he shares in common with virtually all of our notable past presidents. The 'forgettables' can be said to be 'place holder' presidents. So far, as far as actual actions in office, he's doing well. The problem with Trump, as I see it anyway, is that once he's dealt with the most obvious and pressing problems he'll move on and create new problems of his own making.

again, i'll invoke the first hand knowledge blanket re: the finances...
suffice this.

nonetheless:
in re: obvious and pressing problems...
there is still a shit ton on his plate that causes concern.

i do not think that the latest spin on deep state tyranny is gaining much wide-spread traction.

funny to think that china (trade skirmish) may be his "collaborator" in
misdirecting the sheer lunacy of this one.

 

[bellisarius]

again, i'll invoke the first hand knowledge blanket re: the finances...
suffice this.

nonetheless:
in re: obvious and pressing problems...
there is still a shit ton on his plate that causes concern.

i do not think that the latest spin on deep state tyranny is gaining much wide-spread traction.

funny to think that china (trade skirmish) may be his "collaborator" in
misdirecting the sheer lunacy of this one.

Actually the 'Deep State' issue is gaining traction and IS of great concern. I wrote on that subject LONG ago, long before it gained more than peripheral attention and the problem boils down to delegated legislation, a practice we picked up on from our British cousins. Fully 90% of everything you find in the US Code was never passed by congress, but put in place as "rules" by unelected, faceless, bureaucrats working in the administrative branch with the help of a horde of paid lobbyists with offices on 'K' street. Once the bureaucracy, any bureaucracy, reaches a certain threshold it begins to act in it's own best interests, not in the interests of the nation or it's citizens. It's another facet of the Military-Industrial complex that Eisenhower warned of.

Trump is seen as representing a threat to the bureaucracy.

 

[SpeareChucker]

The Bureaucracy
may be a better nomenclature
than The Deep State.

Saying The Deep State
is to many suggesting a conspiracy
whereas
The Bureaucracy implies self-interest.

Did the elements of DC
that supported President Obama
cut of a cloth they approve of
turn on Trump
because swagger ain't their bling?

Yes. You get the thing...
You've got to have that swing.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Actually the 'Deep State' issue is gaining traction and IS of great concern. I wrote on that subject LONG ago, long before it gained more than peripheral attention and the problem boils down to delegated legislation, a practice we picked up on from our British cousins. Fully 90% of everything you find in the US Code was never passed by congress, but put in place as "rules" by unelected, faceless, bureaucrats working in the administrative branch with the help of a horde of paid lobbyists with offices on 'K' street. Once the bureaucracy, any bureaucracy, reaches a certain threshold it begins to act in it's own best interests, not in the interests of the nation or it's citizens. It's another facet of the Military-Industrial complex that Eisenhower warned of.

Trump is seen as representing a threat to the bureaucracy.

In which case, you don't find it in the "US Code." You find regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations.

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)

Trump is seen as representing a threat to the bureaucracy.

Trump doesn’t even know how the Post Office works.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Neither does this guy ^^^^


But note again, the proclivity of very deep thinkers to keep their arguments down to bumper-sticker proportion.
The really good ones of this group can manage mantras of shorter message!

 

[bellisarius]

In which case, you don't find it in the "US Code." You find regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations.

True enough. The rules of implementation.

 

[bellisarius]

One of Trumps campaign rally8ing cries was "Drain the Swamp." It resonated with the electorate and scared the shit out of the bureaucracy.

He further expressed distrust of the intelligence community. And it is becoming more and more apparent that his distrust was well founded.

 

[cleaver]

why does this sound like desperate mid-stream re-branding?

of course the mass can wrap their heads around "bureaucratic" red tape;
that infuriating process that slows any simple action down to a crawl...

whereas the narrative thus far with deep state has been that it is
far more directed and nefarious... an unelected shadow operation
in service to anything but trump...

one exists... the other a spooky spectre...

hmmmmm?

yeah. i'd go with "bureaucracy"... but it would have to be
the "weasly wabbit" ones...
who have meetings and a secret handshake...

i dunno, guys.

certainly there is a bureaucracy - with a natural affinity for self-preservation...

... but what you cling to -
this great wide plot to sink trump by some... golem?

this deep state spectre still stands in
as a potential counterpoint narrative to
what is emerging/ has emerged in investigation of the administration
thus far.

mueller is done... a full report with parts withheld, exists.
ancillary cases in state and lower federal court continue...

i know. i know...
republican mueller - hired by republican rosenstein - under republican sessions... in a republican administration...
hired only democrats and obamists on the mueller team...
faulted from the beginning...
predetermined to finish the work the....
uhhhh... right, "bureau-crats"... started.

trumplethinskin has this super hot daughter who....
you should see what she can do around a loom!

donny deutsch would give his left(wing) nut to re-brand something so!

 

[SpeareChucker]

This is why Trump got elected.
For far too long, the NRO right pushed back against the Democrats and those Republicans they don't much approve of with only words.
Furious editorializing and virtue signaling to the Democrats, the press, and to anyone who might get the power to appoint.
The Bush family, McCain, Romney and most everyone of any national Republican political importance always played to the press and
the idea that good sound governance would secure Democrat grace and cooperation.
And Democrats loved it. They loved playing Lucy, the football holder.
So a large segment of the population felt that the crises of confidence came down to
only choices between Democrat and Democrat-Lite when it came to the government.
On the other hand, a lot of people did not like seeing their government in the hands of
someone outside of their ability to politically, to harness saddle and apply spur.
So everyone under the sun, from the press, to the (generic, bureaucratic) government
to the national leadership decided that Trump had to go and
they would do anything to undo and undermine those whom voted for him.

In short, don't tell me about who appointed them, I don't care.
The question is what team are the playing for?
The Nationals or The People...

 

[bellisarius]

I'm trying to figure out where you think you're going with this cleaver? It is nefarious.

Let's start with weaponizing the IRS. Did you forget about that?

Then there is the intelligence/FBI community. What do you know about Adm. Mike Rogers?

Adm. Mike Rogers

Brennan and Clapper are in abyssal feces. Loretta Lynch and Susan Rice will undoubtedly be swept up in this as well. Scroll down to the bottom of the above link and read through the time line. It was Rogers that quietly blew the whistle on the entire operation. The individual that pulled the thread that started the unraveling. When Trump asked Comey whether he was under investigation or not Trump KNEW that Comey was lying. Roger's had already filled Trump in. Trump's apparent chaotic appointments and replacements in the intelligence structure and FBI make perfect sense in light of the fact that Trump had been briefed on exactly what was going on behind his back. It's not called paranoia when they really are out to get you.

Trump is crude and Trump has warts. But he IS the president and as such I'll judge him by what he does for this nation, not whether he holds his pinky out properly while sipping tea, in that regard I could give a shit less.

 

[cleaver]

This is why Trump got elected.
For far too long, the NRO right pushed back against the Democrats and those Republicans they don't much approve of with only words.
Furious editorializing and virtue signaling to the Democrats, the press, and to anyone who might get the power to appoint.
The Bush family, McCain, Romney and most everyone of any national Republican political importance always played to the press and
the idea that good sound governance would secure Democrat grace and cooperation.
And Democrats loved it. They loved playing Lucy, the football holder.
So a large segment of the population felt that the crises of confidence came down to
only choices between Democrat and Democrat-Lite when it came to the government.
On the other hand, a lot of people did not like seeing their government in the hands of
someone outside of their ability to politically, to harness saddle and apply spur.
So everyone under the sun, from the press, to the (generic, bureaucratic) government
to the national leadership decided that Trump had to go and
they would do anything to undo and undermine those whom voted for him.

In short, don't tell me about who appointed them, I don't care.
The question is what team are the playing for?
The Nationals or The People...

fuck!
i hate bureaucrats too!
even my dog hates bureaucrats - stupid dog tags!

you really got something with this new campaign slogan!

i knew these fuckers had an agenda that was out to...
undemine...
no, no... steal our sovereignty!

there's books that warned us.
whole studies...
why i oughtta...
even that pinko marx raised a red flag!

juggernaut fuckers!

where do we start? who do we kill first?

bring back the spoils system!
right down to the game wardens!

cuz....
it's not like the fucking bureaucrats are your neighbors
or your family members
or your former classmates....
or the guy you barely tolerate on the message board...
or uncle frank's stupid fat girlfriend
or your fucking face book face fucking....fa-fa-false flag friends!
nahhhh!
they're not us!

they are their own... and you see it... you said so above...
they got their own dangerous hidden agenda
to steal the whole god damned u s of a!

not a pluralistic, omni-political, free-thinking individual one among 'em!
and they're smart... dangerous smart!
they got pamphlets...
and meetings...

and and and... trade fucking unions!!!

yeah. that's your deep state!
no, no, no, no... right?

bur-eau-crats.... hahahaha

concocted the whole fucking thing!

blood!
heads!
firing squads!








(the above is political satire... no sacred cows were injured in the making of this rant - literotica, the literotica corporation, literotica.com and asparagus fern (whom you can still ask) neither confirm, nor deny... or even avow anything anywhere about any of this or anything anybody else mumbles herein.)

 

[cleaver]

I'm trying to figure out where you think you're going with this cleaver? It is nefarious.

Let's start with weaponizing the IRS. Did you forget about that?

Then there is the intelligence/FBI community. What do you know about Adm. Mike Rogers?

Adm. Mike Rogers

Brennan and Clapper are in abyssal feces. Loretta Lynch and Susan Rice will undoubtedly be swept up in this as well. Scroll down to the bottom of the above link and read through the time line. It was Rogers that quietly blew the whistle on the entire operation. The individual that pulled the thread that started the unraveling. When Trump asked Comey whether he was under investigation or not Trump KNEW that Comey was lying. Roger's had already filled Trump in. Trump's apparent chaotic appointments and replacements in the intelligence structure and FBI make perfect sense in light of the fact that Trump had been briefed on exactly what was going on behind his back. It's not called paranoia when they really are out to get you.

Trump is crude and Trump has warts. But he IS the president and as such I'll judge him by what he does for this nation, not whether he holds his pinky out properly while sipping tea, in that regard I could give a shit less.

this is interesting reading.
i do know of rogers - his integrity.
the timeline provided is indeed enlightening.

look.
despite my humorous bit above, i can understand your contentions.
the fisa process has been rife with... varying interpretations from the outset.
i do not vouch for it - hell! most of it is secret...
- although the court itself has both a place - as an institution of legal oversight - and as a safeguard of excess...
as i mentioned a couple of posts back, mueller himself - as fbi director
had to curb his own bureau - which had made practice of cutting corners re fisa.

fisa - as an institution - started in the 70's - post frank church's investigation into then excesses and lack of oversight in the intelligence community...
those were messed up times to say the least..
operation shamrock in particular fed all telecom info directly through the nsa...
a warrantless/direct intelligence sweep of the country...

yeah. no.

so, in great part, fisa was born
to streamline, legitimize and warrant certain specific investigative processes
that were... previously not sanctioned - had been illegally/supra-legally done...
on domestic soil - outside of the 4th amendment...
under very specific credential.

9/11 of course - and the concurrent explosion of new media communication
have expanded the use of, and scope of fisa.

still.
excesses in the fisa process are not new.
institutional excesses, it seems, have come in waves... been addressed
and... so on.

it is a secret court to sanction secret surveillance.
some have considered it a rubber stamp...
in it's history less than 1% of fisa applications are rejected...
and perhaps in that, comes the propensity to abuse its... purview?

not to find rationalization for excess, but the very nature of the activities before the court...
covert domestic surveillance procedures over issues of dire national security...
covert surveillance of foreign agents, foreign actors, suspects of such activity...
all very... invasive to what would normally be protected...

and all under a mantle of national security...

ok. i do understand fisa.
i know that rogers was in the midst of internecine
struggles between nsa, cia, fbi, doj at the time up to the 2016 election
having to do specifically with how the court was being asked to approve
certain wide sweeping (non specific) surveillance in order to discern how russia was trying to influence the upcoming election...

by rogers objection, the court actually rejected several of these applications.
the carter page app was tweeked multiple times to be specific enough to conform with fisa.

the contention is that by obscuring the (partisan) genesis of steele
which directly implicated page, the fisa court was duped by fbi/doj...

i know that rogers went to trump tower...
told the candidate that fisa was not entirely within its bounds - in his opinion...
that page and perhaps the campaign were subject to fisa surveillance...
and the campaign immediately moved to nj.

this is encapsulated history, yes?

yes. i get all that.
i do not advocate anything other than... investigate where the system failed.

yet.
i contend that page was a person of interest despite of steele's genesis or veracity...

all of this will come out in the wash as well.

i also want you to remember that no one thought that trump was going to win. certainly not until the very end.

any credible thread suggesting direct connection between the candidate and the kremlin put your bureaucrats into a very difficult position.
weeks before an election...
it took no deep state to perhaps exceed their docket re: trump.

perhaps those bad actors - if they be found -
can invoke the barry goldwater defense ?

btw... i am rather close to an ex officio fisa judge... one who was there at that time. i wonder whether any of this could ever be discussed?

already too long of an answer...
the weaponized irs will have to wait.

 

[SpeareChucker]

Plan to steal it?
Remember a little thing called state rights
and representation in the Senate?

Those days are gone.

Who owns us now?
The mob.
It is fickle.
I get the impression that you really, really, REALLY dislike Trump

Well, so does the Bureaucracy.
But once they got the mob to legally remove
all of the checks and balances on the itself

~~ in the holy name of Democracy ~~

The Bureaucracy now sees themselves as the Neo of the Democracy
and now their Agent Smith is Agent Orange...

So

and this ties together both of your threads
they take it upon themselves to restore the balance to

~~~ DEMOCRACY ~~~​

In other words, they feel they own the mob.
They certainly own the guns.
Who owns the guns

RULES!!!

 

[bellisarius]

Cleaver, Trump was the target, Page was but a portal. The fact that the Steele dossier was used as justification for the FISA warrant is proof of that. Page was but one of many names dropped in that dossier but the subject WAS Trump.

The Clinton's had more, and more concerning, ties to Russia than Page. Why wasn't that investigated? Further, if Page's actions were subject to doubt why wasn't Trump briefed on the subject? They certainly had no problem sandbagging Flynn.

And as a side note, the newly appointed US Attorney to investigate the shennanigan's of the previous administration has actually been on the job for the past 2 months. A whole lot of people are going to be lawyering up.