|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » User Ranks » User Post History |
Post History:
lk2fireone (0)
|
| 1351-1400 of 3618 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 8 | 14 | 20 | 27 | Page 28 | 29 | 36 | 43 | 50 | 57 | 64 | 72 | 73 | Next Page > |
| 03-28-18 06:56am - 2461 days | #304 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Trump is a warrior sent by God to the aid of Evangelical Christians. Praise the Lord. We are saved. Except for sinful people who will go straight to hell, like gays, perverts, and other immoral non-Christian infidels. ------ ------ Politics Pastor Says If Jesus Supported 'Demon Possessed Traitor,' Evangelicals Can Support Trump Newsweek Gillian Edevane,Newsweek 17 hours ago Pastor Says If Jesus Supported Demon Possessed Traitor, Evangelicals Can Support Trump Prominent Pro-Trump evangelicals have sounded off on the Stormy Daniels controversy in recent days, with many vowing to continue supporting the president despite an alleged affair with the adult film star. Tennessee pastor Greg Locke, who made headlines last year for a viral rant against gay people, shared his rationalization for supporting the blustery business mogul with his 30,000 followers and 1.5 million Facebook followers. "People are like 'If you support Trump you can’t be a Christian,'" Locke tweeted. "Do y’all listen when you talk? Jesus hired a demon possessed traitor to handle his money for 3 years. He can use the President if He so desires. Take a seat people." Some online were confused by the tweet. Others enjoyed pointing out apparent "hypocrisy" from a group that offered moral condemnation during the Lewinsky scandal. Still others came armed with puns. Several of Locke's other tweets caused a stir, specifically those that degraded Daniels. One in particular caught the eye of CNN's Jake Tapper, who exchanged a quick back-and-forth with the pastor over a bible passage that preaches compassion for a woman who has lived "a sinful life." Despite the moral quandaries posed by a Trump presidency, evangelicals continue to overwhelmingly back the thrice-married businessman, according to the Pew Research Center. His job performance hovered around 80 percent for the group in mid-March, months after the alleged Daniels scandal broke in The Wall Street Journal. Other polling suggests that while evangelicals believe the reports about Trump's infidelity are true, they don't think it matters. David Brody, who co-authored The Faith of Donald Trump: A Spiritual Biography, rationalized the voting behavior of the religious group in a New York Times op-ed. "This president’s effect on our cultural norms has been shocking," Brody wrote. "His critics would call it appalling; evangelicals say it’s immensely satisfying: They’ve seen a culture deteriorate quickly in the past decade, and they’re looking for a bold culture warrior to fight for them. Showing that God does indeed have a sense of humor, He gave them Mr. Trump." This article was first written by Newsweek | |
|
||
| 03-27-18 11:30pm - 2462 days | #303 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Politics: I have a simple solution to Jared Kushner's problems: Let President Donald Trump, the great business leader, issue a blanket pardon to Jared Kushner for any and all crimes he may have committed after marrying Ivanka Trump. Brilliant, and effective. We don't want to cause the lovely young woman any problems. ------- ------- Politics Jared Kushner’s Month Goes from Bad to Weeping Inconsolably in a Janitor’s Closet Vanity Fair Bess Levin,Vanity Fair 13 hours ago It seems Jared Kushner’s dramatic fall from grace won’t have a soft landing. With his security clearance downgraded, state regulators now poring over his personal finances, and world leaders arguing over who has more sway over him, the First Son-in-Law suffered another blow on Tuesday when the White House was reported to be investigating some half a billion in loans that Kushner Cos. received after financial executives met with Boy Wonder in the White House. Per The Wall Street Journal: White House attorneys are examining whether two loans totaling more than $500 million to Jared Kushner’s family business may have violated any criminal laws or federal ethics regulations, according to a letter from a federal ethics agency made public Monday. The Office of Government Ethics told a Democratic lawmaker in the letter that the White House is probing whether a $184 million loan from the real-estate arm of Apollo Global Management LLC and a $325 million loan from Citigroup Inc. may have run afoul of the rules and laws governing the conduct of federal employees. In a letter to Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi,David Apol, acting director of the O.G.E., wrote: “I have discussed this matter with the White House Counsel’s Office in order to ensure that they have begun the process of ascertaining the facts necessary to determine whether any law or regulation has been violated. During that discussion, the White House informed me that they had already begun this process.” While the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, Kushner’s personal lawyer, Abbe Lowell, was full of them, telling the Journal that after The New York Times’ initial report on the loans, “the White House counsel concluded there were no issues involving Jared.” He added that the Boy Prince of New Jersey “was not involved with his former company after he entered government service; the transactions in question came after that; he had nothing to do with those transactions; the transactions had nothing to do with any of his meetings in the White House, and the people from the companies involved have confirmed that as well.” (Though Kushner stepped down from his position as C.E.O. of Kushner Cos. upon entering the White House, and sold his personal stakes in some projects, he retained stakes in multiple Kushner Cos. properties—including, shockingly, the ones that received loans from Citigroup and Apollo.) In response to a letter from Senator Elizabeth Warren, Citigroup said last week that its $325 million loan to Kushner Cos. was “completely appropriate.” Apollo, responding to a letter from members of Congress earlier this month, said that the meetings between its C.E.O. and Kushner were not related to its $184 million loan, and that the loan “was negotiated on behalf of A.R.I. by an Apollo investment professional with a history of doing business with Kushner Companies that predated his tenure at Apollo.” As the negative stories continue to pile up—last month, there was that small matter of at least four other nations reportedly discussing how best to leverage Kushner’s massive debts and political novice, and last week, a report emerged detailing the sketchy slumlord tactics his family’s company allegedly engaged in while he was C.E.O.—even the world’s biggest joke of a president has become disenchanted, apparently complaining to allies that his son-in-law has become a liability. “He is very weakened,” a Mexican official said on the eve of Kushner’s most recent diplomatic visit. “And he’s going to get weaker.” | |
|
||
| 03-27-18 09:29pm - 2462 days | #302 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Evangelical Christians: Bill Clinton lied to the American public. He cheated on his wife. He was unfit to lead the US as President. Today: Donald Trump lied to the American public. He cheated on all his wives. He is still fit to lead the US as President. Conclusion: Evangelical Christians are hypocrites. Evangelical ministers are liars. --------- --------- Mellman: Evangelicals meet partisanship By Mark Mellman, opinion contributor — 03/27/18 07:30 PM EDT Twenty years ago, evangelical leaders could hardly have been more appalled. Arguing that character counts, Rev. Franklin Graham asserted that if a president “will lie to, or mislead, his wife ... what will prevent him from doing the same to the American public?” The late Billy Graham’s son was referring to President Bill Clinton. Evangelical leader Gary Bauer reported his distress about the scandal then dominating the headlines: “I walk around my home with the TV remote in my hand for fear that [my children] will come in the room when a story about the president comes on. [Thanks to Clinton] our kids have been taught that fidelity is old-fashioned, that adultery is the norm.” Focus on the Family founder Jim Dobson lamented, “As it turns out, character DOES matter. You can’t run a family, let alone a country, without it. How foolish to believe that a person who lacks honesty and moral integrity is qualified to lead a nation and the world! Nevertheless, our people continue to say that the President is doing a good job even if they don’t respect him personally. Those two positions are fundamentally incompatible. In the Book of James, the question is posed, ‘Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring” (James 3:11 NIV). The answer is no.” These and other evangelical leaders wanted Clinton impeached, convicted and removed from office. Their position, they asserted, was based on fundamental values. As one leader wrote, “Most evangelicals consider what Bill Clinton did … an undermining of … the moral and biblical principles on which [our Constitution] is based … evangelicals are values-based voters, values based on biblical morality … evangelicals believe in moral absolutes.” These “values” were reflected in poll data. As recently as 2011, only 30 percent of white evangelicals believed “an elected official who commits an immoral act in their personal life can still behave ethically and fulfill their duties in their public and professional life,” according to a Public Religion Research Institute poll. Enter Donald Trump. We need not rehash his myriad moral failings in detail. Suffice it to say that he engaged in any number of extramarital affairs, not to mention the behavior described, and the vocabulary used, in the infamous “Entertainment Tonight” tape, as well as in scores of tweets and conversations. Trump lied to and misled his wives. He caused parents heartburn about what kids were hearing on TV. He engaged in adultery and sexual harassment. Neither honesty nor moral integrity are his calling cards. In short, whatever one thinks of Clinton, Trump’s transgressions are certainly as bad, and, in truth, worse. So, if evangelicals’ concerns are in fact based on moral absolutes, they should be at least as distraught with Trump as they were with Clinton, if not more so. They aren’t. And it’s not just the leadership who’ve become silent accomplices. The number of white evangelicals who believe personal moral failings are not disqualifying for a public official rose 42 points, to 72 percent, in 5 years. This revolutionary change in evangelical attitudes reveals, once again, the power of partisanship to structure our beliefs. The absolutes to which they claim adherence are actually quite flexible in the face of partisan pressure. It’s a simple mechanism to maintain consistency: “My Republicanism is preeminent. If continuing to like Donald Trump conflicts with my beliefs about the personal morality of public officials, I will alter my views on that subject, enabling me to continue to support Trump.” Related to the power of partisanship is another lesson. We often discuss “values” as deeply held, guiding beliefs from which spring our attitudes on a host of issues. Evangelicals’ views on personal morality were frequently described as “fundamental” and indeed, “absolute” values. Yet, they withered in no time, suggesting that “values” may not be as deep and enduring as we think. Even for a partisan like me, it’s sad that party has become our highest value. Mellman is president of The Mellman Group and has helped elect 30 U.S. senators, 12 governors and dozens of House members. Mellman served as pollster to Senate Democratic leaders for over 20 years and as president of the American Association of Political Consultants. | |
|
||
| 03-27-18 12:50pm - 2462 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
TV The Wrap ‘Star Trek’ Actress Marries Leonard Nimoy’s Son Terry Farrell and Adam Nimoy tie the knot on what would have been the late Spock actor’s 87th birthday Reid Nakamura | Last Updated: March 27, 2018 @ 11:53 AM “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine” actress Terry Farrell and Leonard Nimoy’s son, Adam, tied the knot Monday, on what would have been the late Spock actor’s 87th birthday. Farrell, who played Jadzia on the 1990s sci-fi series, shared the news in a tweet signed “Mrs. Adam Nimoy.” “Freakin AWESOME day!!!!!!! Love ya all!,” she wrote in the post, accompanied by a photo of the couple on their wedding day from film critic Scott Mantz. First engaged last summer, Farrell and Nimoy were wed in a ceremony at the San Francisco City Hall. Leonard Nimoy, who originated the role of Spock in the first “Star Trek” TV series, died in 2015 after a bout with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Last month, on the anniversary of his death, Adam shared a photo of his father with the caption, “Three years gone but never too far from us.” | |
|
||
| 03-26-18 04:40pm - 2463 days | #301 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Wonderful news: Trump is the leader of the US. He is the force of US morals. What is impressive is that Trump's allies, the people who helped get him elected, used advanced techniques in targeting potential voters. That is the Cambridge Analytica story. Of course, Cambridge Analytica denies it did anything wrong. They are innocent. However, it's possible that Trump's allies may have broken US laws. However, Trump's allies have a strong defense: they don't remember breaking any laws. Just like Trump does not remember having an affair with Stormy Daniels. Innocent until proven guilty. We must remember that Trump (and any of his allies) are innocent until proven guilty. And Zuckerberg, the Facebook billionaire, says it's hard to tell if Facebook data affected the 2016 election. Zuckerbergi is the Facebook expert. So that means Facebook is innocent. And Trump and his allies are innocent of breaking any laws. Clear skies ahead for Trump, once people realize he is innocent. ------- ------- Embattled data firm sent foreign workers to US campaigns By Drew Griffin, Curt Devine, Donie O'Sullivan and Maegan Vazquez, CNN Updated 5:34 PM ET, Mon March 26, 2018 Bolton super PAC linked to Cambridge Analytica Bolton super PAC linked to Cambridge Analytica 03:08 Washington (CNN)A former employee of the data firm Cambridge Analytica tells CNN the company might have violated US election laws by using non-US citizens to work on American campaigns during the 2014 midterm election cycle. Company whistleblower Christopher Wylie says the data firm, which was hired by Donald Trump's presidential campaign during the 2016 election, was even warned about the practice by the company's US-based law firm two years prior. But according to Wylie, the company's directors -- including later Trump campaign CEO and White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, Republican donors Rebekah and Robert Mercer, and now-suspended Cambridge Analytica CEO Alexander Nix -- were undeterred. "Bannon didn't care, the Mercers didn't care, Alexander Nix certainly didn't care," Wylie told CNN in an interview in London on Friday night. Ex-Cambridge Analytica staff say Bolton super PAC used compromised Facebook data The latest revelations come as the data firm is under fire for its alleged use of ill-gotten personal Facebook data from tens of millions of Facebook users in the United States to provide psycho-analytics and micro-targeting of voters. Last week the company suspended Nix in the wake of undercover reports showing him discussing potential bribery and entrapment. Nix said in a statement that despite the appearance of the undercover reports, the company does not engage in such practices. Friday night, the United Kingdom's Information Commissioner's Office executed a search warrant at Cambridge Analytica's London office to further its investigation of potential misuse of private Facebook data. Cambridge Analytica denies it used the Facebook data for its work on the Trump campaign. Legal warning Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's then-law firm, Bracewell and Giuliani, wrote a memo to Bannon, Rebekah Mercer and Nix in July 2014 specifically describing how US law prohibits foreign nationals from making "decisions involving election-related activity." The attorney who wrote the memo, Laurence Levy, said Nix should recuse himself from managing any clients involved in American elections and that Cambridge Analytica's foreign employees should not provide final analysis of data for US candidates or political action committees. "Foreign nationals may act as functionaries that collect and process data, but the final analysis of said data should be conducted by US citizens and conveyed to any US client by such citizens," the memo said. In a wide-ranging interview with CNN, Wylie detailed how Bannon, along with funding from the conservative billionaire Mercers, sought to use the data company to challenge and tweak cultural values in the US. The foreign staff, sent mostly from Cambridge Analytica's London headquarters, specialized in political messaging, targeting, and strategy. The company worked on congressional races and for the super PAC of incoming White House national security adviser John Bolton during the 2014 election cycle. Bannon says he doesn't remember purchasing Facebook data at Cambridge Analytica "They played a pivotal role in the direction of strategy and management" of the several American campaigns Cambridge Analytica was working with, Wylie said. Cambridge Analytica and the Mercers have not responded to CNN's requests for comment regarding Wylie's claims. William Burck, an attorney for Bannon, declined to comment. Zuckerberg on whether Facebook affected 2016 election results: It's 'really hard' to tell CNN also spoke to several former Cambridge Analytica staffers who were dispatched to the United States to work on the 2014 campaigns, all of whom requested anonymity, citing reasons that included fear of retribution and not wanting to be publicly dragged into the intense scrutiny of the company. One said that he remembers a mix of employees from Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States working for the company on behalf of US campaigns. He said foreign employees were mindful of the applicable laws, but he added, "We might have been cavalier at times." On the issue of foreigners working with US political committees, the Bracewell and Giuliani memo said that polling and marketing by foreign nationals without green cards could violate the law; it concluded "the prohibition against foreign nationals managing campaigns, including making direct or indirect decisions regarding the expenditure of campaign dollars, will have a significant impact on how Cambridge hires staff and operates in the short term." Investigators search Cambridge Analytica's London offices Investigators search Cambridge Analytica's London offices Brett Kappel, an attorney at Akerman LLP who specializes in campaign finance law, said the company's apparent use of foreign nationals warrants a Federal Election Commission investigation. "Here you have a memo from an attorney who specifically advised them not to do this, which could suggest they knowingly and willfully acted with criminal intent," Kappel said. Brendan Fischer of the Campaign Legal Center said all the facts about the foreign employees' roles in these US campaigns need to be known before reaching any legal conclusions. "The lines between participation in a campaign decision and merely giving advice can be blurry," he said. "If a foreign employee were only offering advice, that would probably be OK." | |
|
||
| 03-26-18 04:40pm - 2463 days | #300 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Wonderful news: Trump is the leader of the US. He is the force of US morals. What is impressive is that Trump's allies, the people who helped get him elected, used advanced techniques in targeting potential voters. That is the Cambridge Analytica story. Of course, Cambridge Analytica denies it did anything wrong. They are innocent. However, it's possible that Trump's allies may have broken US laws. However, Trump's allies have a strong defense: they don't remember breaking any laws. Just like Trump does not remember having an affair with Stormy Daniels. Innocent until proven guilty. We must remember that Trump (and any of his allies) are innocent until proven guilty. And Zuckerberg, the Facebook billionaire, says it's hard to tell if Facebook data affected the 2016 election. Zuckerbergi is the Facebook expert. So that means Facebook is innocent. And Trump and his allies are innocent of breaking any laws. Clear skies ahead for Trump, once people realize he is innocent. ------- ------- Embattled data firm sent foreign workers to US campaigns By Drew Griffin, Curt Devine, Donie O'Sullivan and Maegan Vazquez, CNN Updated 5:34 PM ET, Mon March 26, 2018 Bolton super PAC linked to Cambridge Analytica Bolton super PAC linked to Cambridge Analytica 03:08 Washington (CNN)A former employee of the data firm Cambridge Analytica tells CNN the company might have violated US election laws by using non-US citizens to work on American campaigns during the 2014 midterm election cycle. Company whistleblower Christopher Wylie says the data firm, which was hired by Donald Trump's presidential campaign during the 2016 election, was even warned about the practice by the company's US-based law firm two years prior. But according to Wylie, the company's directors -- including later Trump campaign CEO and White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, Republican donors Rebekah and Robert Mercer, and now-suspended Cambridge Analytica CEO Alexander Nix -- were undeterred. "Bannon didn't care, the Mercers didn't care, Alexander Nix certainly didn't care," Wylie told CNN in an interview in London on Friday night. Ex-Cambridge Analytica staff say Bolton super PAC used compromised Facebook data The latest revelations come as the data firm is under fire for its alleged use of ill-gotten personal Facebook data from tens of millions of Facebook users in the United States to provide psycho-analytics and micro-targeting of voters. Last week the company suspended Nix in the wake of undercover reports showing him discussing potential bribery and entrapment. Nix said in a statement that despite the appearance of the undercover reports, the company does not engage in such practices. Friday night, the United Kingdom's Information Commissioner's Office executed a search warrant at Cambridge Analytica's London office to further its investigation of potential misuse of private Facebook data. Cambridge Analytica denies it used the Facebook data for its work on the Trump campaign. Legal warning Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's then-law firm, Bracewell and Giuliani, wrote a memo to Bannon, Rebekah Mercer and Nix in July 2014 specifically describing how US law prohibits foreign nationals from making "decisions involving election-related activity." The attorney who wrote the memo, Laurence Levy, said Nix should recuse himself from managing any clients involved in American elections and that Cambridge Analytica's foreign employees should not provide final analysis of data for US candidates or political action committees. "Foreign nationals may act as functionaries that collect and process data, but the final analysis of said data should be conducted by US citizens and conveyed to any US client by such citizens," the memo said. In a wide-ranging interview with CNN, Wylie detailed how Bannon, along with funding from the conservative billionaire Mercers, sought to use the data company to challenge and tweak cultural values in the US. The foreign staff, sent mostly from Cambridge Analytica's London headquarters, specialized in political messaging, targeting, and strategy. The company worked on congressional races and for the super PAC of incoming White House national security adviser John Bolton during the 2014 election cycle. Bannon says he doesn't remember purchasing Facebook data at Cambridge Analytica "They played a pivotal role in the direction of strategy and management" of the several American campaigns Cambridge Analytica was working with, Wylie said. Cambridge Analytica and the Mercers have not responded to CNN's requests for comment regarding Wylie's claims. William Burck, an attorney for Bannon, declined to comment. Zuckerberg on whether Facebook affected 2016 election results: It's 'really hard' to tell CNN also spoke to several former Cambridge Analytica staffers who were dispatched to the United States to work on the 2014 campaigns, all of whom requested anonymity, citing reasons that included fear of retribution and not wanting to be publicly dragged into the intense scrutiny of the company. One said that he remembers a mix of employees from Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States working for the company on behalf of US campaigns. He said foreign employees were mindful of the applicable laws, but he added, "We might have been cavalier at times." On the issue of foreigners working with US political committees, the Bracewell and Giuliani memo said that polling and marketing by foreign nationals without green cards could violate the law; it concluded "the prohibition against foreign nationals managing campaigns, including making direct or indirect decisions regarding the expenditure of campaign dollars, will have a significant impact on how Cambridge hires staff and operates in the short term." Investigators search Cambridge Analytica's London offices Investigators search Cambridge Analytica's London offices Brett Kappel, an attorney at Akerman LLP who specializes in campaign finance law, said the company's apparent use of foreign nationals warrants a Federal Election Commission investigation. "Here you have a memo from an attorney who specifically advised them not to do this, which could suggest they knowingly and willfully acted with criminal intent," Kappel said. Brendan Fischer of the Campaign Legal Center said all the facts about the foreign employees' roles in these US campaigns need to be known before reaching any legal conclusions. "The lines between participation in a campaign decision and merely giving advice can be blurry," he said. "If a foreign employee were only offering advice, that would probably be OK." | |
|
||
| 03-26-18 01:44pm - 2463 days | #299 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Finally, the First Lady's spokesperson comments on Stormy Daniels rumors: The First Lady is a fine lady. Have some compassion, people. The First Lady is a mother. Shush the rumors. Have some respect. As a side note: Stormy Daniels admitted that Donald Trump admired her only because she reminded him of his daughter. So how could Trump have done anything with Stormy, if she reminded him of his daughter? ------ ------ First Lady's Spokesperson Comments on Stormy Daniels  SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images Melania Trump Melania Trump has remained silent throughout reports of an alleged affair between her husband, President Donald Trump, and porn star Stormy Daniels. However, just hours after the airing on Sunday of an interview with Daniels, real name Stephanie Clifford, the first lady sought to address the speculation through her spokesperson. “While I know the media is enjoying speculation & salacious gossip, Id like to remind people there’s a minor child who’s [sic] name should be kept out of news stories when at all possible,” Stephanie Grisham wrote on Twitter. Grisham was referring to the Trumps’ only child together, Barron, who turned 12 just last week. A number of reports about the alleged affair have mentioned Barron because of when Daniels has said her relations with Trump took place. Daniels repeated her assertion on CBS’s 60 Minutes that the alleged affair with Trump began in the summer of 2006, just months after Melania had given birth. Daniels told Anderson Cooper during the interview that she asked Trump about his wife and new child but said he didn’t seem particularly concerned. “I asked,” she said. “And he brushed it aside, said, ‘Oh yeah, yeah, you know, don't worry about that. We don't even—we have separate rooms and stuff.’" Trump has also been accused of having an affair with former Playboy model Karen McDougal around the same time. Speaking on CNN last week, McDougal apologized to the first lady for the alleged affair. "What can you say except I'm sorry?" she said. "I'm sorry. I wouldn't want it done to me." Barron wasn’t the only Trump child to come up during Daniels’s interview Sunday. The 39-year-old also claimed that, after she spanked him with a magazine bearing his face, Trump compared her to his daughter—presumably his eldest daughter, Ivanka. “He was like, ‘Wow, you are special. You remind me of my daughter,’” Clifford recalled Trump saying. “You know—he was like, ‘You're smart and beautiful, and a woman to be reckoned with, and I like you. I like you.’" | |
|
||
| 03-26-18 01:30pm - 2463 days | #298 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Praise the Lord. The President of the United States Of America is a God-fearing man. The White House stands firmly behind the President. It denies there ever was an affair between President Trump and that Woman--Stormy Daniels. The President is a man whose word can be trusted: He is like George Washington, who could never tell a lie. Remember the cherry tree? Well, President Trump reveres the First Lady, and would never bring shame to her name. Why would anyone believe the vicious lies Stormy Daniel has told? When people know that Trump is a man of his word? If Trump states anything, his moral strength and courage shine through. Trump can not lie. He is the President. ---------- ---------- White House Still Denies Trump-Stormy Daniels Affair: ‘False Charges Are Settled Out of Court All the Time’ “The President strongly clearly and consistently has denied these underlying claims,” says White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah Jon Levine | March 26, 2018 @ 1:06 PM White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah swatted back against allegations made by Stormy Daniels’ on “60 Minutes” reiterating Monday that the president continued to deny any suggestion of a sexual affair between the two. “The president doesn’t believe that any of the claims Ms. Daniels made in the interview are accurate,” said Shah, adding, “False charges are settled out court all the time.” “The President strongly clearly and consistently has denied these underlying claims. The only one who has been inconsistent is the one making the claims,” he said. “My understanding is that she signed the statements that conflict with what she said last night.” While Daniels’ did admit to signing such a statement she told Anderson Cooper last night that she did so only under duress from team Trump. “They made it sound like I had no choice,” said Daniels on “60 Minutes.” “The exact sentence used was, ‘They can make your life hell in many different ways,'” added the porn star. It wasn’t just the president, however, who used those inconsistencies against her. On “Morning Joe” Monday, the show was sharply critical of Daniels’ and the entire “60 Minutes” exercise, saying the adult film actress was not credible and her conversation with Cooper yielded little new information. “The fact is Stormy Daniels is not credible,” law professor and “Morning Joe” mainstay Jonathan Turley said. “She’s signed false statements.” | |
|
||
| 03-26-18 09:09am - 2463 days | #3 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
If Spielberg had his druthers, Netflix and Amazon and any other srreaming service would be ineligible for an Oscar, no matter what the merits of the movie. That's a purist point of view. To take it one step further into fantasy, would Spielberg, Nolan, and Cameron be in favor of banning all DVD sales and rentals, and TV sales, and streaming sales of their movies? Of course they wouldn't. But they advocate seeing their movies at a movie theater, because that's the "best" way to experience the movie. I don't deny that the movie experience could be heightened by seeing a movie in a first-run theater, especially with al the special effects some movies have. Except it costs a lot of money to see these movies in a theater. Something these directors seem to forget about, or ignore. Not all of us are millionaires or billionaires like these directors are. And I doubt that they pay to see a lot of movies in a theater like a regular paying customer. Either they see the movies at premiers, or are entitled to special passes. Or maybe they even watch some movies on cable or DVD, perish the thought. | |
|
||
| 03-25-18 07:06pm - 2464 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Sports 19-year-old says she was kicked off of her college volleyball team because her Instagram posts were 'too sexy' Erin Donnelly Sat, Mar 24 7:43 AM PDT A college student who claims she was kicked off the University of Cincinnati women’s volleyball team after being singled out for Instagram images her coach deemed “too sexy” is taking legal action. According to legal documents obtained by Courthouse News Service, which was the first to break the story, Shalom Ifeanyi filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court Tuesday. The lawsuit names former coach Molly Alvey as well as executive senior associate athletic director Maggie McKinley and the University of Cincinnati as defendants. Ifeanyi, who is black, cites racial discrimination and sexual discrimination and harassment as motives behind her dismissal from the team in late June 2017. Her lawsuit alleges that Alvey “began harassing and shaming” her about images posted to her social media accounts, referring to them as “too sexy.” The 19-year-old, pictured bottom right in the below image, maintains that she was fully clothed in the images, and claims that her teammates were not subjected to similar lectures. “Upon information and belief, no such requests were made to other members of the women’s volleyball team who were of slighter build and lighter complexion despite photographs picturing them in outfits, including but not limited to, two-piece swimsuits,” the lawsuit, prepared by Ohio firm Rittgers & Rittgers, states. Ifeanyi claims she heeded the warnings and removed the images in question, posting more conservative headshots instead. But in June 2017, she was allegedly confronted by Alvey about her Instagram profile picture. “‘When the football players see this, what do you think they see?’” the coach allegedly told her. “‘They see your breasts. It’s seductive.’” Ifeanyi deleted the photo but was soon ordered by text to remove additional photos. She finally objected, citing a frustration with the “body shaming,” and replied to Alvey that she would not comply. Approximately a week later, in a meeting overseen by McKinley, Alvey informed Ifeanyi that she would need to leave the team, as they had “different philosophies.” Leaving the team prevents Ifeanyi, who suffered from a knee injury for much of the season but maintains that she remained committed to her rehab and workouts, from renewing her athletic scholarship past the 2017-2018 academic year. The lawsuit claims that NCAA transfer rules also prohibit her from playing competitive volleyball for the 2018-2019 season, which means pursuing another athletic scholarship is off the table. Ifeanyi has since enrolled in a different university and has “lost earning capacity.” The student filed a Title IX complaint about her dismissal nine months ago, but claims that an investigation was not completed, nor was she given an opportunity to appeal the decision. Citing Ifeanyi’s “pain and suffering in the form of humiliation, frustration, aggravation, anger, and depression,” the lawsuit is seeking “compensatory damages, punitive damages, reasonable attorney fees, costs, and all other relief to which she may be entitled.” Ryan Koslen, a spokesman for the University of Cincinnati’s athletic department, told Yahoo Lifestyle that he was “unable to comment on the allegations.” Ifeanyi has not yet responded to a request for comment. “We feel that the lawsuit speaks for itself and do not have any additional comments at this time,” her lawyer, Ryan McGraw, said. | |
|
||
| 03-25-18 06:55pm - 2464 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I'm certainly not a movie professional, like Spielberg, Christopher Nolan or James Cameron, but I think that if a movie is great, it should be in contention for an Oscar. I understand that these directors want the audience to see most of their movies in a movie theater. And in 3D, Ultra-large/WhateverTheFuck Special Presentation movie format. But most of us don't have the cash to pay for the Special Presentation formats. Or even to see a lot of movies with ticket prices that seem to go nowhere but higher and higher costs. So-give us a break, and let us watch these movies on DVD, TV, Cable, Streaming, etc. That's my opinion, anyway. --------- --------- Steven Spielberg Says Netflix Movies Shouldn’t Win Oscars, Warns TV “Poses Clear And Present Danger To Filmgoers” by Dade Hayes March 25, 2018 2:38pm Even while promoting his futuristic, high-tech new movie, Ready Player One, Steven Spielberg is revealing his traditionalist streak., questioning the level playing field between theatrical features and films launched on Netflix and other streaming services. During his five-decade directing career, as innovations from DVD commentary tracks to digital cameras and projectors have arisen, the filmmaker has often questioned the need to veer from the classical approach. There are positive results of this reverence for tradition, including Spielberg’s work on a range of preservation causes and other efforts to strengthen the legacy of Hollywood. But the latest target of his skepticism is feature films that launch on streaming services like Netflix and Amazon are the latest target of his skepticism. (His views, and those of fellow filmmakers like Christopher Nolan, are not new but are getting fresh attention as he makes the publicity rounds.) In an interview with ITV News (see video below), Spielberg noted that the movie business has never faced more of a challenge from television, especially given the rise of streaming. While there are benefits from that to the overall culture, he said features launched on streaming platforms should not be allowed at the Oscars. “I don’t believe that films that are given token qualifications, in a couple of theaters for less than a week, should qualify for Academy Award nominations,” he said. “Once you commit to a television format, you’re a TV movie. If it’s a good show, you deserve an Emmy. But not an Oscar.” Movie studios who once took chances on fringe, indie fare they discovered at film festivals, he said, are focused on branded tentpoles. And filmmakers are able to find willing buyers in the SVOD world, fundamentally changing the game. “Television is thriving with quality and heart,” he said. “But it poses a clear and present danger to filmgoers.” Reflecting on his previous film outing, he expressed no regret. “I’ll still make The Post and ask an audience to please go out to theaters and see The Post and not make it for Netflix,” he said. | |
|
||
| 03-25-18 11:31am - 2464 days | #17 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I respectfully disagree. I'm fine with eliminating political, sociological, entertainment. But posts and threads on computer programs that can help with downloading or using the sites can be useful. As well as programs that might help with editing videos or photos. (Not that I use any editing programs, but downloading programs are helpful, and the other topics can be interesting.) Anyway, I think that narrowing the site forums to only porn would take away from the interest of the site. And remove the possibility of helpful information about software programs that might be useful. But if it annoys some PU members that other topics are non-porn related, let's have a vote through a poll that shows what the members feel: ban all non-porn-related threads-which would include or not include technical help about software programs or discussions about developments such as VR, Hi definition, etc. And would this include what type of monitor or PC you might buy, or problems about download speeds, etc.? I'm suggesting a poll, to see what the PU members want to see the PU rules should be: on porn and non-porn topics (for the threads). | |
|
||
| 03-24-18 01:37pm - 2465 days | #13 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
As far as porn topics go, I think the PU member reviews and comments on the site are the basic draw of the site: We come here to find information about sites, whether we might like to join them, what are the site problems (navigation, billing, poor content, whatever)? And the threads offer a place to post ideas and comments that are not necessarily porn-related. It's good to see new members contributing to the site: but the truth is, traffic to the site, by members and non-members, seems to have dropped way down, even under the former management. I can't give the specific reasons for the drop-off in activity. But I believe the site used to be far more active, with members posting reviews and comments and replies far more frequently than in the last few years. I don't think this is a case of wishful thinking of the good old days. There was just more participation by the members. | |
|
||
| 03-24-18 05:03am - 2465 days | #2 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Wow, glad to see so many PU members went to see the new Tomb Raider. (Joke.) I would expect even less of you saw the new Pacific Rim Uprising. I saw the original Pacific Rim. I thought the original was better. More understandable. The plot made more sense. The updated version seemed like it was made for teenagers who will just swallow stories about giant robots and terrifying monsters from another dimension., A lot of the characters were teens or early twenty-somethings, who act like teens without a brain or much control over their emotions. One more time to save the world, and we're all one big family fighting the monsters, so see how wonderful and heroic we are. The story of the updated Pacific Rim was very loose and sloppy, and the heroes act like kids. | |
|
||
| 03-23-18 10:41am - 2466 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Drones from Amazon will respond to signals from people. If the person who is supposed to get a package delivered shows a thumbs up (meaning I accept the package), the drone will deliver the package. If the person starts screaming or waving his hands or jumping up and down, the drone might abort the delivery. Stay tuned: I am a Amazon prime member. I'm hoping to get a drone delivery some time in the near future (within the next 5 years or less). This sounds like a dangerous delivery system. Because drones, in the past, have been used to deliver bombs. What if Amazon makes a mistake, and delivers a bomb to my house? Stay tuned for future developments at Amazon. | |
|
||
| 03-23-18 07:44am - 2466 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Labelling every thread as to the subject seems like a lot of extra work. And the PU staff already have plenty of essential work that needs to be done anyway. So I vote against the extra work of labelling each thread. Easier solution: if you think a thread is controversial, or annoying, just post a reply (or an email to the potential poster) that the thread is too off-topic for the site, and delete the thread. Khan would have had no problem shutting down a thread that he did not feel contributed to the site, or that broke site rules/policy/whatever. Just my 2 cents. | |
|
||
| 03-23-18 07:32am - 2466 days | #3 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Test. Test. Also, just to let you know, when you write the date in a post, 2018, the 8 sometimes converts into the "cool" icon. But that's OK, because I think maybe I'm turning into a cool guy, this year. (Joke) To check this conversion, look at Amanda's recent post on the Raffle Winners thread: ------ Hey guys! Just a note to tell that I will be out of office next week so the weekly raffle (March 27, 201 [Cool] will be postponed. As usual, all reviews submitted during this time will be counted in the next one on April 3, 2018! Thanks for your understanding! ------------- Edited on Mar 23, 2018, 07:50am | |
|
||
| 03-23-18 07:27am - 2466 days | #2 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Amanda, it's not just this morning. Yesterday, I got the error message several times when posting, but the posts were mainly saved. And this happens every once in a while over time. Not just yesterday and today, but over the months, the error message pops up. And maybe the post is saved, or not. But it's nice that PU is aware of the problem, and stating so publicly. Unlike the Facebook scandal, where they knew about the data breach/hack over 2 years ago, but in the interests of "public safety" or whatever other excuse, did not report it to the public. | |
|
||
| 03-23-18 12:19am - 2467 days | #296 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Originally Posted by lk2fireone: I am surprised that American Airlines did not offer to pay the rental fee for any golf clubs she might have rented. Since they were responsible for her missing clubs.
Not kidding. I don't know what American Airlines legal responsibility is for losing the clubs. But if they were insensitive enough to offer advice to a golf pro who's clubs they lost to rent more clubs as replacement, they might (just might) have had to courtesy to offer to pay for new clubs. And how do you value the personal gold clubs of a professional golfer? That would be a legal matter. I read today that some other airline refused to let a man with an infant fly on their airline because the infant was too young. The man had a letter from the hospital that said the infant was allowed to be on an airline flight. But the airline stated that their rules would not allow the infant to fly, because the infant was too young. So the man asked for a refund on his tickets (one for the man, another for the infant). The airline said they would issue a refund in 7 days time. The man said he had no extra money to pay for a motel/hotel because he was refused the flight. The airline said, we're sorry, you have to wait 7 days for a refund on your tickets. A civilian offered to let the man and the infant stay at her place, which the man accepted. A few days later, the airline allowed the man and the infant to travel on a flight (because the infant was now old enough for travel by the airline rules). The airline did not charge the man extra for trading his old tickets for new tickets. So what are the legal responsibilities: Do you believe the airline was acting in a fair and businesslike manner, by allowing the man to exchange his tickets without further charges? Or should the airline have offered a faster refund on his old tickets, since the man was in desperate need of cash? Or is this just one of those situations where a man gets stuck in a crack, and it's no one's fault? But in this case, the man got lucky with a person who gave him a place to stay until the airline would let him fly with his infant. | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 11:58pm - 2467 days | #8 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Back on the thread topic: I said the main reason police are able to shoot unarmed people is because the police often face few consequences for the shooting (and possible killing). As a side note, I mentioned that if anyone has to pay money, it's not the cop that did the shooting, because the cop has little money: in a lawsuit, you go after the ones with big pockets, it's standard legal practice. Here's a case where an officer killed an unarmed black man. He was fired (which is not the normal practice.) However, his employer, a university: 1. The University of Cincinnati agreed to pay more than $244,000 in back pay and benefits and $100,000 in legal fees, to the fired officer (who killed an unarmed black man). 2. The university earlier reached a $5.3 million settlement with the victim's family, including free undergraduate tuition for his 13 children. ----- ----- https://www.yahoo.com/news/fired-officer...k-pay-205859460.html U.S. Fired officer who killed unarmed black man to get back pay Associated Press DAN SEWELL,Associated Press 6 hours ago CINCINNATI (AP) — A white police officer fired after he fatally shot a black unarmed motorist will get about $344,000 in back pay and legal fees from the University of Cincinnati, the school said Thursday. The university is paying Ray Tensing to settle a union grievance brought on his behalf for his 2015 firing, following his indictment on murder charges. The charges were dropped last year after two juries deadlocked. The Fraternal Order of Police had challenged Tensing's firing, saying he shouldn't have been removed from the university's police force before the case was resolved. As part of the settlement, the union said, Tensing has resigned and will not pursue any other claims against the university. "This case has caused a lot of strife in the community, and I believe the settlement will allow for healing to continue," said Tensing, 28. "It certainly will do that for me after two difficult trials." Tensing's statement released by the FOP thanked those who had stood behind him. Tensing shot Sam DuBose, 43, in the head after pulling him over for a missing front license plate in 2015. He testified that he believed his life was in in danger when DuBose tried to drive away during the traffic stop. The shooting is among numerous cases nationwide that have called attention to how police deal with blacks, and the two trials underscored the difficulty prosecutors can have gaining convictions of police officers for on-duty shootings. The University of Cincinnati agreed to pay more than $244,000 in back pay and benefits and $100,000 in legal fees, the two sides said. "I realize this agreement will be difficult for our community," university President Neville Pinto said. "I am nevertheless hopeful that we can focus on supporting each other as members of the same Bearcat family — even, perhaps especially, if we don't agree." The university earlier reached a $5.3 million settlement with DuBose's family, including free undergraduate tuition for his 13 children. The school has initiated police reforms and restructured its leadership since the shooting. ___ Follow Dan Sewell at http://www.twitter.com/dansewell | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 05:44pm - 2467 days | #7 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Off topic: Wild hogs in Louisiana are a huge problem. Could cost the state a lot of money. I don't know why they have this problem. Give all citizens a rifle, plus ammo, and the hogs would soon be bacon. (And save on grocery bills, as well.) But an estimated population of 700,000 wild hogs in Louisiana? Where did they come from? -------- -------- 'Huge problem' of transporting wild hogs in Louisiana could soon cost big bucks under proposed legislation BY ELIZABETH CRISP | ecrisp@theadvocate.com Mar 22, 2018 - 1:38 pm (…) Elizabeth Crisp State lawmakers are trying to root out a growing problem in Louisiana: A booming wild hog population. A state House committee on Thursday approved legislation that would make it illegal to transport feral swine. Those found guilty of the infraction would face fines of up to $900 or up to six months in prison, if the measure makes it into law. It now heads to the House floor for consideration. "If you're any kind of an outdoorsman you know wild hogs are becoming a huge problem in this state," said Rep. Kirk Talbot, R-River Ridge. Talbot said the problem is growing because people trap wild hogs, keep them alive and then let them loose in other locations. "That's how they spread so quickly," he said, describing seeing trailers full of hogs riding 60 miles per hour down the highway. Wild hogs like a 'cockroach:' Officials hope poison can help control widespread problem It's already illegal to release feral hogs into the wild or at an unapproved site. But Talbot said that people are skirting the law. He hopes his House Bill 226 will give another point to try to stop the problem. The Department of Wildlife has already sought to have give its agents the ability to write tickets when they see feral swine being transported. Talbot's bill would expand that beyond policy to state law. Talbot's bill would still allow the state to issue permits for lawful transport of feral pigs. Wild hogs are considered nuisance in Louisiana. They root for food, often damaging crops, trees and even man-made structures. The state has a year-round hunting season for them to try to curb the problem. Jim LaCour, state wildlife veterinarian for the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, said they currently exist in every parish in Louisiana, with a population of about 700,000. "One of the goals is to prevent purposeful introduction of them onto (non-native) properties," he said, speaking at a hearing in support of Talbot's bill. He said some people catch them and bring them home so that they can fatten up the hogs and slaughter them later, but feral hogs have rapid reproduction rates. Rep. John Bagneris, a Democrat, said his New Orleans East district even has problems with feral swine. "I'm thinking about joining the rural caucus," he joked, before telling his own interaction with them. Bagneris said he was driving in his district when he spotted what he thought was a pack of dogs. It ended up being a pack of about 10 wild hogs, he said. "I didn't stop. I ran the red light," Bagneris said of his fear that they would charge at his car. "I had to get out of dodge." Follow Elizabeth Crisp on Twitter, @elizabethcrisp. | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 05:07pm - 2467 days | #6 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Off-topic: My next car: Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat. Can I start a Go-Fund-Me to buy my dreamcar? I always wanted to go 160 mph on the freeways and byways. ------- ------- Hellcat doing 160 MPH is too fast for cop, but then driver's luck runs out By Mike Moffitt, SFGATE Updated 3:49 pm, Thursday, March 22, 2018 Now Playing: Dodge Charger SRT Hellcat at Lightning Lap 2016 With its relatively skimpy tires, it's like the Hulk in Gucci pumps. Media: CarAndDriver An Indiana state trooper found his police cruiser seriously challenged when he tried to pull over a speeding Dodge Challenger Hellcat on the Indiana Toll Road. Trooper Dustin Eggert was merging back into traffic near Bremen on Tuesday after helping a broken-down motorist when the reddish-orange Hellcat passed him at a high rate of speed, according to a police statement obtained by Jalopnik. Police said Eggert witnessed the 707-horsepower muscle car weaving in and out of traffic without using turn signals as it passed slower vehicles. The trooper began pursuit, but even though he reached reached speeds of 150 mph, he could not catch the Hellcat, which was allegedly going 160. State police in Bremen, Ind., say this Dodge Challenger Hellcat was clocked at 160 mph Tuesday while trying to evade a pursuing officer on the Indiana State Toll Road. The speed limit on the toll road is 70 mph. Unable to gain on the speedster, Eggert radioed ahead for help, requesting officers watch for the Dodge. But then two big-rig trucks inadvertently came to the aid of law enforcement. They happened to be driving side by side on the two-lane highway, blocking the Dodge and allowing Eggert to catch up. Arrested on a reckless driving charge was J. Jesus Duran Sandoval, 38, of Lake Geneva, Wis., who police say was driving on an expired driver's license. He was taken to LaPorte County Jail. The reason he was driving so fast? He was "trying to get to Maryland," or so he told Eggert. Apparently he had a very pressing engagement. | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 04:46pm - 2467 days | #293 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I am surprised that American Airlines did not offer to pay the rental fee for any golf clubs she might have rented. Since they were responsible for her missing clubs. | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 04:38pm - 2467 days | #5 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
The main problem is accountability. If police shoot and kill an unarmed person, they are shielded by both the law, fellow police officers, and the public, as well as by the government agency that employs them, because civil suits against the officer are paid for by the the government that employs them (which only makes sense from a legal standpoint, because a cop does not have a lot of money--you sue where the money is--which is the government (city, county) instead of the cop himself. Am I over-simplifying? Possibly, to a certain extent. But the main problem is that cops are not punished for killing unarmed people. In some cases, they even refuse to make public the name of the cop who kills--to protect the officer from hate mail/whatever. (Which seems to me to be illegal--but that's what I have read.) The officer who killed the unarmed man who was a victim of a phone prank in Wichita, Kansas. The man answered the police who came to his front door, and he was shot and killed. The man had no gun, no weapon. He just opened his front door, and was shot. He was not threatening anyone. But the officer who shot him somehow thought the guy had a weapon. The officer's name has been withheld from the public, to protect the officer's rights and safety. . | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 12:36pm - 2467 days | #291 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
More fake news: What's the connection between this story and Donald Trump? Trump owns golf courses. Was Trump behind the disappearance of a professional woman golfer's golf clubs recently? It's a well-known fact that Trump likes to dominate women. Especially foreign-type women. So, when In-Kyung Kim’s golf bag went missing on an American Airlines flight in January, she might have thought, at the back of her mind, was Trump involved? Was he playing tricks on her? Or, maybe this was all done in the spirit of good, clean fun, since Trump has not tweeted any vicious comments about In-Kyung Kim. I especially like the wonderful, caring advice American Airlines gave to the professional golfer: If your golf clubs are missing, rent more clubs. American Airlines, the heart and soul of the Airline Industry. -------- -------- Golfer's missing clubs miraculously found on sale at a sporting goods store Devil Ball Golf Liz Roscher,Devil Ball Golf 1 hour 51 minutes ago In-Kyung Kim’s golf bag went missing on an American Airlines flight in January, but a TV segment and a chance encounter helped her get them back. (AP Photo) For a golfer, losing your clubs is one of the worst things that can happen. And in January, that happened to pro golfer In-Kyung Kim. While traveling from Miami to San Deigo, her golf clubs went missing. And they weren’t just any clubs. According to Golfweek, they were the set she used to win the Women’s British Open in 2017. Thankfully, Kim had a back-up putter to use. But American Airlines’ advice to her wasn’t all that useful. Yes, their advice to a professional golfer — who has chosen her clubs carefully over a span of years, and who might even have a club or two that was custom made for her — was to rent a set of clubs. As you can see from the photo she chose for the Instagram post, Kim wasn’t amused by that suggestion. But a few weeks later, something happened that was a lot more helpful than American Airlines’ suggestion that Kim rent a set of clubs like she’s a newbie on vacation. At the HSBC World Championship, she shot a “What’s in the Bag?” segment with Alison Whitaker, and talked about the loss of her other set of clubs. That segment led to something miraculous. Three golfers named Jack, Jeff, and Paul saw it on TV, and actually found Kim’s clubs. They were being sold for $60 each at a Play It Again Sports store in southern California. Here’s the reunion between Kim and her clubs at the Carlsbad Police Station. How exactly the bag and clubs made it to that store is a mystery. (How they made it to the sales floor is even more of a mystery, since Kim’s LPGA badge and other identifying items were still in the pockets of the bag.) But it’s a stroke of luck that Jack, Jeff, and Paul saw them. The three of them are serious golfers, and were able to identify the club of a professional very easily. Once they made the connection between the clubs and the segment they’d seen a few months earlier, they got the police involved and Kim got her clubs back. As Kim said on the video, “there are good people out there.” – – – – – – Liz Roscher is a writer for Yahoo Sports. Have a tip? Email her at lizroscher@yahoo.com or follow her on twitter! Follow @lizroscher | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 12:14pm - 2467 days | #290 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Fake news: Jared Kushner, a trusted advisor to President Donald Trump, and the husband of one of Trump's daughters, will suspend his white house duties to fight to clear not only his good name, but the name of his wife and father-in-law. Terrible people are spreading false and vicious lies about a company bearing Kushner's name. -------- -------- Reuters New York building regulator probes Kushner Companies properties Reuters Reuters 6 hours ago March 22 (Reuters) - A New York City regulator is probing 13 buildings controlled by a company formerly run by Jared Kushner, a top aide to U.S. President Donald Trump and his son-in-law, over possible "illegal activity" related to work permits, according to public filings. The online filings by the Department of Buildings show that it is investigating the possibility of "false filing" on applications by developer Kushner Companies for construction work. The filings are dated Wednesday and involve properties in the Brooklyn and Manhattan boroughs of New York. News of the agency's probe comes two days after a tenants' rights group and city councilman announced that they had found evidence that Kushner Companies had falsified more than 80 work permits involving 34 buildings in the city. The probe was first reported by the Associated Press. A spokeswoman for Kushner Companies, which was run by Jared Kushner until early last year, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Earlier this week, she said the company values its tenants, takes its legal and ethical responsibilities seriously and would not intentionally falsify filings. The tenants rights group, Housing Rights Initiative, has alleged that Kushner Companies failed to disclose the existence of rent-stabilized units in its buildings, thereby skirting tighter oversight during renovations and harass tenants. The group also accused the company of using construction as a means to disrupt the lives of tenants with rent controls and push them out. The tactics, employed by other landlords, have led to a drop in affordable housing in the city, the group says. The building department's investigation was assigned to its marshal's office, which investigates allegations of unlicensed activity by plumbers and other trades and "develops cases for both civil and criminal prosecution," according to its website. (Reporting by Nathan Layne in New York; Editing by Bernadette Baum) | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 10:12am - 2467 days | #289 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
More fake news: Trump tweets that Congress will spend $1.6 billion on Trump's wall. Maybe that's why Republicans are fighting so hard to reduce funds for social security and wellfare programs like food for the poor and other wasteful programs that are giving financial aid to the poor and underserving and elderly, instead of to the hard-working millionaires and billionaires who really deserve the tax breaks that Trump has courageously championed and passed through Congress. ----- ----- Politics Remember When Trump Said Mexico Would Pay For His Border Wall? Twitter Does. HuffPost Dominique Mosbergen,HuffPost 10 hours ago President Donald Trump took to Twitter on Wednesday night to boast about the President Donald Trump took to Twitter on Wednesday night to boast about the $1.6 billion that was earmarked in the new omnibus spending bill for his oft-touted wall project along the U.S.-Mexico border. But not only was Trump’s assertion misleading (the money isn’t actually going to help build the concrete wall he’s long-championed), many Twitter users pointed out that it contradicted the president’s repeated claims that American taxpayers wouldn’t have to pay for the wall at all: On several occasions, Trump has claimed that he would get Mexico to pay for the border wall, despite the vehement rejections of such a plan by Mexican leaders. “I believe Mexico will pay for the wall,” Trump said at a news conference in January, a day after his administration asked Congress for $18 billion over the next decade to fund the construction of the barrier. “I have a very good relationship with Mexico,” Trump added. “But yes, in some form, Mexico will pay for the wall.” The new government spending bill released on Wednesday has designated $1.6 billion for border security. Democrats pointed out, however, that only $641 million of that will be used to build 33 miles of “new fencing or levees” — and not the concrete wall that Trump has championed. The rest of the funds will be used for the repair and replacement of existing fencing or border security technology. The $1.3 trillion spending bill must pass by midnight Friday to avert another government shutdown. | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 09:57am - 2467 days | #288 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Fake news revealed: Donald Trump is not only the most powerful President the United States ever had, he is also the fiercest. Trump would crush any opponent he faced, Trump has the power of a super villain, except that he's the Good Guy, the Hero. (Ignoring the fact that Trump avoided military service during the Vietnam war by getting 5 deferments. His last deferment was medical for a bone spur. In high school, he played baseball and football, as well as soccer. So I guess that the foot spur developed when he was in college. Trump stated publicly that he would run into Parkland high school (where a shooter killed 17 people) “even if I didn’t have a weapon” It’s not the first time he’s suggested gun violence could be stopped by a would-be action hero: himself. Now, Trump is saying if he fought Joe Biden, Biden would be crushed. -------- -------- Trump: If I fought Biden, he would go down 'crying' Dylan Stableford 3 hours ago President Trump said Thursday that if he were to fight Joe Biden, the former vice president “would go down fast and hard.” At an anti-sexual assault rally at the University of Miami earlier this week, Biden said that if he were in high school and heard Trump making lewd comments about women — like those captured on the infamous 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape — he would “take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him.” Trump responded on Twitter, escalating the war of words between the two septuagenarians. “Crazy Joe Biden is trying to act like a tough guy,” he wrote. “Actually, he is weak, both mentally and physically, and yet he threatens me, for the second time, with physical assault. He doesn’t know me, but he would go down fast and hard, crying all the way. Don’t threaten people Joe!” Biden first expressed a desire for a fisticuffs with Trump at a rally for Hillary Clinton in October 2016, after Trump’s hot-mic comments on “Access Hollywood” were made public. “The press always ask me, ‘Don’t I wish I were debating him?’ No, I wish we were in high school — I could take him behind the gym,” Biden said. “That’s what I wish.” Trump responded that he would “love that.” “Did you see where Biden wants to take me to the the back of the barn? Me. I’d love that,” the then-Republican nominee said at a rally in Tallahassee, Fla. “Mr. Tough Guy. You know, he’s Mr. Tough Guy. You know when he’s Mr. Tough Guy? When he’s standing behind a microphone by himself.” Trump added: “Some things in life you could really love doing.” Despite Trump’s admonishment to Biden about threatening people, the president himself has a history of doing just that while standing behind a microphone. At a February 2016 rally in Las Vegas, Trump said he wanted to punch a protester in the face. “There’s a guy, totally disruptive, throwing punches — we’re not allowed to punch back anymore,” Trump said. “I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out on a stretcher.” And in July 2016, Trump said he wanted to “hit a number” of speakers at the Democratic National Convention “so hard, their heads would spin” and “they’d never recover.” “I was going to hit one guy in particular, a very little guy,” Trump said at a rally in Iowa, apparently referring to former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. “I was going to hit this guy so hard his head would spin; he wouldn’t know what the hell happened.” Though Trump’s freewheeling Twitter insults have long broken presidential decorum, the Thursday morning tweet about fighting Biden was nonetheless striking. Trump also has often railed against Democrats — including Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. — who, it’s speculated, are considering running against him in 2020. | |
|
||
| 03-22-18 03:56am - 2467 days | #3 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
A simplified explanation for why police in the US kill people. -If a police officer kills someone, it's rare that he is charged with a crime. Even more rare that he is sent to prison. Basically, police officers are given a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Card with their job, and if a civilian did what the police do, they would almost certainly go to jail or prison. The public believe that the police are in a dangerous job, and that gives them the right to shoot first, and ask questions later. So even if a cop shoots an unarmed man, the cop will claim self-defense, that the cop shot in fear of his life. That's the training they receive. The mind-set. A cop gives a civilian an order, the civilian better obey: especially since cops are under a lot of pressure, and might release that pressure by beating or shooting a suspect, or someone they think might be a suspect. You also get a lot of cops that have a temper, or are in bad frame of mind because life has problems, so they take it out on civilians. And the cop culture is that cops protect one another. If a cop breaks the law (simple case, speeding), other cops will give the cop offender a pass. Cops are all brothers. I read about a woman cop who stopped another cop for speeding. The speeding cop was driving at a high rate of speed. He was off duty. There was no emergency. The cop was speeding because he is a cop, and who's going to stop a cop from speeding? A civilian? You're going to take a chance pissing off a cop, who can mess you up so bad it's not funny, or he can get his buddies to mess you up. The woman cop who stopped the speeding cop was harassed by other cops in her area in different ways, that were illegal. Cops sent hate emails to her, and other things happened to her. She sued in federal court for illegal harassment. But, basically, she was a pariah, because she stopped a cop for speeding, and other cops resented that. Anyway, the basic answer to why cops kill innocent people in the US: because they can. There's very little consequence to a cop shooting an unarmed civilian. Once in a while a cop might lose his job or even go to jail. But actual jail time for cops is rare. There are probably other factors involved. But I think the main reason is that most people believe that cops are doing a dangerous job, and they are trying to protect the general populace. Which is myth. Cops are people just like everyone else. Just like ministers are people just like everyone else. Some ministers are in it for the money. And they can make an obscene amount of money from preaching the good word. And since ministers are real people, they sometimes get caught for sex activities and other "sins" that they are preaching against. | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 10:02pm - 2468 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Tomb Raider (201  I saw Tomb Raider (201 with Alicia Vikander.It was good. But I actually enjoyed the 2 Tomb Raider movies with Angelina Jolie more. Different reasons why I enjoyed the Jolie Tomb Raider movies: -the Jolie movies had more of a cartoon vibe: outlandish action, plots and turns that I enjoyed. -I thought that Jolie was more physical than Vikander. I'm not saying which is the better actress. They've both won academy awards. But Jolie has more heft to her body, it just seems more real that Jolie could physically beat opponents in a fight than Vikander, who has a slender body. These are movies, not real life. But I just thought that Jolie was a better fit, physically, than Vikander. And, dare I admit it, I ogled Jolie's body when she was partially naked. Not that she showed much, but I kept hoping to see more. Both the Jolie films, and the Vikander film, are fantasies: neither character would be alive at the end of any of these movies. But that doesn't matter: they are fantasy-adventure films. Both Jolie and Vikander did a good job, in my opinion. But I enjoyed the Jolie film more. I also liked the villains more in the Jolie films. (Walter Goggins, the bad guy in the Vikander film, was less of a villain than a guy was fell into a sad situation and was fighting his way out. So Goggins became evil, because of the situation he was put in. But Goggins was also a father, who missed his two young daughters.) Goggins did not have the Evil that Jolie's villains had. So I thought that Jolie's villains were more memorable. Have any PU members seen either the new Tomb Raider or the older ones? Care to comment on which movies you enjoyed the most? Edited on Mar 21, 2018, 10:10pm | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 05:51pm - 2468 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Police shot and killed an unarmed black man in his own backyard. However, the police can say it was in self defense. The man had a cell phone in his hand. The police have made statements about the weapons the man was holding: The current statement is the police thought the cell phone was a gun. The police fired 20 rounds at the man. After the shooting, officers waited several minutes for backup before moving to handcuff Clark and beginning medical treatment. And the only item he turned out to have been carrying was a cellphone. The police issued multiple statements about the suspect they killed: -they said the man may have been armed (holding a gun). -they said the man had a tool bar (a cell phone is a tool bar?). -they said the had a wrench (a cell phone can be used as a wrench, which police know is a deadly weapon). What can we learn from this? Never wave or point your cell phone at a police officer. This a reson for them to shoot you. Never wave or hold or move your hands if you see a police officer. That is a reason for them to shoot you. Police officers are here to serve and protect. That is why they carry guns. Guns can be dangerous. -------- -------- https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/3/21...-shooting-sacramento Police shot and killed an unarmed black man in his own backyard. All he was holding was a cellphone. Officers say they mistook Stephon Clark’s cellphone for a gun. Activists want more answers. By P.R. Lockhart Mar 21, 2018, 6:30pm EDT Stephon Clark, 22, was shot and killed in his backyard by police on Sunday, March 18. Officers say they mistook his cell phone for a gun. Facebook Police killings of unarmed black men helped fuel the rise of the Black Lives Matter Movement. Now a new tragedy — the shooting death of an unarmed black man in his own backyard — is raising new questions about how much things have changed, if at all. On Sunday, 22-year-old Stephon Clark was shot in the backyard of the home he was staying in with his grandparents. Police officers were purportedly responding to reports of a man breaking car windows. According to a press release issued by the Sacramento Police Department, a helicopter tracking a suspect directed the officers to Clark, who ran towards the house after being confronted by officers. The police department said Clark turned and began to “advance forward with his arms extended, and holding an object in his hands.” The officers, who are said to have thought the object was a gun, then fired 20 rounds at Clark. It’s unclear how many of the shots hit Clark, but other facts aren’t in dispute, and they’re disturbing: After the shooting, officers waited several minutes for backup before moving to handcuff Clark and beginning medical treatment. And the only item he turned out to have been carrying was a cellphone. The shooting has sparked public outcry both locally and nationally. And, nearly four years after the death of Michael Brown sparked the rise of Black Lives Matter and brought more attention to racial disparities in police shootings, the Clark case serves as a stark reminder that even as national attention has waned, unarmed black men and women continue to experience deadly encounters with police. There are a lot of questions and few answers about the Sacramento shooting What happened immediately before Clark’s shooting remains unclear, and his family and community are demanding answers. ”He was at the wrong place at the wrong time in his own backyard?” Sequita Thompson, Clark’s grandmother, said to the Sacramento Bee on Tuesday. Thompson also said that though she heard the gunshots, she never heard the police ask Clark to drop what he was holding. Clark’s family also said that they were not immediately told that their relative was the man killed in their backyard. At a city council meeting in Sacramento on Tuesday, local activists argued that the police department’s multiple statements on the shooting have only added to the confusion. “They put one story out that he may have been armed. They put out another that he had a ‘tool bar,’ whatever that is,” Tanya Faison, founder of the Sacramento chapter of Black Lives Matter, told reporters. “Then they put out that he had a wrench, and then they put out that he just had a cellphone. They need to get it together.” The officers who shot Clark have each served in the Sacramento Police Department for less than five years, and were placed on paid leave while the investigation continues. Both officers were wearing body cameras. A local ordinance requires that footage from the cameras be released to the public within 30 days, and the department says that it plans to release video and audio from the helicopter in the near future. Clark’s shooting is the latest in a troubling pattern Clark’s death follows several high profile police shootings of black men in recent years. According to the Washington Post’s Fatal Force database, some 230 people have been shot and killed by police in 2018. 38 of those people were identified as black in news reports. Research has shown that there are significant racial disparities in police use of force. While these disparities are most commonly attributed to issues like implicit bias and systemic racism, recent research has also noted that specific factors like high levels of housing segregation and economic inequality also play a role in where police shootings occur and who they affect. “It’s not just about how individuals interact, but how society is structured,” Michael Siegel, the author of a recent study examining the relationship between housing segregation and structural inequality to police violence, told the Intercept earlier this month. At this point, it is unclear what the results of the police investigation will be, or if the officers will face charges for the shooting. But when police officers shoot civilians, it is rare that these cases lead to prosecution. As Vox’s German Lopez has noted, police are given wide latitude to use force and only have to reasonably perceive a threat at the time of the shooting for their actions to be legally justified. | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 05:27pm - 2468 days | #286 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I don't know if President Trump threw his wife under the bus. But-- Here are some quotes from Trump's speech at the Gridiron Club Dinner held on March 3, 2018: (Trump has been in the news lately about alleged trysts with women--some of which may have been while he was married to his current wife, Melania.) And to make a joke that she might be leaving just proves how thick a skin he has. Except that any time someone criticizes Trump, he hits back with a sledgehammer. ------ ------ Donald Trump isn’t busy fighting a never-ending battle against the wind, the occasional salad-eater can often be found cracking bad and offensive jokes. So, it should come as no surprise that Trump’s Saturday night appearance at the Gridiron Club Dinner – a high-profile evening of roasts and jokes in D.C. attended by journalists and politicos (including his very close vice-president Mike Pence) – was replete with questionable (and awkward) humor. Here, a selection of Trump’s worst bits from the dinner. About his wife possibly leaving him: “So many people have been leaving the White House. It’s actually been really exciting and invigorating ‘cause you want new thought. So, I like turnover. I like chaos. It really is good. Now the question everyone keeps asking is, ‘Who is going to be the next to leave? Steve Miller or Melania?’ That is terrible honey, but you love me, right?” On Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients: “We were talking about the Dreamers and quite honestly, democrats can fantasize all they want about winning in 2020 … those are the Dreamers.” About Rep. Maxine Water’s calls for his impeachment: “And I say — and I get in trouble for this — ‘she has to immediately take an IQ test,’ and people go crazy.” And his son-in-law attendee Jared Kushner’s downgraded White House security clearance: “Before I get started, I wanted to apologize for arriving a little bit late. You know, we’re late tonight because Jared could not get through the security.” On Mike Pence’s impeachment worries: “[Pence] starts out each morning asking everyone, ‘Has he been impeached yet?’ Mike, you can’t be impeached when there’s no crime, please remember that.” And about Pence’s rule that he won’t be alone with a woman who isn’t his wife (or “mother”): “The other day we were in line shaking hands with men and women, and a woman came over to shake his hand and he said, ‘I’m sorry I can’t do that, my wife is not here.’ He’s 25 years ahead of his time, folks.” Sources CNN New York Times Huffington Post | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 01:40pm - 2468 days | #281 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Fake News flash!!!!! There is a mole in the White House. President Trump vows to enlist the CIA, the FBI, and the Secret Service with orders to SHOOT TO KILL the informant who leaked a confidential memo warning Trump to not congratulate Putin on his election victory. Rats must be destroyed, shouts the President. Fake news should not get their hands on authentic documents that might prove embarrassing to the United States of America. Once the mole has been executed, the agencies and the US Armed Forces can turn their attention to yellow-bird Mueller, who has been identified as a traitor by Trump himself. It doesn't get any clearer that Trump, as President, is the Commander in Chief, with the power to order the Armed Forces to destroy his enemies!!!! ------- ------- Politics White House hunts leaker after Trump congratulates Putin AFP Andrew BEATTY,AFP 1 hour 53 minutes ago Washington (AFP) - The White House fumed Wednesday about an embarrassing leak regarding Donald Trump's shock decision to congratulate Russia's Vladimir Putin on his re-election, as lawmakers blasted him for feting the strongman's landslide win. Trump shunned the advice of some aides in making the call in the first place, after Putin sailed to a fourth term in a vote plagued by evidence of ballot stuffing, media censorship and the jailing of political opponents. But the controversy was compounded as it emerged the president's prepared notes for the call had specifically warned him "DO NOT CONGRATULATE" -- with a hunt now underway for the person who leaked the document. The row erupted as lawmakers heard that Russia -- slapped with US sanctions over its meddling in the 2016 election -- remains a menace as the country gears up for congressional polls in November. "The threat of interference remains," Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee on election security. "We recognize that the 2018 midterm, and future elections, are clearly potential targets for Russian hacking attempts," she said. Democratic Senator Mark Warner told the hearing it was "clear that 2016 will not be the last attempt" to meddle by Russia, calling Trump out for his failure -- once again -- to tackle the subject with Putin. "The fact that the president did not even bring up the topic of our election security when he called Vladimir Putin to congratulate him on his 'victory' in a pre-cooked election, is extremely troubling." - Trump ignored advice - The Washington Post and others reported that aides explicitly advised Trump not to congratulate the Russian president, and instead urged him to condemn the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. According to accounts from the White House and the Kremlin, Trump did neither. The leak of such sensitive information about Oval Office deliberations points to deep frustration within the White House about the president's ad-hoc approach and disregard for the advice of his inner circle. Only individuals at the very highest levels of the administration would have known about the details of the call. Officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP that a hunt for the leaker was underway. One suggested the documents prepared for the call may have been classified, making unauthorized disclosure a crime. - Russian hacking threat remains - The furor in the White House over the leak broke out even as Nielsen, Trump's top domestic security official, sounded a fresh warning about the threat posed by Russia. "It needs to be very clear that there are consequences for countries that meddle in our affairs." Warner said Moscow's threat has grown larger than in 2016. "There are signs that the Kremlin is becoming more brazen. As we saw recently, the Putin regime was behind an assassination attempt on European soil with a prohibited military-grade nerve agent. This is not the action of a regime that is being successfully deterred." He echoed the criticism of Trump's call by Republican Senator John McCain, who warned on Wednesday that "an American president does not lead the free world by congratulating dictators on winning sham elections." - 'Hold Russia accountable' - Allies, most notably in Britain, were furious about Trump's apparent lack of solidarity after double agent Sergei Skripal was poisoned in a small English town. The White House waited for days before condemning the attack, which London has pinned squarely on the Kremlin and Moscow has denied. Also facing mounting domestic pressure over his unwillingness to confront Putin, the White House said Wednesday Trump agreed in a call with French President Emmanuel Macron "on the need to take action to hold Russia accountable" over the attack. For critics, Trump's call offered Putin legitimacy while giving him a wedge to drive between Western allies and within the White House itself. But Republicans also lined up behind the president in anger about the latest leak from the White House. "I don't like that he did it, but you know what I like even less? That there is somebody close to him leaking this stuff out. If you don't like the guy, quit!" said Republican Senator Marco Rubio. | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 01:15pm - 2468 days | #280 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
A US President has the power to pardon. Why can't Trump pardon himself, if he is found guilty of any crimes? The perfect solution to Trump's problems. (Or, maybe he needs to pardon himself before he is found guilty in a court of law?) Go, Trump, First President for Life of the United States of America. Ford pardoned Nixon of any crimes he may have committed while Nixon was President. It was a blanket pardon, that did not spell out (specify) any crimes Nixon may have committed. So Trump would be following in the grand tradition of Republican Presidents. | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 08:30am - 2468 days | #279 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I was surprised by the deletions of Onyx's posts. I also agree that much of his posts on computer tech was useful and informative. It might have been a mistake on PU's part. Otherwise, the deletion action would seem more like an action taken again a scammer, or fraudster, which seems far-fetched. In this age of paranoia, was Onyx a Russian agent, seeking to penetrate the PU community? Enquiring minds want to know. (Joke-or my attempt at a joke.) | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 08:11am - 2468 days | #277 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Loki, I disagree completely. Onyx gave no reason was his account was disabled. I doubt that any of your posts were the cause. Everything you wrote was civil and polite, to use your terminology. Although I too agree that Onyx contributed to the PU site with his knowledge of computer tech, and his non-computer views, each person has the right to disable their account, whenever they wish. Some PU members disable their account, and then return, when they have time or interest in rejoining. I think it would be a shame if you disabled your account. It's your choice, of course, but we would miss your contributions to the site. I'm sure I'm not alone in this view. | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 06:30am - 2468 days | #275 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Jimmy Kimmel admits he's a pervert. He says he would watch a Donald Trump sex tape if it was released. Personally, I would rather watch a video from X-Art, Diesel Access, or Teen Mega World, which features attractive young teens. Watching a sweaty old man is not my film of choice. ------ ------ TV The Wrap Jimmy Kimmel: ‘Of Course’ We Would Watch the Donald Trump Sex Tape If It Comes Out “I never wanted to see and not see anything more,” Kimmel said on his show Thursday night Phil Owen | Last Updated: March 16, 2018 @ 6:29 AM jimmy kimmel live donald trump sex tape stormy daniels On his show Thursday night, Jimmy Kimmel spent a good chunk of his monologue discussing the latest developments in the Donald Trump-related stories that will never end: special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the Trump campaign’s possible collusion with Russia, and Trump’s affair with porn star Stormy Daniels. “Yet another day of March madness for the president. According to the failing New York Times, the special prosecutor Robert Mueller has subpoenaed the Trump Organization, the president’s company, demanding that they hand over any documents related to business they may have done with Russia. In an investigation like this, it is important to follow the money no matter how many porn stars it leads to,” Kimmel joked. “So Donald Trump surprisingly hasn’t tweeted about the subpoena yet. Probably because he doesn’t know how to spell the word ‘subpoena.’ But there are rumors he may try to fire Robert Mueller, the guy who is investigating him. That would have to be it, right? At that point, we have to wait until he goes to Mar-a-Lago and lock him in it forever. Trump said Mueller looking into his finances is a red line he wouldn’t allow to be crossed and now it is being crossed. Why do I think this is about Melania handing files over in an underground parking lot?” Kimmel then transitioned over to the Stormy Daniels situation, which has a new element surfacing every day — particularly as the prospect that a presidential sex tape starts to feel more and more likely. “There are new developments in the ‘Russia’ investigation, that, of course, being Stormy Daniels, the adult film star, who may or definitely did have sex with Donald Trump,” Kimmel said. “She is trying to raise money to pay her legal fees. So she launched a fundraising page on a website called crowdjustice.com. So now you can give money to a porn star just like the president of the United States. In 24 hours, she’s already raised more than $135,000. I never thought giving money to a porn star would be an act of patriotism, but I also never thought a guy who would get in a Twitter war with Cher would become president. Remember, every dollar you donate potentially brings us one step closer to seeing photos will haunt our dreams forever.” But it may not just be photos. Kimmel played a clip of Daniels’ lawyer, Michael Avenatti, being questioned on CNN about the possibility that there may even be a sex tape out there somewhere, and he refused to answer the question — which of course is not the same thing as a denial. Instead, Avenatti said, “there could be, might be, would be, could be, who knows?” “I don’t know,” Kimmel said after the clip ended. “I was thinking about it today, and I have never wanted to see and not see anything more than I either do or do not want to see Donald Trump butt naked and pumping away. I mean really. You would watch that, right? Of course. It’s a once in a lifetime opportunity.” | |
|
||
| 03-21-18 06:08am - 2468 days | #274 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Onyx, sorry to see you go. I mean that sincerely. Your contributions were worthwhile. | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 06:12pm - 2469 days | #271 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Trump was chosen by God to be President of the United States. Why can't people in the United States understand that Trump is doing God's work on earth? Let us pray for the sinners, and pray for Trump's lawyers, who are defending a God-fearing Trump. ------ ------ Former GOP White House official: Evangelicals' mulligan defense of Trump is 'complete hypocrisy' Jennifer Hansler By Jennifer Hansler, CNN Updated 2:55 PM ET, Tue March 20, 2018 (CNN)He served under Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush, but under Donald Trump's presidency, Peter Wehner says things are different. "I'm very uncomfortable calling myself now a Republican even though my roots are with the Republican Party," Wehner told David Axelrod on "The Axe Files," a podcast from the University of Chicago Institute of Politics and CNN. Wehner, who now serves as a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, said he draws particular unease from the staunch evangelical defense of the President. "What's happened is that a lot of these prominent evangelical Christians have gone from making a prudential judgment to being the sword and shield for Donald Trump. They are his most reliable defenders," Wehner said. In the wake of initial reports about the President's alleged affair with porn star Stormy Daniels, conservative evangelical leader Tony Perkins said Trump gets a "mulligan" when it comes to his personal behavior. "Yes, evangelicals, conservatives, they gave him a mulligan. They let him have a do-over. They said we'll start afresh with you and we'll give you a second chance." Perkins said in a interview on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront." Evangelical leader Franklin Graham said Trump was a "changed man" from the time of his alleged affair. Graham argued that Trump been put in the White House by God. Wehner said these excuses for the President's behavior and rhetoric are "complete hypocrisy" -- and it runs the risk of derailing the evangelical message. "I think we've seen that there is, in their defense of Donald Trump, a kind of hypocrisy that is so obvious to everybody else but apparently themselves. And so I think that that has really had a discrediting effect on faith," he said. "I feel like something that I treasure and is important to me is being denigrated and harmed. And it's it's not only unnecessary, it's downright destructive," he added. | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 04:34pm - 2469 days | #270 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Cracks appearing in Trump's legal defense? A New York state judge rules that President Donald Trump must face a defamation lawsuit by a woman who accused him of groping her. Trump publicly stated the woman was a phony and her stories were lies. Will Trump be forced to tell the truth under oath and admit he groped a woman? Or will he avoid speaking the truth, under oath? Lying under oath would open him to a perjury charge. Shades of Bill Clinton, who was impeached for lying under oath. What's interesting is that Trump's lawyers hold that any statements made by Trump are political speech protected by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. (In other words, if you are a politician, there is no penalty for telling lies.) But some people believe otherwise. This state judge in particular. ----- ----- Politics Trump, deemed not 'above the law,' must face defamation lawsuit Reuters By Jonathan Stempel and Brendan Pierson,Reuters 3 hours ago By Jonathan Stempel and Brendan Pierson NEW YORK (Reuters) - A New York state judge on Tuesday said U.S. President Donald Trump must face a defamation lawsuit by a woman who accused him of sexually harassing her after she appeared on his former reality TV show. The decision by Justice Jennifer Schecter of the New York state court in Manhattan in favor of California restaurateur Summer Zervos, a former contestant on NBC's "The Apprentice," raises the prospect that Trump might have to answer embarrassing questions in court about his behavior toward women. She rejected Trump's claim that he was immune from being sued, finding "absolutely no authority" to dismiss litigation related "purely to unofficial conduct" solely because he occupied the White House. "No one is above the law," the judge wrote. A White House representative was not immediately available for comment on the ruling. Mariann Wang, one of Zervos' lawyers, said in a statement: "We are grateful for the opportunity to prove that that defendant falsely branded Ms. Zervos a phony for telling the truth about his unwanted sexual groping." Trump has been accused by several women of misconduct, including after the release during the 2016 presidential campaign of an "Access Hollywood" recording in which he had spoken in vulgar terms about trying to have sex with women. He later said the comments were "locker room banter" and his campaign issued an apology from him if anyone was offended. Trump also faces a lawsuit by porn actress Stormy Daniels to end an agreement under which she was paid $130,000 in what she called hush money to keep quiet about an affair she claimed to have had with Trump beginning in 2006. Also on Tuesday, Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model who said she had an affair with Trump, filed suit in California to release her from a legal agreement requiring her to stay silent. TRUMP BRANDED ALLEGATIONS "LIES" Zervos had met Trump when she became a contestant on "The Apprentice" in 2005. She accused him of kissing her against her will at his New York office in 2007, and later groping her in a Beverly Hills hotel at a meeting about a possible job. During his campaign, Trump repeatedly said at rallies and on Twitter that all accusations made by women after the "Access Hollywood" recording became public were "lies." He also republished on Twitter another a post that called Zervos' accusations a "hoax." Zervos said Trump's denials of her accusations amounted to defamation and that being branded a "liar" caused diners to stay away from her restaurant. Her lawsuit sought damages and an apology. In allowing Zervos' case to go forward, Schecter cited a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court precedent allowing former Arkansas state employee Paula Jones to pursue a sexual harassment case against then-President Bill Clinton to proceed. That paved the way for Clinton's impeachment the following year. Trump's legal team had argued the Jones decision applied only to federal courts and that Trump's campaign statements were political speech protected by the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. But the judge said any listener, recognizing that Trump knew "exactly what transpired," could reasonably believe based on his statements that Zervos was "contemptible" because she had "fabricated" events for personal gain. "In their context, defendant's repeated statements ... cannot be characterized simply as opinion, heated rhetoric or hyperbole," Schecter wrote. The case is Zervos v Trump, New York State Supreme Court, New York County, No. 150522/2017. (Reporting By Brendan Pierson in New York; Editing by Ben Klayman and Bill Trott) | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 03:27pm - 2469 days | #269 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Say what you will, Donald Trump sometimes has an eye for beauty. Playmate Karen McDougal is one beautiful lady. I only hope that Trump (or his handlers) got his money's worth from his time with her. Actually, the Eurpeans handle this type of affair much better (from the man's point of view). I believe Prince Albert of Monaco had two illegitimate children before he got married. I read a long time ago, that one of the mothers tried to get money from the prince. But Monaco law states the prince has no legal responsibility for his illegitimate kids (I believe). He had to pay the mothers nothing (by law). And he was certainly not in any trouble for playing around. In Europe, they seem to view sex and relationships differently, than in the US. But he had the illegitimate children before he got married. Since then, he has 2 kids by his wife, who are his heirs. (The illegitimate kids are not legal heirs--unless he wants to give them something.) Maybe Trump should move to Europe, where he would be freer to indulge his sexual appetites. ---------- ---------- Former Playboy Model Karen McDougal Sues to Break Silence on Relationship With Trump The Wrap Itay Hod,The Wrap 3 hours ago Former Playboy Model Karen McDougal Sues to Break Silence on Relationship With Trump Karen McDougal, the former Playboy model who said she had an affair with Donald Trump, is taking a page straight out of the Stormy Daniels playbook. According to a The New York Times report, McDougal filed a lawsuit on Tuesday to get out of her 2016 non-disclosure agreement, becoming the second woman in two weeks to filed a lawsuit accusing the president or his allies of trying to bury news about a Trump extramarital affair. McDougal is suing American Media Inc., The National Enquirer’s parent company, which, according to the Wall Street Journal, paid her $150,000 to buy her story — but never ran it. The Enquirer’s chief executive, David Pecker, is a friend of Trump’s. Also Read:Ex-Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal Says She Had 9-Month Affair With Trump - And Deal to Keep Quiet Porn star Stephanie Clifford, known as Stormy Daniels, said in a lawsuit filed March 6 that her “hush agreement” with Trump is invalid. Trump attorney Michael Cohen agreed in October 2016 to pay her $130,000 to keep her from talking about an extramarital affair she said she had with Trump just over a decade ago. The White House did not immediately respond to TheWrap’s request for comment. But Trump has repeatedly denied both affairs. In her lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, McDougal claims that Michael Cohen, the president’s personal lawyer, was in talks with American Media behind her back and that both AMI and her lawyer at the time misled her about the deal. Also Read:Ronan Farrow on Enquirer's Ties to Trump: 'They Can Hold This Story Over the President' McDougal, who spoke to The New Yorker last month, after the publication obtained notes she took about Trump, said that A.M.I. “warned” that her breach of the non-disclosure agreement could result in “considerable monetary damages.” McDougal’s lawyer, Peter K. Stris, told the Times, A.M.I. was engaging in “a multifaceted effort to silence” his client. McDougal filed her suit just as Clifford is about to make her “60 Minutes” debut, which, according to The Washington Post, is tentatively scheduled to air this Sunday. Also Read:7 Biggest Shockers in Ronan Farrow's New Yorker Story About Trump and Karen McDougal Trump’s team is seeking $20 million from Clifford, arguing she violated her non-disclosure. The Wall Street Journal has reported that A.M.I., one of the country’s largest tabloid news providers, is known to buy damaging stories about allies for the sole purpose of burying them, a practice known as “catch and kill.” | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 01:32pm - 2469 days | #268 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I should probably add: that my posts on this thread (the ranting about Trump) are not 100% honest. But PU has allowed the thread to exist, instead of blocking or deleting it. Maybe the thread should be deleted. I use it to blow off steam, saying, again and again, how disappointed I am in my current President.  or  ?Edit: spam is probably the wrong word. I only post these messages on PU, not to the internet at large. And there is no commercial value to the messages. By saying spam, I just meant the messages can be considered annoying waste of space (by some who read them). Edited on Mar 20, 2018, 01:39pm | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 01:27pm - 2469 days | #267 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Honesty is nice. But kindness or politeness is also nice. PU has usually been a friendly place to visit. To exchange facts, knowledge, opinions on porn and other matters. The more people who participate with knowledge, the better the site will be. There are plenty of sites where people with differing opinions often start flame wars. Which is a poor way to blow off steam. And make those sites less friendly. Personally, I regard PU as a friendly site that welcomes members and visitors. So honesty and politeness help the site. | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 01:17pm - 2469 days | #2 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
There are plenty of software programs to edit videos. Some are free, some are pay-for, Perhaps some other PU members with greater experience using these programs can point you out which free or paid programs to use. I've never had the energy to edit edit either photos or videos, myself. If you are good with google searches, you can probably find one or more threads at PU that discusses your problem (using software to edit videos). Or you can do a google search on the best freeware to edit videos. But it's nice to get the opinion of a PU member who has used (free or pay) some of these programs, to explain how hard they are to use, their plus and minus points. | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 09:50am - 2469 days | #2 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Hacking is a world-wide problem. It's found in almost all countries: malware, spam, etc. Symantec (a software security company), makers of Norton Antivirus programs, lists the following global software threats for 2016 that Symantec found: 10. Vietnam — 2.16% 9. Japan — 2.25% 8. France — 2.35% 7. The United Kingdom — 2.61 6. Russia — 3.07% 5. Germany — 3.35% 4. India — 5.11% 3. Brazil —5.84% 2. China — 9.63% 1. The United States —23.96% The US proudly stands at #1. I would have thought Russia or China would be at the top of the list, since you read so many stories about Russia and China hackers in US newspapers. But no, Americans (from the US) top the list. | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 08:32am - 2469 days | #261 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
US agent goes on trial in border killing of Mexican teen Associated Press ANITA SNOW,Associated Press 1 hour 12 minutes ago PHOENIX (AP) — A rare second-degree murder trial of a U.S. Border Patrol agent accused of shooting across the international boundary into Mexico and killing a teenager is set to start with jury selection. The trial starting Tuesday U.S. District Court in Tucson comes amid President Donald Trump's crackdown on illegal immigration and his promise to build a wall along the 2,000-mile (3,200-kilometer) U.S.-Mexico border. Lonnie Swartz is accused of killing 16-year-old Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez five years ago. The teenager was on the street in Nogales, in the Mexican state of Sonora, just across the border from Nogales, Arizona. An autopsy showed the unarmed teen was hit 10 times, mostly from behind. Following jury selection, opening statements later Tuesday or on Wednesday, said Cosme Lopez, spokesman for the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. Lee Gelernt, a New York-based lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, said he believes Swartz will be the first border agent prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department in a fatal shooting across the international border. Gelernt is handling a civil lawsuit for the teen's mother, who is seeking monetary damages against Swartz. "This historically important trial is coming at a time when all eyes are on the border," he said. Prosecutors say Swartz opened fire at about 11:30 p.m. on Oct. 10, 2012, through the metal poles of a 20-foot (6-meter) fence that sits on a 25-foot (about 7.6-meter) embankment above Mexico's Calle Internacional, a street lined with homes and small businesses. About 20,000 people live on the Arizona side and about 300,000 live on the Mexico side, but the two communities linked by family members, trade and culture have long been referred to locally as "Ambos Nogales" — "Both Nogales" in Spanish. Swartz's lawyers have said Elena Rodriguez threw rocks just before he was shot in an attempt to create a distraction for drug smugglers and that the officer was justified in using lethal force. They want jurors to visit the site at night to experience the area after dark. Witnesses from the Mexico side of the border said they did not see the teen throw rocks and his relatives have denied he was helping drug smugglers, saying he was walking home after playing basketball. The U.S. Attorney's Office has said it won't dispute that the boy was throwing rocks, but it's unknown if he had any link to drug smugglers. They argue an unreasonable amount of force was used. Swartz pleaded not guilty after being indicted by a federal grand jury in 2015 and is currently on administrative leave and free on his own recognizance. The Border Patrol has not said if he is continuing to receive his salary. Defense attorney Sean Chapman has declined to comment while the trial is ongoing. A spokesman for the agents' union, the National Border Patrol Council, did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The case is expected to last more than a month and activists who oppose U.S. border policies say they will rally outside the courthouse. "For so long, prosecutors have been reluctant to charge Border Patrol agents with violent crimes," said John Fife, a retired Presbyterian minister who was active in the sanctuary movement that sheltered citizens of Central American countries who came to the U.S. in the 1980s fleeing civil war. "Now we will see if they can be held accountable." | |
|
||
| 03-20-18 07:41am - 2469 days | #260 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Fake news: A company in India that is partnering with the Trump Organization (Trump no longer runs the Trump Organization, his sons do that, but Trump retains an ownership interest in the Trump Organization) has been accused of fraud involving $150 million. However, the investors should not be worried. Since the Trump Organization is involved, Trump himself, or his sons, will make good on any investor losses, because the Trump name is gold, and the Trump family will treat fairly all investors in their projects. That is why America will be great again, under the leadership of Donald Trump. Also, Trump could easily persuade Congress to donate $150 to $300 million to any investors who lost money, because Trump loves all people, especially people who invest in his deals. ------ ------ Trump Org. partner in India accused of bilking investors Tim Sullivan, Associated Press Tim Sullivan, Associated Press 22 minutes ago NEW DELHI (AP) -- An Indian company that is partnering with the Trump Organization on an office tower project has been accused of running an elaborate real estate swindle that cheated investors out of nearly $150 million, according to complaints filed with Indian authorities. Ramesh Sanka, the former CEO of the real estate firm IREO, said in the documents obtained by The Associated Press that he saw "various acts of cheating, fraud and misappropriation of money" at his onetime employer that created "huge wrongful gains" for the company's managing director and his associates. The documents make no mention of the Trump Organization, and focus largely on two real estate deals that began years before the organization signed a 2016 agreement with IREO to partner on an office tower in Gurgaon, outside New Delhi. Sanka quit the company in late 2016 "because I was increasingly uncomfortable with the way in which IREO's business was being conducted," according to a police complaint he filed in late February in Gurgaon, a sprawling and ever-growing satellite city of New Delhi. In a statement at the time, Donald Trump Jr. said, "IREO is truly a fantastic group and we are looking forward to pushing the boundaries together to create what will soon be one of the most exciting and sought-after commercial towers in India." The Trump Organization has licensing agreements with all its Indian business partners, who build the properties and acquire the Trump name in exchange for a fee. The Trump Organization did not immediately respond to requests for comment from the AP. Sanka's accusations were first reported by The Washington Post. His statements form the basis for an Indian police complaint filed by two large international investors, the UK-based Children's Investment Fund Foundation, a philanthropy founded by British billionaire Chris Hohn, and New York-based Axon partners. The complaint accuses Lalit Goyal, IREO's managing director, of being at the heart of the alleged fraud, with Sanka's statement saying he "was the final decision maker on all matters" at IREO. The documents focus on two deals, one for 78 acres in the small town of Bhiwadi, about 30 miles from Gurgaon, and another for 37 acres of land in Gurgaon. Through a series of sub-deals, the documents say much of the investment money was channeled away from real estate developments and to Goyal and people close to him. The complaint filed by Axon and Children's Investment Fund Foundation says the Bhiwadi deal was "nothing but a sham planned by Lalit Goyal in conspiracy with various other accused persons to misappropriate about $62 million." A March 9 letter from Hohn and Dinakar Singh, Axon's managing partner, say Goyal "and related entities appear to have diverted funds" worth nearly $150 million, and that they have seen evidence "suggesting there may have been wrongdoing and theft well beyond these amounts." The letter, obtained by the AP, was sent to IREO investors. Goyal and other top IREO officials could not be reached for comment. The Children's Investment Fund Foundation and Axon had originally filed suit in Mauritius, where the IREO investment funds were incorporated, trying to pressure IREO to manage them better. In February, before accusations of mismanagement had shifted to accusations of fraud, Goyal told Barron's magazine that IREO carefully watched over investor money and that that "we are very hopeful they will get much more than what they invested back." Donald Trump Jr. recently finished a trip through India, promoting properties that have licensed the family name. The Trump Organization has five projects in India, making it the brand's largest market outside the United States. One complex is already open in the central Indian city of Pune, with other developments in various stages of construction in Kolkata and Mumbai, and two in Gurgaon. ___ Associated Press journalist Stephen Braun in Washington contributed to this report. | |
|
||
| 03-19-18 11:13pm - 2470 days | #258 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Trump attorney says that FBI plotted to exonerate Hilary Clinton and to frame our Glorious President for Life, Donald Trump, with a crime. Fake news is better than reading the Enquirer (do they still publish the Enquirer, or those other trash rags?). ------ ------ Former US attorney Joseph diGenova, who alleges FBI plot to frame Trump, joins Trump legal team NBC News Dartunorro Clark Mar 19th 2018 4:09PM President Donald Trump has added a longtime Washington lawyer to his legal team who has publicly promoted a conspiracy theory that officials in the FBI and Justice Department are plotting to frame the president with a "false crime" in the Russia investigation. Joseph diGenova, a former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, was recently joined Trump's legal team, Jay Sekulow, one of the president's lawyers, confirmed to NBC News Monday. "I have worked with Joe for many years and have full confidence that he will be a great asset in our representation of the president," Sekulow said in a statement. DiGenova has strongly touted Trump's claim that the Russia investigation is tainted by bias, with the lawyer telling Fox News this past January that there is a secret "brazen plot" by the FBI to "illegally exonerate Hillary Clinton and, if she didn't win the election, to then frame Donald Trump with a falsely created crime." "The motive would be that they didn't like Donald Trump, they didn't think that he was fit to be president, and they were going to do everything within their power to exonerate Hillary Clinton, and if she lost to frame Donald Trump with a false crime, because they didn't think he should be president," DiGenova told the network at the time. The news comes as Mueller was directly targeted by Trump, who called out the special counsel by name for the first time on Twitter over the weekend and Monday. The president characterized Mueller's Russia investigation as a "WITCH HUNT!" and said the probe "should never have been started" because it was "based on fraudulent activities and a Fake Dossier paid for by Crooked Hillary and the DNC, and improperly used in FISA COURT for surveillance of my campaign." DiGenova declined to comment. The story was first reported by The New York Times. | |
|
||
| 03-19-18 08:48pm - 2470 days | #253 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
I'm afraid I'm a tech primitive: I've never joined Facebook, twitter, or most social programs/services. But maybe I should join twitter so I can read directly the tweets of our President. How many PU members read Trump's tweets? ------ ------ The backlash against Facebook has destroyed $40 billion in market value in a matter of hours Written by Hanna Kozlowska Jason Karaian March 19, 2018 Following revelations that Trump consultant Cambridge Analytica collected and exploited the data of tens of millions of Facebook users without their permission, the company took a massive hit, losing about $40 billion in market value on Monday morning. As Facebook’s stock plummeted, so did CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s personal fortune, by almost $4 billion. The company faces several official investigations, and increased calls for government regulation. | |
|
||
| 03-19-18 08:42pm - 2470 days | #252 | |
|
lk2fireone (0)
Active User Posts: 3,618 Registered: Nov 14, '08 Location: CA |
Selling data on millions 'is the opposite of our business model,' says Facebook's Boz Devin Coldewey,TechCrunch 2 hours 30 minutes ago Facebook's former VP of ads has weighed in on the ongoing disaster involving his company's apparent negligence in allowing data on as many as 50 million users to be used for nefarious purposes by Cambridge Analytica. In a post on (what else) Facebook, Andrew "Boz" Bosworth gave variations on the line we've come to expect from tech in these situations: They're not supposed to do that, and anyway how could we have known? "This is the opposite of our business model," he wrote. "Our interests are aligned with users when it comes to protecting data." What reason could you possibly have to be skeptical of this declamation? He said much more than that, of course, and very earnestly indeed, but if you cut through the prevarication here's the simplified timeline: Facebook deliberately allows developers to collect a bunch of data from users who authorize it, plus a bunch of their friends. (But developers have to promise they won't use it in certain ways.) Shady people take advantage of this choice and collect as much data as possible for use off the Facebook network in ways Facebook can't predict or control. (The quiz app in question is surely just one of many — this was an incredible opportunity for data snatchers.) Facebook fails to predict or control use of the data it released, and fails to protect users who never even knew their data had been released. (It also fails to learn that it has failed to control it.) The rest is noise, as far as I'm concerned. Even if anyone really believes that sharing data about users is not the Facebook business model, who cares what its business model is? Whatever plausible sounding business model it had before didn't protect anyone, and didn't stop these characters from collecting and using data in all sorts of shady ways. Of course there's the strong possibility that Cambridge Analytica and others misused the data, didn't delete it as promised, performed unsanctioned analyses on it. Oh no! Who would have thought someone would do that? The real question was what was Facebook expecting when it handed out data on millions essentially on the honor system? Facebook's business model is monetizing your data (the data you give it, it must be said), one way or the other. It used to be one way, now it's the other. Soon it'll be yet another — but don't ever doubt that's at the core of every decision the company makes. This article originally appeared on TechCrunch. | |
|
||
| 1351-1400 of 3618 Posts | < Previous Page | 1 | 2 | 8 | 14 | 20 | 27 | Page 28 | 29 | 36 | 43 | 50 | 57 | 64 | 72 | 73 | Next Page > |
|
