Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, April 30, 2018

OTP 2018 Apr 30: Republicans in Congress return to baseball field nearly a year after gunman opened fire

As a light rain trickled down Wednesday, Republican members of Congress returned to a baseball field where a gunman critically wounded teammate Rep. Steve Scalise and shattered their sense of security nearly a year ago.

“Today is an emotional day,’’ said Texas Rep. Joe Barton, manager of the Republican congressional baseball team. “But it’s also a rebirth, a renewal. I’m proud of the team.’‘

On June 14, Republican lawmakers practicing for their annual charity baseball game against Democrats found themselves scrambling to dodge gunfire from a man behind a chain-link fence.

 

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 07:56 AM | 1655 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: congress, off topic, old people's medicine for fuel, politics, shooting

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 3 of 17 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  Last ›
   201. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 12:54 AM (#5663425)

Yeah. I have a hard time believing that Rhode Island exports $5.5 billion in airplanes. maybe deals are made there, but that's not the same. In fact, 16 states have airplanes listed as the largest export.
I don't believe the map, but you need to look more carefully. That's Connecticut. Rhode Island is listed as $187M in Iron and Steel Waste.
   202. Ray (CTL) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 12:58 AM (#5663426)
A quick trip down memory lane, to remind ourselves of how Keep Hope Alive started and why it's now applied to the TDSers re Trump and collusion:

898. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: October 28, 2016 at 01:20 PM (#5336650)

FBI reopens Clinton email investigation. Hopefully their tanktastic investigatory steps in the first go-round didn't compromise this part.

Keep hope alive!


1344. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: April 29, 2016 at 12:29 PM (#5208327)

I just saw a cloud float by my house that looked like a dead heat between Clinton and Trump. Keep hope alive.


1388. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 29, 2016 at 10:14 PM (#5231867)

Keep hope alive, Juice man. I'm sure you can find many more of those HillaryIsDoomed articles all the way up through her inauguration. It'll at least keep you away from teenaged girls.
   203. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 01:00 AM (#5663427)
We met yet learn that Trump colluded with Russia, but as of now there's no evidence for it,
There's documentary evidence for it. There is an email trail showing Trump Jr. meeting with an emissary from the Russian government to discuss how the latter could help them win the election.

If I have an email exchange involving the EVP of a company setting up a meeting with a competitor to discuss how they can charge more for their products, and the meeting actually takes place (involving not just the EVP, but another VP and the CFO), claiming that there's "no evidence" of a price-fixing conspiracy is, well, delusional.


EDIT: The CEO may be able to escape prosecution by saying that he wasn't involved. The EVP/VP/CFO may be able to escape prosecution by saying, "Well, that's not what we talked about. We never actually discussed price fixing at the meeting, and we never actually priced-fixed, and you can't prove otherwise." But saying that there's insufficient evidence to prosecute is not saying that there's no evidence.
   204. Ray (CTL) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 01:03 AM (#5663428)
And:

96. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 26, 2016 at 04:30 PM (#5307347)

Shooting the messenger is never a great idea, especially when the messenger has as good a track record as Nate. But just as that first debate in 2012 served as a wakeup call for the Obama campaign,** the sane reaction to a tightening race will shake any remaining complacency out of Clinton's.

Keep hope alive.


(The comment in italics is Andy, in case it wasn't obvious. Classic Andy, actually.)
   205. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 01:15 AM (#5663429)

This is why a few weeks ago I pushed back on the mindless cliche spewed at Trump that "Nobody is above the law." I noted that per the Constitution the president is above the law in various ways. IIRC you didn't agree with me then. I see you've come around now.
Nope. Try again. Read more carefully.
   206. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 01, 2018 at 01:30 AM (#5663430)
There is an email trail showing Trump Jr. meeting with an emissary from the Russian government to discuss how the latter could help them win the election.

Listening to someone claiming to have the goods on your political opponent is not a crime.
   207. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 01:33 AM (#5663431)
Nope. The American company had no dealings with -- let alone agreements with -- the Russian government.

They spy they hired did. It's a distinction without a difference. And laughably so.
Nope. Like FLTB, you apparently don't understand (a) the concept of an independent contractor, and (b) the difference between someone who works for the Russian government and the Russian government. (Or the meaning of the word "agreement," for that matter; what agreements did Steele have?)

The "American company" that Hillary hired through an intermediary (the faux degrees of separation here fooled nobody except apparently you)
False. I haven't even made an issue of the fact that Perkins Coie rather than Hillary hired Fusion. I've been willing to treat those as one and the same for the purposes of these conversations. That you don't understand the difference between that relationship and the Hillary/Fusion/Steele one speaks ill of your legal and logical thinking skills.
hired a spy who -- if the spy's own work product is to be believed -- obtained dirt on Hillary's political opponent from the Russian government. Then the spy peddled it to the US government and to the US media. All in Hillary's name.
Nope. The spy gave it to the US government in his own name, not in Hillary's name.

Nobody was fooled when Michael Cohen tried to pretend that David Dennison wasn't Donald Trump and nobody was fooled when Hillary hired intermediaries in an attempt to provide her with cover for what these intermediaries did in her name. Either you actually believe that she isn't responsible for what people who worked for her did for her, or you're the world's biggest patsy. She has played you and your cohorts for fools. She set up a ridiculous construct -- pretend walls of separation in a hopelessly transparent effort to insulate her from what they did -- and then got you to defend her on the basis of it.
Speaking of conspiracy theories, there is literally zero evidence for any of this. There is no evidence that Hillary hired anyone to provide cover or to shield anyone from anything. There is no evidence that Steele wasn't a true independent contractor, rather than an employee of Hillary's with "pretend walls of separation." (I'm not sure that you understand what the phrase "in her name" actually means, by the way. You're misusing it so badly I'd think you were Andy. Steele was literally doing exactly the opposite of doing these things in Hillary's name.)
   208. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 01:42 AM (#5663432)

Listening to someone claiming to have the goods on your political opponent is not a crime.
Whoosh!
   209. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 01:49 AM (#5663433)
Hillary hired people who hired people who hired someone to do something on behalf of Hillary. The something he did was not only for Hillary but paid for by Hillary with the compensation being for the work product he delivered and peddled. It's not like Steele went off and, say, started a drug smuggling operation and Hillary then said, "You know, this is not what I contracted for; I'm not paying you." Steele went off and did things that fell under the scope of what he was hired for and paid for, and he indeed got paid for doing the things that he did. Nobody said, "This isn't what we hired you for," and refused to pay him.
That's... sort of true, and yet utterly irrelevant.

Seriously, your weird Hillary dementia makes you completely unable to understand these issues. You should probably find an issue that you Don't Care about to spend time talking about, because it Isn't a Good Look for you to keep making these kind of bizarre mistakes, and you're much less likely to make them if you aren't so emotionally involved.
   210. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 01, 2018 at 02:31 AM (#5663434)
Vanity Fair has a fairly long Iowa Caucus focused excerpt from Chasing Hillary, the recently released book by NYT reporter Amy Chozick. Earlier coverage of the book makes it pretty clear that Chozick wanted to be liked by Hillary, very much wanted her to win, and seemed to agonize about her reporting not furthering those goals. Not much of that in this excerpt, but quite a bit about campaign logistical decisions designed to keep the press at a distance. Might be interesting to all those who insisted Hillary's superior organization would carry her to victory - "Organization Doesn't Mean ####: Inside The Beginning Of The End For The Clinton Campaign".
   211. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 02:32 AM (#5663435)

As has been explained to you repeatedly, Steele met with Russians who were not acting on behalf of the Russian government, while the Trump team met with someone explicitly said to be acting on behalf of the Russian government.

That's nonsense. If you believe Steele wasn't just making up stuff, then he was getting info from the Russian government. And that Russian who met once with the Trump team had far more contact with the Clinton camp.
He was getting info from sources in the Russian government, not from people acting on behalf of the Russian government. As I mentioned yesterday, the professor who Comey gave his memos to could be described as "getting info from the American government." But Comey was most certainly not acting on behalf of the American government when he gave Richman those memos. Government officials leak¹ information all the time. Often those leaks are directly authorized by the government. (Trial balloons, for instance.) Sometimes those leaks aren't explicitly authorized by the government but are done for the benefit of the government. (e.g., what McCabe says he did.) Sometimes those leaks are for personal reasons (e.g., what the OIG concludes McCabe actually did, or what Daniel Ellsberg did, or anonymous people taking shots at Ronny Jackson.) Sometimes those leaks are initiated by the government employee trying to get something out there; sometimes a reporter is seeking information about a topic and reaches out to people he knows in the government to give him some OTR stuff.


¹ This term is often used pejoratively, but here I am using this term broadly, to describe any disclosure of information. The vast majority of such disclosures are legal.
   212. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 02:37 AM (#5663436)

But yes, people here have made such claim about Trump personally colluding. David, for example, has suggested that Trump had timed his campaign statements to the release of the Wikileaks emails.
That suggestion has indeed been made here, but I don't think by me. Without an exhaustive review of my posts, I may have suggested that this was one form that a collusive strategy could have taken, but I don't think I affirmatively said that it did happen that way.
   213. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 02:38 AM (#5663437)

The North Korea situation is interesting. We can't know whether this will ultimately mark a turning point. The only thing we can be absolutely certain of is that if the North Korea situation improves Trump will have had nothing to do with it.
Strange that a declared non-supporter of Trump would care about that.
   214. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 06:16 AM (#5663440)
Mueller can indict Trump or his campaign/administration on a million non-collusion-related crimes and I won't care


...and then Dilbert or Dershowitz will write about it and you’ll care.
   215. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 01, 2018 at 06:42 AM (#5663441)
Of course not a single person here has made any such claim about Trump personally colluding,** but keep firing away at that straw horse.

You can expand my statement to Trump or his campaign; I wasn't attempting to parse words.


Okay, but it wouldn't be too hard to add "or his campaign" into your future comments,

But yes, people here have made such claim about Trump personally colluding. David, for example, has suggested that Trump had timed his campaign statements to the release of the Wikileaks emails. And you -- let's not forget your evidence of Trump personally colluding -- said that Trump colluded by joking that he hoped the Russians would find Hillary's missing emails.

I didn't say that those "joking" comments amounted to collusion, which requires at minimum a certain amount of coordination.** I said that they were evidence that Trump was openly encouraging the Russians to help him win the election.

Not the same thing.

Whether his role went beyond that is something I'm skeptical about, but then I'm looking forward to the dozens of questions that Mueller has prepared for Trump. Those will be enough to keep you and Dershowitz occupied for quite some time.

** As I wrote in #192, if Trump had personally colluded with the Russians, by this time he would've bragged about it at least half a dozen times. And then said he was just joking.
   216. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:28 AM (#5663443)
Mueller can indict Trump or his campaign/administration on a million non-collusion-related crimes and I won't care


What part of "illegal" do you not understand? Where was this broadminded disregard for the law during various other investigations. Funny how "I don't care about laws" only evolved once Trump was under investigation.

But hey, care about what you want, I assure you Trump and/or his campaign being indicted for a million crimes (give or take a few hundred thousand) does matter to most people and most voters. So even if YOU don't care the rest of the nation does indeed care.
   217. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:37 AM (#5663445)
A quick trip down memory lane, to remind ourselves of how Keep Hope Alive started and why it's now applied to the TDSers re Trump and collusion:


Was Hillary indicted, found guilty and sent to prison last night? But sure go with that, and hey Hillary wasn't sent to prison, but she did lose an election (for many reasons), which means it is utterly impossible for Trump or his legal campaign to be in legal trouble now ... because ... reasons. Hopeful reasons. Or something.
   218. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:40 AM (#5663446)
Right. Legal things. Commonly done things, like opposition research. And?


Asked and answered many times, but: In the course of that "opposition research," colluded with Russia far more deeply and frequently than Trump.

That is more than a little different than what Trump did.


Indeed. By the very standards established by the TDS brigade before we knew the dossier was a Herself production, what she did was far worse.
   219. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:44 AM (#5663448)
As has been explained to you repeatedly, Steele met with Russians who were not acting on behalf of the Russian government,


You and yours have literally no way of knowing that, and given the lack of real pluralism in Russia it's a rather absurd belief. Nor does the dossier say any such thing.
   220. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:46 AM (#5663449)
There is obviously a difference between hiring someone who asks contacts in the Russian government for information and meeting someone who is an agent of the Russian government.


No -- there's no difference. Hiring someone to get dirt from the Russian government is actually worse than saying "yes" when Russia comes to you.
   221. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:48 AM (#5663450)
That's not, as FLTB thinks, from the Pentagon Papers case, which was only about whether the publication of that information can be enjoined.)


Good effort for the target demo, but I never said anything about the holding of the case. Not only could the Times publish the illegally-obtained information, but there would have been nothing untoward about the Times giving anyone advance knowledge of when the publication was going to occur. Same applies to Wikileaks and the DNC emails, notwithstanding the various bizarre theories being proffered.
   222. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:53 AM (#5663451)
Hillary also actually got dirt from Russia, unlike Trump. So the scoreboard is as follows:

1. Hillary went to Russia to get dirt; Russia came to Trump to give dirt.
2. The number of Hillary's dirt-seeking contacts with Russia dwarfs Trump's
3. Hillary actually got dirt on Trump from Russia; Trump didn't get dirt on Hillary
4. Hillary moved heaven and earth to try to peddle her dirt; Trump did nothing

Kind of a rout, actually.
   223. Stormy JE Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:55 AM (#5663452)
You and yours have literally no way of knowing that, and given the lack of real pluralism in Russia it's a rather absurd belief. Nor does the dossier say any such thing.
Not only do we have no idea have literally no way of knowing that, Steele didn't meet with these Russians, at least not in Russia, as he hasn't visited since leaving the clandestine service.

At this point, probably the best thing one may say about Steele's dossier is that Kremlin agents compromised his reports.
   224. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:56 AM (#5663453)
On the very first page of the dossier:

"Source[] A ... a senior Russian foreign ministry figure."

Really now. The beclowning is becoming a bit over the top.
   225. Stormy JE Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:58 AM (#5663454)
Hillary also actually got dirt from Russia, unlike Trump.
Also, Team Hillary got dirt on Trump from Ukraine. And while Ukraine is an ally, what officials from Kyiv did was a pretty big no-no.
   226. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:58 AM (#5663455)
Yup, that hill they have chosen, it is a nice hill. Kind of irrelevant, but a nice hill indeed.Too bad all they have to defend themselves are stale talking points and tired lies. Poor Trumpkins.
   227. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 07:58 AM (#5663456)
He was getting info from sources in the Russian government, not from people acting on behalf of the Russian government.


Pure invention on both ends. The only way you get there is the conclusory and tautological and unproven, "The Russian government wanted Trump to win." But in fact, the Russian government wanted to #### disturb, and the way to #### disturb is to feed each of the candidates dirt on the other.

Plus the idea of some kind of dissident faction within the Kremlin that chose Hillary over Trump, against Putin's objections, is laughable. Pure fantasy. There's no reason whatever to believe Source A, a "senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure," was some kind of dissident. None. Zero.
   228. Lassus Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:05 AM (#5663457)
Yup, that Hillary they have chosen
Fixed. I feel like SBB and JE will see Hillary in their final moments on earth, and not because she's standing over them armed in a Berlin alley, ala Atomic Blonde.
   229. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:21 AM (#5663459)
Add tautology to the (really really) long list of words and concepts stretchy doesn't understand, but uses because he thinks it sounds like something a smart person would say. Of course a smart person would use the word correctly.

For stretchy:

In rhetoric, a tautology (from Greek ταὐτός, "the same" and λόγος, "word/idea") is an argument which repeats an assertion using different phrasing. The proposition, as stated, is thus logically irrefutable, while obscuring the lack of evidence or valid reasoning supporting the stated conclusion.


The sentence "The Russian government wanted Trump to win" is not a tautology. It may be true, it may be false, but it is most certainly not a tautology.

In the future stretchy feel free to use the word correctly. You will sound smarter. You are welcome.
   230. Stormy JE Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:22 AM (#5663460)
Fixed. I feel like SBB and JE will see Hillary in their final moments on earth, and not because she's standing over them armed in a Berlin alley, ala Atomic Blonde.
You're overdue for another long overseas holiday.
   231. Greg K Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:30 AM (#5663462)
Fixed. I feel like SBB and JE will see Hillary in their final moments on earth, and not because she's standing over them armed in a Berlin alley, ala Atomic Blonde.

I thought you were going to go with Richard Nixon as the thing everyone sees just before they die, as in The Nice Guys.
   232. Lassus Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:38 AM (#5663464)
You're overdue for another long overseas holiday.

Like Rubio, leaving behind his party on their Trump tax cut?

(BTW, eight days is not long.)
   233. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:39 AM (#5663465)
Good effort for the target demo, but I never said anything about the holding of the case.
Not surprising, since you don't know the holding of the case. Nevertheless, you were obviously referring to the holding of the case, or the mention would've been a complete non sequitur. You could have just as easily said "Roe v. Wade" or "Yankees vs. Red Sox" in the spot where you said "Pentagon Papers" and it would have made just as much (little) sense.
   234. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:40 AM (#5663466)

Plus the idea of some kind of dissident faction within the Kremlin that chose Hillary over Trump, against Putin's objections, is
something that FLTB made up. Nobody on the planet except him has suggested any such thing.
   235. Lassus Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:43 AM (#5663467)
GREG! I took a photograph of a historical plaque in Scotland because of you. Here's your quiz: What relation does Dunkeld, Scotland have with a Canadian historical figure?
   236. BDC Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:50 AM (#5663470)
Rhode Island is listed as $187M in Iron and Steel Waste

There are some goofy things in that map. I saw "needles" for Minnesota and figured it was sewing needles, imagining some sort of Adam-Smith-like factory town … but of course they mean medical supplies. But for other states they group all medical equipment together.

And then Idaho, which has "chips" so I assumed potato chips.
   237. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:55 AM (#5663473)
‘So disgraceful’: Trump lashes out at publication of special counsel questions
President Trump lashed out Tuesday at the publication of questions that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III seeks to ask him as part of the Russia probe and possible attempts to obstruct the inquiry.

In a morning tweet, Trump said it was “disgraceful” that the 49 questions were provided to the New York Times, which published them Monday night.

“So disgraceful that the questions concerning the Russian Witch Hunt were ‘leaked’ to the media,” Trump wrote on Twitter.

It appears the leak did not come from Mueller’s office. The Times reported that the questions were provided to Trump’s lawyers as part of negotiations over the terms of a potential Trump interview. The list was then provided to the Times by a person outside Trump’s legal team, the paper said.

In his tweet, Trump also falsely asserts there are no questions about “Collusion.”

While the questions are wide-ranging — and include more related to possible obstruction of justice — the list includes 13 related to possible cooperation between the Trump campaign and Russia. ...

   238. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 08:56 AM (#5663474)
There are some goofy things in that map.


Yeah, I flat out don't believe it. It is clearly the result of poor data and/or test construction. It is a cool idea for a map though and I wish it were better. Oh well.
   239. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:07 AM (#5663478)
Not surprising, since you don't know the holding of the case.


From context I have an obvious guess, but can you please explain what is meant by "holding of the case" in lay terms?
   240. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:09 AM (#5663480)
Not surprising, since you don't know the holding of the case. Nevertheless, you were obviously referring to the holding of the case, or the mention would've been a complete non sequitur.


No, I obviously was not since what I said had nothing to do with the holding of the case. Nor was what I said remotely a "non sequitur."
   241. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:10 AM (#5663481)
The sentence "The Russian government wanted Trump to win" is not a tautology.


LOL. BBTF's D student strikes again.
   242. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:12 AM (#5663482)
Plus the idea of some kind of dissident faction within the Kremlin that chose Hillary over Trump, against Putin's objections, is
something that FLTB made up. Nobody on the planet except him has suggested any such thing.


You've not only "suggested" it, but "said" it a number of times. Not in those exact terms of course, but it's the correct summation of your "argument." But the argument is pure fantasy. There's no reason whatever to believe that Source A wasn't speaking "on behalf of" the Russian government and there isn't a stitch of evidence suggesting he/she wasn't. And conversely, there's no reason to believe NKL was. She might have said she was, but then again she said she was going to deliver dirt on Herself and that wasn't true.
   243. Stormy JE Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:20 AM (#5663486)
Strzok-Page texts show efforts to communicate on personal accounts:
Anti-Trump FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page seemingly communicated about “work-related” matters on their personal accounts, according to newly released texts, raising questions about whether they tried to conceal certain discussions from the bureau.

The Justice Department last week released a series of redacted Strzok-Page text messages to congressional committees. The messages, though, show the FBI officials repeatedly referring to personal accounts, like “gmail” and “imsg” — short for the text message system on iPhones, iMessage.
Bureau personnel transmitting work-related items, particularly federal records pertaining to an ongoing investigation, over private e-mail accounts is a pretty big no-no, Count. It's a clear violation of FBI internal procedures.

And of course, it raises the question: *Why* did they feel the need to resort to private e-mail accounts to transmit such info? Um...
   244. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:21 AM (#5663487)
This is what happens you probably start by thinking you'll cleverly troll, but then wind up believing your trolling.

You wind up an incel.
   245. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:31 AM (#5663490)
LOL. BBTF's D student strikes again.


Concession accepted. Thanks.
   246. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:31 AM (#5663491)
Why are these supposed questions Mueller wants to ask Trump all about things the Trumpkins have assured us never happened, weren't crimes if they did, and things Hillary did anyway?

Why does Mueller want to know if Trump discussed Manafort's Russian outreach with him if Manafort has been charged with crimes having nothing to do collusion. Sorry, "collusion". With "Russia".

Doesn't Mueller read the OTP?
   247. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:34 AM (#5663493)
And of course, it raises the question: *Why* did they feel the need to resort to private e-mail accounts to transmit such info? Um...

So, Mr. Curiosity, *why* does Trump feel the need to keep his tax returns hidden from the public?

(But congrats, of sorts. I see you've now graduated from The Daily Caller to Fox News pundits when it comes to getting your talking points.)
   248. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:35 AM (#5663494)
Why are these supposed questions Mueller wants to ask Trump all about things the Trumpkins have assured us never happened, weren't crimes if they did,


Because he wants to do a thorough investigation, unlike the tanked email investigation.

A lot of Trump's interactions with his subordinate officials are of course covered by executive privilege. Indeed, Comey violated Trump's privilege by revealing their work-related communications.
   249. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:37 AM (#5663495)

A lot of Trump's interactions with his subordinate officials are of course covered by executive privilege.


And the ones that aren't would be covered by executive time.
   250. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:38 AM (#5663496)
Why are these supposed questions Mueller wants to ask Trump all about things the Trumpkins have assured us never happened, weren't crimes if they did, and things Hillary did anyway?

Why does Mueller want to know if Trump discussed Manafort's Russian outreach with him if Manafort has been charged with crimes having nothing to do collusion. Sorry, "collusion". With "Russia".


Deep State Conspiracy designed to overturn the election. Next?
   251. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:38 AM (#5663497)
So, Mr. Curiosity, *why* does Trump feel the need to keep his tax returns hidden from the public?


It's interesting that you bring up Trump's tax returns, because that's a good marker to see if anyone is actually principled. Substitute "Trump's tax returns" for "DNC emails," imagine Russia hacking Trump's tax returns and all other facts being the same ... and ask yourselves if the usual suspects would have the same position on this whole matter.

The answer is quite clear indeed.
   252. Stormy JE Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:42 AM (#5663500)
Why are these supposed questions Mueller wants to ask Trump all about things the Trumpkins have assured us never happened, weren't crimes if they did, and things Hillary did anyway?
Most of the 49 questions focus on obstruction or relate to events that may have happened *after* the election. Only nine deal with the campaign.

So... yay?
   253. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:43 AM (#5663502)
I am amused with how excited everyone is getting over the leaked questions. I guess it goes to show how tight a ship Mueller has been running.

EDIT: Allow me to alter this a bit. I am amused, because I think people are focusing on the wrong things. My understanding is for the majority of the questions Mueller already knows the answers from other sources. So in that sense it is interesting because it lays out (very roughly) what Mueller knows.
   254. Lassus Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:45 AM (#5663503)
seemingly communicated about “work-related” matters on their personal accounts, according to newly released texts, raising questions about whether they tried to conceal certain discussions from the bureau.

FOX as usual is fucking hilarious; and speaking of, Occam's dildo suggests possibly other reasons why a work-related affair would want to be off work email.


Hear from Rubio's office yet, JE?
   255. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:46 AM (#5663506)
Most of the 49 questions focus on obstruction or relate to events that may have happened *after* the election. Only nine deal with the campaign.


It is rather bizarre that Mueller is so insistent about grilling Trump about his interactions with his executive subordinates. Trump would certainly be on solid ground either just telling him to stick it, or claiming executive privilege. The questions in that theme very much do intrude on inherent presidential prerogatives.
   256. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:51 AM (#5663509)
I, for one, am waiting with bated breath to learn how Jason and SBB are going to blame incel mass murderers on Hillary Clinton.
   257. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:52 AM (#5663511)
I, for one, am waiting with bated breath to learn how Jason and SBB are going to blame incel mass murderers on Hillary Clinton.


Had she had sex with them, as they were owed, there would have been no such murder. Come on that one is easy.
   258. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:52 AM (#5663512)
I said long ago that Islamist terrorism was, at base, a product of sexual repression and now it appears that the phenomenon has spread to the "incels."

Hardly shocking. Modern communications give women even more contact with more appealing men, and make more appealing men seem more available (*) -- so there's even less need for them to psychologically settle for an incel.

(*) Though this is often a mirage.
   259. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:57 AM (#5663514)
Americans Are A Lonely Lot, And Young People Bear The Heaviest Burden

More than half of survey respondents — 54 percent — said they always or sometimes feel that no one knows them well. Fifty-six percent reported they sometimes or always felt like the people around them "are not necessarily with them." And 2 in 5 felt like "they lack companionship," that their "relationships aren't meaningful" and that they "are isolated from others."

The survey found that the average loneliness score in America is 44, which suggests that "most Americans are considered lonely," according to the report released Tuesday by the health insurer.


I am a bit skeptical*, but for what it is worth.

* As I am of any single study. Plus they make some leaps seemingly not justified by the data.
   260. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:58 AM (#5663516)
I hope and assume that the findings of greater American loneliness don't come as a shock to anyone.
   261. Lassus Posted: May 01, 2018 at 09:59 AM (#5663518)
#258 is an all-timer.
   262. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:02 AM (#5663522)
#258 is an all-timer.


Nah, you give me too much credit. It's just another truth in a long line of them.

Don't complicate things. Humans are animals, hotwired through evolution. I know it's kind of the leftist thing to imagine all that can be overcome through socialization (*), but that's pure claptrap.

(*) Or even stronger -- is simply the product of socialization.
   263. Lassus Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:06 AM (#5663526)
Nah, you give me too much credit. It's just another truth in a long line of them.

Someone is certainly giving you too much credit, and it isn't me.
   264. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:07 AM (#5663527)
It is rather bizarre that Mueller is so insistent about grilling Trump about his interactions with his executive subordinates. Trump would certainly be on solid ground either just telling him to stick it, or claiming executive privilege. The questions in that theme very much do intrude on inherent presidential prerogatives.


So he's thorough and bizarre?
   265. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:09 AM (#5663529)
#258 is an all-timer.


Indeed.

I think the new Primate welcome pack should include it under the "Why does everybody pick on this SBB guy and think he's a loon" section.
   266. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:17 AM (#5663535)
So he's thorough and bizarre?


Yep.
   267. Traderdave Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:19 AM (#5663537)
I think the new Primate welcome pack should include it under the "Why does everybody pick on this SBB guy and think he's a loon" section.


Second only to Ray's "Trump is so smart that smart people who think they are smarter than me have no idea how smart Trump (and especially his supporters, most particularly a smart lawyer who was smart enough to but a smartly decorated Trump condo) really is because he's so smart" post a while back.

Anyone have a link to that one?


   268. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:21 AM (#5663538)
Most of the 49 questions focus on obstruction or relate to events that may have happened *after* the election. Only nine deal with the campaign.


When did you become aware of the Trump Tower meeting?

What involvement did you have in the communication strategy, including the release of Donald Trump Jr.’s emails?

During a 2013 trip to Russia, what communication and relationships did you have with the Agalarovs and Russian government officials?

What communication did you have with Michael D. Cohen, Felix Sater and others, including foreign nationals, about Russian real estate developments during the campaign?

What discussions did you have during the campaign regarding any meeting with Mr. Putin? Did you discuss it with others?

What discussions did you have during the campaign regarding Russian sanctions?

What involvement did you have concerning platform changes regarding arming Ukraine?

During the campaign, what did you know about Russian hacking, use of social media or other acts aimed at the campaign?

What knowledge did you have of any outreach by your campaign, including by Paul Manafort, to Russia about potential assistance to the campaign?

What did you know about communication between Roger Stone, his associates, Julian Assange or WikiLeaks?

What did you know during the transition about an attempt to establish back-channel communication to Russia, and Jared Kushner’s efforts?

   269. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:21 AM (#5663539)
Well, I guess we know SBB isn't getting laid either.
   270. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:36 AM (#5663546)
Wheeeeeeeee!

Jim Acosta

@Acosta

Source close to Trump says National Enquirer story on Michael Cohen appears to be a strong sign the president is turning against his personal attorney. Asked whether a message is being sent, Cohen replied: “what do you think.”
8:45 PM - Apr 30, 2018
   271. Omineca Greg Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:36 AM (#5663547)
Problems with Rankin Inlet runway lights leave passengers in limbo for more than 21 hours
Plane attempted to land in community twice before returning to Winnipeg airport

What was supposed to be a two-hour flight from Winnipeg to Rankin Inlet, Nunavut, turned into a day of airport-hopping, leaving passengers hungry and exhausted.

Alice Simik boarded her flight to Rankin Inlet around 4 p.m. in Winnipeg last Thursday, but she arrived 21 hours later, after a number of things went wrong.

"It's tiring," she said. "If you would be travelling on the snowmobile for that long, I'm sure that your body would be very exhausted with barely any strength."

She said there were children and elders on the plane and passengers were barely able to sleep or eat.

After takeoff from Winnipeg, the Calm Air flight, operated by First Air, was first diverted to Churchill, Man. because of a medical situation with one of the passengers.

In Churchill, the crew learned the runway lights in Rankin Inlet were broken. Rankin Inlet airport workers laid out emergency runway lighting, and the 38 passengers and four crew members attempted to complete the journey after sunset.

Twice, the plane approached Rankin Inlet, and both times the plane had to return to the tarmac in Churchill.

Passengers eventually got off the plane in Winnipeg at 5 a.m. Two hours later, Simik and other passengers who were eager to get to Rankin Inlet were boarding again. This time they made it. They landed Friday afternoon.


The multiple legs between Winnipeg, Rankin Inlet and Churchill ultimately covered a total distance of about 3,800 kilometres.

The incident was "regretful," according to Shawn Roy, vice-president of operations and general manager for Calm Air.

Simik said passengers received $200 in compensation for the delays.

Airport workers in Rankin Inlet were able to fix the runway lights by Sunday evening.

"This is a bad time of year for runway lighting because the cabling is all underground," said John Hawkins, assistant deputy minister for transportation with the Government of Nunavut.

Hawkins said this problem comes up every spring in Nunavut airports when ice thaws and refreezes in the lighting circuits underground.

Flare pots are used as emergency lighting, but "pilots make the call about whether they can land," said Hawkins. Approach lights at the airport have also been out of order for over a month.

Airports across Nunavut are more susceptible to electrical problems because of extreme weather, and the government can expect the need for repairs in about one community per year.

"It can happen in Montreal, Calgary, or anywhere it freezes and thaws," said Hawkins. "Unfortunately it doesn't happen in a predictable place."


link, worth it for photos of Arctic runway using flare pots.

And people here think their flights are bad.

Jimmy Cliff wrote a song about the exact same thing happening to him.
   272. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:38 AM (#5663549)
Jimmy Cliff wrote a song about the exact same thing happening to him.


Man, do I love that song. Movie is pretty good, too.
   273. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:39 AM (#5663550)
I am amused with how excited everyone is getting over the leaked questions. I guess it goes to show how tight a ship Mueller has been running.

It's been said before, but one of the points Comey made in his book-related Q&A event last night on C-SPAN2 was this:
PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE NOTHING IS COMING FROM PEOPLE WHO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. [APPLAUSE] NOT PICKING ON THE MEDIA, BUT THE SOURCES ARE DEFENSE LAWYERS, PEOPLE AROUND THEM AND NOT ROBERT MUELLER'S OPERATION WHICH IS TIGHT AS A DRONE. NONE OF US KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE INVESTIGATION.

The quote begins at 24:27 of the video.


   274. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:42 AM (#5663553)
Right, because if James Comey says it, it just has to be true.
   275. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:50 AM (#5663556)

From context I have an obvious guess, but can you please explain what is meant by "holding of the case" in lay terms?
The holding of a case is -- as you probably guessed -- the court's determination of law in a case. (There's also something called "dicta," which is a legal determination by a court that isn't necessary for the court's ruling. Typically, dicta is not binding precedent, but; many circuits treat dicta from the Supreme Court as binding.) Findings of fact specific to a case are usually not included in the word holding, although there's no hard and fast rules here. The holding of Roe v. Wade is that the 14th amendment protects a right to abortion subject to its trimester guidelines.
   276. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:50 AM (#5663557)
As Comey also pointed out last night, and as others have noted before, not being under oath for any of those questions won't free anyone (including Trump) from any possible perjury charges if he should lie in response to any of them.
INTERVIEWER: SHOULD HILLARY CLINTON HAVE BEEN CHARGED WITH A CRIME?

COMEY: NO.

INTERVIEWER: WHEN SHE WAS INTERVIEWED WHY WASN'T SHE PUT UNDER OATH?

COMEY: IT DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S STILL A CRIME TO LIE DURING THE INTERVIEW. IT'S INCONSEQUENTIAL IN TERMS OF THE STRATEGY OF THE INTERVIEWERS.
   277. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:51 AM (#5663559)

Simik said passengers received $200 in compensation for the delays.
Isn't that a bit misleading? Even though those wacky Canadians use a "$", they mean two hundred Canadian dollars.
   278. Omineca Greg Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:52 AM (#5663560)
Man, do I love that song

Yep, brilliant song.

It's a perfect example of an artist taking a personal experience, in this case the unexpected death(heart attack at age 38) of Cliff's producer, mentor, and friend, Leslie Kong, and writing something that can be related to by anybody.
   279. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:55 AM (#5663564)
The holding of a case is -- as you probably guessed -- the court's determination of law in a case.


Thanks. That is what I would have guessed, but IANAL so it is nice to have the real details. Much appreciated.
   280. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: May 01, 2018 at 10:58 AM (#5663565)
Simik and other passengers who were eager to get to Rankin Inlet
This seems like English, but I can't quite seem to understand it. Do they have a good bakery or something?
   281. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:00 AM (#5663566)
As Comey also pointed out last night, and as others have noted before, not being under oath for any of those questions won't free anyone (including Trump) from any possible perjury charges if he should lie in response to any of them.


Yes, it will free him from any possible perjury charges. It won't free him from 1001 charges for lying to federal officials.
   282. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:01 AM (#5663567)
Move over, Pujols! Outta the way, Miggy! Make room for the newest member of the exclusive 3000 Club!

In 466 days, President Trump has made 3,001 false or misleading claims

So what's the over/under for the date that he passes Pete? Can he do it by November 6th? And will Ray get an invite to the party that Dilbert throws in celebration of his leader's brilliance?

   283. Lassus Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:05 AM (#5663570)
Simik and other passengers who were eager to get to Rankin Inlet
This seems like English, but I can't quite seem to understand it. Do they have a good bakery or something?


They seem to have a Tim Hortons.
   284. Omineca Greg Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:06 AM (#5663572)
This seems like English, but I can't quite seem to understand it. Do they have a good bakery or something?

ᑲᖏᕿᓂᖅ has three Tim Hortons!

To answer your inevitable next question, 2800 people live in Rankin Inlet.

For Nunavut, it's actually a big deal, it was runner-up to Iqaluit in the plebiscite choosing Nunavut's capital.

Double Double to Lassus.
   285. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:07 AM (#5663573)
Why are you guys talking about Narnia like it is a real place? ;)
   286. Lassus Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:08 AM (#5663575)
To answer your inevitable next question, 2800 people live in Rankin Inlet.

More than Baker Lake. Barely, though.

Man, those places are up there.
   287. Tom T Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:09 AM (#5663576)
At any rate I wouldn't describe veterans as "faking it"; I think the real problem is orthogonal to that. The main problem is the _system_. The government is so lax in honoring veterans claims of PTSD that it has to be by de facto design. There are a great many people who served in the military who are living virtually completely normal lives but who are enabled to claim 70% disability or even 100% disability. A large swathe of these people who served never actually saw active combat, or never were deployed overseas. (Some of them were working in, e.g., hospital wards or cancer wards.) I wouldn't describe them as "faking it" and I don't know what the percentage is, but a large percentage of people who served in the military are (a) living virtually normal lives, and (b) collecting a lot of disability. Tens of thousands of dollars a year.

If that's the system we want -- and it seems to be -- fine. I happen to be of the mind that if we're dealing with a wounded-warrior type injury -- lost a leg in the field, for example -- that should be compensated completely and at a high sum. But the injury scale goes down from there to the point where we're paying up the wazoo to claims (both physical and psychological) that are borderline at best, or evidence-free at worst.


Sorry for the long excerpt. Just had to see it all again to believe it had been spouted.

He actually goes from "PTSD must be getting ignored by design" to essentially claiming that only guys who lost a leg are worthy of compensation, because that whole PTSD thing is "borderline" or "evidence-free".

Ray must do work for the NFL or NCAA...this sounds like the typical "relative to..." argument that idiots like Casson and Pellman try to spout all the time. (And if Ray DOESN'T do work for them, I'l have pass his name on to Hainline or the morons running the CARE Consortium...they'd LOVE to have a lapdog like him.)
   288. Stormy JE Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:15 AM (#5663582)
Jim Acosta

@Acosta

Source close to Trump says National Enquirer story on Michael Cohen
Anything's possible but the idea that Acosta has a source who's truly "close to Trump" seems LOL-worthy.
   289. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:16 AM (#5663583)
I wouldn't describe them as "faking it" and I don't know what the percentage is, but a large percentage of people who served in the military are (a) living virtually normal lives, and (b) collecting a lot of disability. Tens of thousands of dollars a year.
Speaking of "evidence-free".

PTSD is a thing.
Probably, some people are milking the system. For lack of a better word, that's deplorable and anyone found to be faking it should be (IMO) severely punished.
Claims that "75%" or even "a large percentage" are guilty of some manner of fraud are, at best, speculation; at worst, harmful.
   290. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:17 AM (#5663585)

A lot of Trump's interactions with his subordinate officials are of course covered by executive privilege. Indeed, Comey violated Trump's privilege by revealing their work-related communications.
Speaking of D students, at least they matriculated at their schools, as opposed to people who only attended Fake Law School.

FLTB is trying to sound sophisticated by using legal-sounding terms like "executive privilege," but his statement is gibberish. Executive privilege is an evidentiary privilege (of uncertain parameters -- it's not statutory). That means that it covers testimony/evidence. To whatever extent it exists, it simply doesn't apply to private speech outside the context of a hearing. If your priest (rabbi, minister, imam, etc.) is subpoenaed to testify about what you spoke about in a spiritual counseling context, you can assert the priest-penitent privilege to quash the subpoena; forcing him to testify would violate said privilege. But if your priest (rabbi, minister, imam, etc.) goes on television and blabs about what you told him, that privilege isn't implicated. The priest may be fired or go to hell for breaking the confessional seal; you might even be able to sue him. But he hasn't violated the priest-penitent privilege. Executive privilege may allow Comey and Trump to refuse to answer questions about their discussions if Trump decides to invoke it. (If Trump doesn't invoke it, as when Comey testified to Congress last July, then Comey can testify.) No court has ever ruled that it prevents someone like Comey, as a former executive branch official, from testifying if he chooses, even over Trump's objection. But it most certainly does not apply in any way to Comey talking to the media about those conversations. It's a category error.
   291. Omineca Greg Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:18 AM (#5663586)
More than Baker Lake. Barely, though.

2000 people, 12 different ethnic groups!

Ahiarmiut/Ihalmiut, originally from the north of Back River area, and from Ennadai Lake
Akilinirmiut, originally from the Akiliniq Hills, Thelon River area of Beverly Lake, Dubawnt Lake, Aberdeen Lake
Hanningajurmiut, originally from Garry Lake
Harvaqtuurmiut, originally from the Kazan River area
Hauniqturmiut, originally from Whale Cove's south, between Sandy Point and Arviat
Iluilirmiut/Illuilirmiut, originally from Adelaide Peninsula (Iluilik), Chantrey Inlet area
Kihlirnirmiut, originally from the Garry Lake area between Bathurst Inlet, Cambridge Bay
Natsilingmiut, originally from Baker Lake area between Gjoa Haven, Taloyoak, Kugaaruk, Repulse Bay
Padlermiut, originally from the Baker Lake to Arviat area
Qaernermiut, originally from the lower Thelon River, Baker Lake, Chesterfield Inlet, Corbett Inlet areas, between Rankin Inlet and Whale Cove
Utkuhiksalingmiut, originally from the Back River and Gjoa Haven/Wager Bay area
Everybody else

And people say Canada isn't diverse.
   292. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:19 AM (#5663588)

No -- there's no difference. Hiring someone to get dirt from the Russian government is actually worse than saying "yes" when Russia comes to you.
Not only is that obviously not true, but it's also irrelevant, since Hillary didn't hire anyone to get dirt from the Russian government.
   293. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:22 AM (#5663590)
Speaking of "evidence-free".

PTSD is a thing.
Probably, some people are milking the system. For lack of a better word, that's deplorable and anyone found to be faking it should be (IMO) severely punished.
Claims that "75%" or even "a large percentage" are guilty of some manner of fraud are, at best, speculation; at worst, harmful.


QFT.

I admit I sort of skipped over this when it was originally posted, but yeah, pretty much.
   294. Stormy JE Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:23 AM (#5663591)
INTERVIEWER: SHOULD HILLARY CLINTON HAVE BEEN CHARGED WITH A CRIME?

COMEY: NO.

INTERVIEWER: WHEN SHE WAS INTERVIEWED WHY WASN'T SHE PUT UNDER OATH?

COMEY: IT DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S STILL A CRIME TO LIE DURING THE INTERVIEW. IT'S INCONSEQUENTIAL IN TERMS OF THE STRATEGY OF THE INTERVIEWERS.
One of the more salient questions would have been why, when the question of criminal activity hinged almost completely on Hillary's intent, did Comey wait until months after the exoneration memo had been drafted and edited to have her interviewed?
   295. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:23 AM (#5663592)
FLTB is trying to sound sophisticated by using legal-sounding terms like "executive privilege," but his statement is gibberish.


Uh, no -- I am sophisticated and "executive privilege" isn't a "legal-sounding term" -- it's a legal term.
   296. . Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:26 AM (#5663594)
Not only is that obviously not true, but it's also irrelevant, since Hillary didn't hire anyone to get dirt from the Russian government.


Yeah, she did. As Ray noted, Steele worked entirely within the scope of his agency, without obstacle or protest. And then he shopped around the product of that work, another act entirely within the scope of his agency -- again without obstacle or protest, indeed with the encouragement of his principal.
   297. Traderdave Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:26 AM (#5663595)
Uh, no -- I am sophisticated


You're also a stable genius and you're, like, really smart & you'd crush Rex Tillerson in an IQ test.
   298. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:26 AM (#5663596)
I am sophisticated


LOL
   299. Traderdave Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:31 AM (#5663602)
Yeah. I have a hard time believing that Rhode Island exports $5.5 billion in airplanes. maybe deals are made there, but that's not the same. In fact, 16 states have airplanes listed as the largest export.


A large number, and perhaps a majority, of Boeing's exported planes are financed through the Ex-Im Bank, a US Treasury backed entity. Each deal done this way is set up as a new special purpose entity (SPE). Many are set up in Delaware but I've seen them from lots of states. That's is probably how airplanes rank so high in so many places.
   300. Stormy JE Posted: May 01, 2018 at 11:33 AM (#5663603)
.pilF
Page 3 of 17 pages  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Andere Richtingen
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT - November* 2018 College Football thread
(196 - 5:32pm, Nov 14)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (November 2018)
(193 - 5:30pm, Nov 14)
Last: Man o' Schwar

Gonfalon CubsNow what?
(226 - 5:27pm, Nov 14)
Last: Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought

NewsblogZack Greinke trade makes sense for these teams
(10 - 5:20pm, Nov 14)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

NewsblogSale of Baseball Prospectus
(51 - 5:12pm, Nov 14)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogTime running out for officials to reach stadium deal with Rays
(2 - 5:00pm, Nov 14)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(2229 - 4:51pm, Nov 14)
Last: Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant

NewsblogMike Elias Orioles general manager | MLB.com
(15 - 4:50pm, Nov 14)
Last: Rally

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-14-2018
(21 - 4:45pm, Nov 14)
Last: Ziggy's screen name

NewsblogDodgers pitcher Hyun-jin Ryu is only MLB player to accept $17.9M qualifying offer for 2019
(51 - 4:42pm, Nov 14)
Last: Baldrick

NewsblogProspects who stood out in Arizona Fall League
(1 - 4:31pm, Nov 14)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogAtlanta/Southeast BBTF meet up
(67 - 4:19pm, Nov 14)
Last: stig-tossled, hornswoggled gef the typing mongoose

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(2312 - 4:14pm, Nov 14)
Last: rconn23

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(1197 - 3:35pm, Nov 14)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Force of Nature

Newsblog2018 Manager of the Year winners | MLB.com
(15 - 3:24pm, Nov 14)
Last: Khrushin it bro

Page rendered in 0.7543 seconds
46 querie(s) executed