Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Christy42 · 16-12-2017 02:03PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Of course it's for profiteering. Comcast (my ISP) is going to want me to love its service and pay them lots and lots of money. And be so happy with my service (my wife and I tend to use our bandwidth for movies and gaming) that I will tell all my friends how happy I am with them, so they will also go pay Comcast lots of money. All without their having to spend metric tons of money in upgrading infrastructure. That's not to say that I cannot benefit from it at the same time, though. There is such a thing as a win-win. Why do I pay anyone money for a service, but because I believe I get value or enjoyment out of it?

What is the benefit to throughput? How does it compare to other possible strategies? Would it pale in comparison to the increase from the next technology increase (which will happen regardless of NN). Remember speeds for wireless are talked about in orders of magnitude. Saying a speed increase would happen is meaningless without the magnitude.

Agreed that the wording change is stupid.

Billy86 · 16-12-2017 03:35PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Of course it's for profiteering. Comcast (my ISP) is going to want me to love its service and pay them lots and lots of money. And be so happy with my service (my wife and I tend to use our bandwidth for movies and gaming) that I will tell all my friends how happy I am with them, so they will also go pay Comcast lots of money. All without their having to spend metric tons of money in upgrading infrastructure. That's not to say that I cannot benefit from it at the same time, though. There is such a thing as a win-win.

Except this is not a win-win, as you can be charged just to access a website - if the FCC were serious about this being altruistic, they would cover to make that an impossibility prior to getting rid of NN - but they haven't.

This can easily be highly detrimental to small businesses who would not be able to keep up with the already established large companies on the internet - ManicMoransGoods.com won't be able to pay premiums that Amazon, IKEA or Walmart can without any hassle. and so won't be able to access a huge chunk of the market (or rather, a huge chunk of the market won't be able to access ManicMoransGoods.com). The end result of this is needing to have more money than a small business does in order to be able to operate online at all. And without as much competition around them, these companies then are easily able to just raise the prices of many of their own goods, hitting the consumer in the process.

The end result is not 'win-win' but rather 'win-win-lose-lose' - the winners being the ISPs and larger companies, the losers being the consumers and small companies/startups - which is kind of laughable given all the rhetoric coming from Republicans for so long about supporting small business, etc.

Why do I pay anyone money for a service, but because I believe I get value or enjoyment out of it?

Because it's an essential service (which the internet is these days) and you don't have any viable alternatives (which you won't if or rather when all the providers are charging additional premiums needlessly). This is the painful truth for a lot of people already, and if NN were gone it would only get worse for all.

listermint · 17-12-2017 08:47AM

20Cent wrote: »

Hi Manic. Do you have much choice regarding ISP services? Much competition? As far as I have read there are a lot of places in the US where there isn't much choice.

Id argue that manic knows full well that both Comcast and time Warner actively divvied up the country many years ago into their own areas . They don't stray into each others locations through agreement. It's like the Mafia.

If this is the sort of 'freemarket' price fixing competition killing stuff that he things stem's out of lobbying then he is welcome to it.

There is no real captilism in the US some say it died in the 80s.

Which is intriguing question where does manic get his main news from because alot of the viewpoint aligns with what lobbyists want you to think / believe.

Fox et el ?

20Cent · 17-12-2017 09:36AM

listermint wrote: »

Id argue that manic knows full well that both Comcast and time Warner actively divvied up the country many years ago into their own areas . They don't stray into each others locations through agreement. It's like the Mafia.

If this is the sort of 'freemarket' price fixing competition killing stuff that he things stem's out of lobbying then he is welcome to it.

There is no real captilism in the US some say it died in the 80s.

Which is intriguing question where does manic get his main news from because alot of the viewpoint aligns with what lobbyists want you to think / believe.

Fox et el ?

The ISP's are regularly voted amongst the worst companies in the US. Classic video of guy trying to cancel his account.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYUvpYE99vg

Leroy42 · 17-12-2017 11:29AM

Rumours coming out of Washington is that Trump will fire Mueller on the 22nd, when congress and senate have closed for the year.

The hope would be that people have switched off and something else will have taken over by the time everyone gets back.

I would have said that it would cause a major crisis, but the GOP have gone from hating Trump to simply accepting him and, in the last few days, actively attacking Mueller to laid the ground work for the his dismissal.

Fox News et al are ready for the fake news to stem any hint of dissent from the GOP voters.

aloyisious · 17-12-2017 12:03PM

Umm. Maybe this is behind the latest reasoning behind any such rumoured move... https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/thousands-of-trump-transition-emails-obtained-in-mueller-s-russia-probe-1.3330303

It seems the I/T report is based on an AP story, itself in turn from a Media Site Axios, accrording to the last line in the I/T report.

Really Interested · 17-12-2017 12:05PM

aloyisious wrote: »

Umm. Maybe this is behind the latest reasoning behind any such rumoured move... https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/thousands-of-trump-transition-emails-obtained-in-mueller-s-russia-probe-1.3330303

“But the E-mails” will have a whole new meaning.

ECO_Mental · 17-12-2017 12:19PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Rumours coming out of Washington is that Trump will fire Mueller on the 22nd, when congress and senate have closed for the year.

The hope would be that people have switched off and something else will have taken over by the time everyone gets back.

I would have said that it would cause a major crisis, but the GOP have gone from hating Trump to simply accepting him and, in the last few days, actively attacking Mueller to laid the ground work for the his dismissal.

Fox News et al are ready for the fake news to stem any hint of dissent from the GOP voters.

Listening to fox news on tune-in radio yesterday and for two hours it was all how corrupt Mueller is, how his team is full of Clinton supporters they are deffo laying the ground work for Trump to sack him or at least sow the seeds of doubt in his supporters (now it was two white house employees Tucker and Hannity :P)

aloyisious · 17-12-2017 01:35PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Rumours coming out of Washington is that Trump will fire Mueller on the 22nd, when congress and senate have closed for the year.

The hope would be that people have switched off and something else will have taken over by the time everyone gets back.

I would have said that it would cause a major crisis, but the GOP have gone from hating Trump to simply accepting him and, in the last few days, actively attacking Mueller to laid the ground work for the his dismissal.

Fox News et al are ready for the fake news to stem any hint of dissent from the GOP voters.

Even if the two houses are closed, there's the courts.

Billy86 · 17-12-2017 02:19PM

aloyisious wrote: »

Even if the two houses are closed, there's the courts.

...don't expect Trump to have researched into the process.

The emails could be very interesting though, are these the same ones Vikileaks had their hands on but decided they didn't want to release because they're all about selective censorship after all, or are they different ones? If there's anything significant in there we can expect a complete 80 from Trump, FOX, Bretibart, etc, and of course his followers, when it comes to "loving leaks" and talking about emails. Watch the 'whataboutery' switch almost immediately away from that and onto something else.

And right on cue - FOX: Trump transition lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained documents in Russia probe followed by Mueller's allegedly lawless acts have corrupted his probe and demand his removal.

What FOX already know, but don't want their viewers to know or care about, and before the usual suspects show up bitching and moaning about it too (we know they don't actually care about that from all the hooting for joy about this just over a year ago), the issue of illegality, these are from "@ptt.gov" addresses which are completely legally obtainable and a part of public record.

It also appears the Trump team were completely caught off guard with this, they thought they had 'prepared' but had been caught out long beforehand (bit of a recurring theme, that) and only found out about it when being questioned on them in front of the committee.
https://www.axios.com/scoop-mueller-obtains-tens-of-thousands-of-trump-transition-emails-2517994590.html

The twist: The sources say that transition officials assumed that Mueller would come calling, and had sifted through the emails and separated the ones they considered privileged. But the sources said that was for naught, since Mueller has the complete cache from the dozen accounts.

...

Trump officials discovered Mueller had the emails when his prosecutors used them as the basis for questions to witnesses, the sources said.

Yes, that's right - hiding official government ("@ptt.gov") emails, many Trump supporters will tell you that means guilt on it's own. Or at least would have, before today. Time to completely change their entire outlook on that.

The Trump transition team included the likes of: Rep. Devin Nunes (House Intelligence Chair who had to recuse himself after getting spooked and trying to sabotage the investigation, and yet who still continues to try and do so)... Rep. Trey Gowdy (House Oversight Chair, House Intelligence, House Judiciary who seems eager to get this investigation shut down asap)... Rep Cynthia Lummis (House Oversight)... Rep. Tom Marino (House Judiciary)... Rep. Dennis Ross... Sen. Tim Scott... Rep Marsha Blackburn... Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers... Rep. Tom Reed... Rep. Lou Barletta... Rep. Chris Collins... Rep. Sean Duffy... Pam Bondi (who has extremely questionable links to Trump)... Peter Thiel (founder of PayPal, heavily involved right wing donor)... Rebeckah Mercer (who's dad Robert owns the infamous Cambridge Analytica linked to social media manipulation)... Steve Mnuchin (current Treasury secretary)... Reince Priebus (current chief of staff)... Steve Bannon... and of course "Jared and the kids" (all three of them; Eric, Ivanka and Donald Adoption Jr).

eagle eye · 17-12-2017 02:36PM

Lmfao, it's like the gutter press in here.

You pick out names with ties to Trump to make your case.

Do you not think that this could be done for any former Potus?

Billy86 · 17-12-2017 02:40PM

"This latest defense of Trump which cannot actually defend Trump has been brought to you by..."

I'll add this because Trump supporters have often for the last 18+ months effectively been allowed use 'one liner' posts over and over that don't say anything at all while the same has not been true for the rest of us... what specifically are you referring to in terms of "names with ties to Trump" and what do you feel is misleading, or inconsequential, or whatever it is you're actually trying to get at with regards to them? Because your post appears to actually say absolutely nothing.

Professor Moriarty · 17-12-2017 02:40PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Lmfao, it's like the gutter press in here.

You pick out names with ties to Trump to make your case.

Do you not think that this could be done for any former Potus?

Maybe. But this is The Donald Trump Discussion Thread. So...

eagle eye · 17-12-2017 02:46PM

It is but it's become like twitter which is sad.
On boards you normally find much more intelligent discussion but this really has become a gutter and it's the stuff being posted that's making it that way not the topic, even though he is awful.

Professor Moriarty · 17-12-2017 02:55PM

eagle eye wrote: »

It is but it's become like twitter which is sad.
On boards you normally find much more intelligent discussion but this really has become a gutter and it's the stuff being posted that's making it that way not the topic, even though he is awful.

Billy's posts on this matter are hardly tweets. There's a lot of substance in them to be engaged with.

circadian · 17-12-2017 03:01PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Lmfao, it's like the gutter press in here.

You pick out names with ties to Trump to make your case.

Do you not think that this could be done for any former Potus?

I think I'm missing the point here but yes you could pick out names with ties to previous POTUS and I'm sure there'd be some questionable characters.

How many have been involved in a Special Prosecutors case, possibly as a result of something that POTUS has done.

ancapailldorcha · 17-12-2017 03:03PM

eagle eye wrote: »

It is but it's become like twitter which is sad.
On boards you normally find much more intelligent discussion but this really has become a gutter and it's the stuff being posted that's making it that way not the topic, even though he is awful.

Instead of moaning about the quality of posts, I suggest you either not post or use the report function.

Back on topic please.

pitifulgod · 17-12-2017 03:29PM

eagle eye wrote: »

It is but it's become like twitter which is sad.
On boards you normally find much more intelligent discussion but this really has become a gutter and it's the stuff being posted that's making it that way not the topic, even though he is awful.

Out of interest if Trump does attempt to fire Mueller, will you equally think it's a gutter press move to criticise it? An indictment of Kushner is incoming by looks of things too. Manafort and Flynn have far more than passing relationships with Trump...

Captain Obvious · 17-12-2017 03:52PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Lmfao, it's like the gutter press in here.

You pick out names with ties to Trump to make your case.

Do you not think that this could be done for any former Potus?

It was done, mainly by the Republicans. Do you not remember Bill Clinton live on international TV defending himself for getting a blowjob from an intern? Do you not remember the horror displayed on screens across America when Obama ate dijon mustard? Now we have a president who has betrayed his country to Russia, sexually assaulted multiple women, supported a child molester for the senate, has completely given over the office of the president to business interests, has childish tantrums on social media and taken from the most vulnerable in society over and over. And you think he is being hard done by?

Billy86 · 17-12-2017 03:57PM

Billy86 wrote: »

And right on cue - FOX: Trump transition lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained documents in Russia probe followed by Mueller's allegedly lawless acts have corrupted his probe and demand his removal.

They're really cranking it up very, very fast in the last day or two...

Direct quote: "The abbreviated version of a criminal cabal, like a crime family in the movies, except this time the FBI is the crime family"

You'd have to wonder what FOX might be leaving themselves open to in terms of their rhetoric here, it's stronger than I've probably even seen it on anything (including guns, Obamacare, and the whole Muslim/birther thing). I wouldn't bet the house on it, but it's looking more and more like FOX are very worried about the investigation too. Makes you wonder...

The continued projection is phenomenal too - a 'crime family' eh? :pac:

spacecoyote · 17-12-2017 04:54PM

My question is... if Trump keeps pushing that there is nothing to see, no collusion etc... why would he care if they have access to the emails?

They seem to be pushing the line of emails retrieved through incorrect channels. What difference should that make ultimately if there is nothing to find?

aloyisious · 17-12-2017 05:10PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Lmfao, it's like the gutter press in here.

You pick out names with ties to Trump to make your case.

Do you not think that this could be done for any former Potus?

If you bother to read the I/T article you would see it was the General Counsel representing the Trump transition team and its members who has objected to Mr Mueller getting possesssion of the team members emails.

Listing the names of the Trump transition team members is NOT picking out names to make a case. It's simply stating the obvious as to whom would be affected by Mr Mueller having possession of the emails and having the legal right to read through all the emails which would list the senders and recipients names.

aloyisious · 17-12-2017 06:20PM

Content Removed

Just not suitable, given the severity and unsubstantiated nature of the claims

Ta....

Really Interested · 17-12-2017 06:43PM

aloyisious wrote: »

.

I’m no fan of the guy, and while any allegations may stand up this sort of thing is like pizzagate.

listermint · 17-12-2017 07:44PM

Billy86 wrote: »

They're really cranking it up very, very fast in the last day or two...

Direct quote: "The abbreviated version of a criminal cabal, like a crime family in the movies, except this time the FBI is the crime family"

You'd have to wonder what FOX might be leaving themselves open to in terms of their rhetoric here, it's stronger than I've probably even seen it on anything (including guns, Obamacare, and the whole Muslim/birther thing). I wouldn't bet the house on it, but it's looking more and more like FOX are very worried about the investigation too. Makes you wonder...

The continued projection is phenomenal too - a 'crime family' eh? :pac:

Have to wonder.

What is it that Murdoch gets out of all of this . Specifically in the US

Mr.Micro · 17-12-2017 08:13PM

spacecoyote wrote: »

My question is... if Trump keeps pushing that there is nothing to see, no collusion etc... why would he care if they have access to the emails?

They seem to be pushing the line of emails retrieved through incorrect channels. What difference should that make ultimately if there is nothing to find?

Exactly. Why would Trump et all be worried about emails when they have nothing to hide? It seems to me when the heat is on Trump he fires people. When are the Americians going to wake up and see their so called democracy is eroding by the day.

No doubt Mueller will be next to go as he gets close to the truth?

Leroy42 · 17-12-2017 10:18PM

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Exactly. Why would Trump et all be worried about emails when they have nothing to hide? It seems to me when the heat is on Trump he fires people. When are the Americians going to wake up and see their so called democracy is eroding by the day.

No doubt Mueller will be next to go as he gets close to the truth?

And remember that SHS has consistently stated that the WH is cooperating in full with the investigation and the whole thing will be over quickly.

Now we have the WH writing to congress to complain about e-mails being reviewed. It is interesting that they have not written to Mueller about this and instead made it public.

Of course they might have brought it up with Mueller directly but then it must have been turned down.

Mueller has kept everything really airtight until the charges are brought so why would Team Trump deem it appropriate to 'leak' this story?

Army_of_One · 17-12-2017 10:37PM

eagle eye wrote: »

On boards you normally find much more intelligent discussion but this really has become a gutter

And yet you post your own brainfarts...

listermint · 17-12-2017 11:11PM

listermint wrote: »

Have to wonder.

What is it that Murdoch gets out of all of this . Specifically in the US

I'll reply to myself on this.

Murdoch is clearly a lunatic that believes the nonsense he and his pawns peddle.

https://youtu.be/t3H5z4OepKc

PropJoe10 · 18-12-2017 12:00AM

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Exactly. Why would Trump et all be worried about emails when they have nothing to hide? It seems to me when the heat is on Trump he fires people. When are the Americians going to wake up and see their so called democracy is eroding by the day.

No doubt Mueller will be next to go as he gets close to the truth?

Wouldnt surprise me at all if Mueller was gone soon. If Trump and his people have nothing to hide, why are they so keen to discredit this investigation? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to cop on to the fact that they're worrried about something, and hopefully Mueller will find out what that is before he's given his P45.

Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Comments