Jon Letendre Posted March 22, 2018 Share Posted March 22, 2018 Joe and Barack are pizza BFFs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 22, 2018 Share Posted March 22, 2018 If anyone wants to get a layman's understanding of what went on with Cambridge Analytica, Jimmy Dore breaks it down well. It takes him a while to get to the good stuff, but he gets there. The fact is, Barack Obama's team pioneered this form of information mining and using big data from Facebook. That's how Obama got elected--twice. (The secret was to get a list of the friends of hardcore Obama supporters, find out where these friends were, then get in touch with them and use their friendship as a hook to convince them to show up and vote for Obama. Then do that with their friends and so on. In fact, if you watch the video below, you will see that there is a TED Talk from several years ago where a lady working on Obama's election team describes this process in these terms--including scraping data from Facebook.) I already knew that (and, frankly, a lot more including COBS), which is why I have not considered the Cambridge Analytica story more than a flash in a forest fire. But the mainstream media is glomming onto this story as if it is something new and earth-wrecking. It isn't. Once you see the video, I hope this monkey-business is clearer to you. I am on the polar opposite of Jimmy Dore's politics, but I am 100% with him on the way he looks at something new to him like this. He simply looks at facts and uses common sense. Oddly enough, Jimmy did an earlier video on Cambridge Analytica that I didn't post because he screwed it all up. (He didn't realize the data of Facebook friends of an app participant were being scraped.) He fixed that understanding in this video and, along the way, realized that Obama had pioneered this in presidential politics. He even found an old TED talk about it and major news stories of the time. So, if this is something Obama did (and Hillary Clinton did) and, frankly what so many other people have done in other markets on even vaster scales, why is this story going all gangbusters right now? Why is the mainstream treating it as something new and big? Off the top of my head, I believe there are two reasons. 1. They want to nail President Trump more than anything in the world and the Mueller investigation is doing poorly. It looks like it will ultimately be a massive fizzle and that means--to the public at large--totally exonerating President Trump and bolstering him. The anti-Trumpers, including the fake news media, can't let that happen, so they need a new narrative and they need one quick. What's worse, if they give up the "Muh Russians" storyline, in their minds nobody will take them seriously anymore. They will have to admit they were wrong and, for elitist power-mongers, nothing stings worse than admitting they were wrong to the very person (and his supporters) they targeted to destroy. That is a total fail on so many levels, it just hurts too bad to let happen. Even lying to themselves is preferable. Sooooo... lie to themselves they will. Wait... if Trump wasn't directly in contact with Russia to get elected, but he was in contact with a firm (Cambridge Analytica) that used Facebook data and someone in that firm was in contact with Russia... Woah!!!... Wait a minute... How's this? The Russians didn't directly influence the election. They directly influenced Facebook, which influenced the election! Facebook elected Trump through the Russians! Bingo! And off to the races they go. 2. This reason is more sinister. Think back to almost any movie or story where there is a real nasty bad guy and minions. In many of these stories, the bad guy gives one of his minions the task of killing the good guy, but the minion comes back and says he failed. What does the bad guy do in front of all the other minions? He screams at the screw-up, humiliates him, then takes out a gun and shoots him dead. Then the bad guy glares at the other minions and asks if anyone has a question. I think the elitist insiders are doing that with Facebook right now. Facebook promised to take out Trump. Instead, a small unknown company used its data to help elect Trump (even if on a modest scale). These ruling class power-mongering elitists need to make an example to keep everybody else in line, goddammit! How about Facebook? You think people will pay attention when they see what happens to the mighty Facebook when they get through with it? You're goddamm right they will! That's exactly what these assholes are thinking. Right now in the fake news, they are in the screaming and humiliating phase. But I can see a few of them already pulling out their guns... Mark Zuckerberg is not the man to fight that fight. His Milquetoast apology which wasn't an apology just made matters worse for him. Don't get me wrong. Zuckerberg is a genius and his genius changed the world, but that genius is compartmentalized. We will soon see what happens to a genius who tries to play with elitist power-monger fire using Milquetoast philosophical principles as his guide. Dr. Robert Stadler comes to mind... Since this is in the Trump thread, let me tie this to President Trump. He got elected using plain old fashioned campaigning. Unlike what goes on with the Obam-pioneered social media data targeting process, he didn't set out to fool his voters. He bonded with them. The only people he has fooled so far are the fake news media folks (who keep falling for his antics like Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football) and the Deep State jerks. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 22, 2018 Share Posted March 22, 2018 btw - Zuckerberg is going around saying Facebook should be regulated by the government. That's one way to ensure he stays in business and his competitors don't take his spot. It's a scam. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted March 22, 2018 Share Posted March 22, 2018 There will be no such thing as Facebook. Or FBI, or CIA, or CIA’s Google. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 22, 2018 Share Posted March 22, 2018 It was very hard for me to watch this interview because I saw Mark Zuckerberg saying some of the most ridiculous things I ever heard. Here's a doozy, for example. He was talking about how they are doing a better job of policing bots that influence elections, then cited several where the nationalist parties lost as an "improvement." He specifically mentioned the special election in Alabama and how they nabbed bots from Macedonia. Do you know where Macedonia is? It's right above Greece, right next to Bulgaria. Can you see it? Now try to square that support with the image of evangelical bible-wielding Judge Roy Moore galloping to the polls on horseback. Does anyone really think Macedonian Facebook bots would have influenced bible-thumpers who don't even use social media if not for the heroic actions of self-policing Facebook? Dayaamm! Or how about this one? Zuckerberg referred several times to the Russian influence on the election as something really evil, then when asked if Facebook influenced the election, he waffled in a manner suited to any self-respecting corrupt politician. He sounded like he said something, but didn't say anything. Now get this. He even said that the Russians disrupted the election by supporting ALL SIDES! He actually said that. He called it "dividing people." Good God... Zuckerberg's subtext is clear. Facebook is sorry Donald Trump won and Zuckerberg promises he won't let it happen again. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Here's a fantastic quote by Steve Bannon that correctly sums up what Silicon Valley tech giants do--in practice, not in theory. It's from here: Bannon swipes at Zuckerberg after Cambridge Analytica reports Quote "They take your stuff for free. They sell it and monetize it for huge margins. That's why the companies trade for such high valuations," Bannon said during an interview at a conference held by the Financial Times on the future of media, CNBC reported. "Then they write algorithms and control your life." Bannon: Facebook takes your stuff for free and monetizes it for huge margins from CNBC. Yup. That is their business model in a nutshell. What's more, if they gave up controlling your life, nobody would complain about what they do except the elitist control freaks in our culture. Bannon also said the following (from the CNBC article): Quote The former Breitbart News boss also pushed back on the idea that Cambridge Analytica won the election for Trump. "Here's what won it for Trump: economic nationalism" and talking in plain language to the American people, Trump said. Amen. I hope anti-Trumpers keep mocking this idea and pushing the idea that America was brainwashed by Facebook to elect President Trump. That will make for a very easy second term for him. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 This should go in Trump Humor, but the context here will be understood after time passes. Over there it probably won't (without a long explanation). So here it is. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Why am I not surprised? Lucy, Charlie Brown and the football, anyone? I am considering a VETO of the Omnibus Spending Bill based on the fact that the 800,000 plus DACA recipients have been totally abandoned by the Democrats (not even mentioned in Bill) and the BORDER WALL, which is desperately needed for our National Defense, is not fully funded.— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 23, 2018 Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 21 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Why am I not surprised? Lucy, Charlie Brown and the football, anyone? Michael Democrats systematically abuse minorities and immigrants, don’t give a flying shit about them. They use them as political tools, just like they do shooting victims, discarded and forgotten when their utility dries up. A truly disgusting lot. President Trump cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 4 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Lucy, Charlie Brown and the football, anyone? LOL... Looks like I'm the one trying to kick the football. Trump says he's signed $1.3 trillion spending bill into law despite being 'unhappy' about it Regardless, anti-Trumpers think this retreat is a permanent change in him. Little do they know... If he ever does several of these kinds of things in a row, I will start getting worried. But not on a one-off tactical retreat. So... Now we get to watch him squeeze the juice out of this mess. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted March 24, 2018 Share Posted March 24, 2018 There will plenty in this bill for everyone to hate (which he may have had something to do with ?) He wants the rules changed, he wants line-item veto, and he is going to get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted March 24, 2018 Share Posted March 24, 2018 12 hours ago, Jon Letendre said: Democrats systematically abuse minorities and immigrants, don’t give a flying shit about them. They use them as political tools, just like they do shooting victims, discarded and forgotten when their utility dries up. A truly disgusting lot. President Trump cares. The Democrats’ hearts bled for DACA Dreamers. They swore to stand by them. The Democrats failed the Dreamers. Trump will solve that and many other problems through spring and summer. In November we will watch the total collapse and end of the Democrat Party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 24, 2018 Share Posted March 24, 2018 This... Bolton Expected to ‘Clean House’The incoming national security advisor aims to ax dozens of White House officials as he dismantles McMaster’s NSC. From the article: Quote Incoming National Security Advisor John Bolton and people close to him are expected to launch a massive shake-up at the National Security Council, aiming to remove dozens of current White House officials, starting with holdovers from President Barack Obama’s administration, according to multiple sources. Those targeted for removal include officials believed to have been disloyal to President Donald Trump, those who have leaked about the president to the media, his predecessor’s team, and those who came in under Obama. . . . A second former White House official offered a blunt assessment of former Obama officials currently detailed or appointed to the NSC: “Everyone who was there during Obama years should start packing their shit.” Finally. btw - Bolton is more hawkish than I like. But in a position like the one he is now in, he knows how to put the wishes of his boss above his own. Now maybe President Trump can start governing (at least re foreign policy) without one arm tied behind his back. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 I just had a random thought about President Trump signing the spending bill. He said he will not sign another like it and I believe him. But not because I simply believe him. It has more to do with philosophical principles. The government has a monopoly on initiating force. A government without force to back it up will not be a government for long. When President Trump was sworn in, the upper management of the government people who wielded force were, essentially, ruling class elitists and their muscle. They used individual rights and protecting the peace as a smokescreen for their scams and crony schemes. President Trump has replaced some of those people, but there are a whole lot left over. Even the military had become something is was not supposed to be--a tool for elitist ruling class boondoggles (mostly run by the endless war for profit schemes). The entire existence of the force arm of the government was being corrupted into oppressive might and even a formal secret police. And the foot soldiers did not share in the booty the elitists were getting. They had to make do with crumbling everything except at show time when they were deployed against the harmless. Then they got top grade equipment, extra hours, and so on. President Trump knows that in the current environment, with politically agenda-driven hostile management of many of the US force organizations, standing unarmed on any kind of principle in the face of a gun is suicide. It's one thing to be a spiritual leader and stand on principle with non-violence. That works a lot of the time. It's quite another to be a head of state. That doesn't work. If the head of state cannot deploy force, those who can will replace him. It's just that simple. (Should it be in a perfect world? That's another question. In the reality we currently live in, and with human nature being what it is at this stage of evolution, there is no way to divorce power and force from the government.) So President Trump faced a critical decision. If he doesn't keep his power for his term of office and be able to wield it, all his principles will be nothing but words. They will not turn into concrete reality. But to consolidate his power enough to ensure his vision is implemented, he had to face a dilemma. Sacrifice principle or turn power back over to the guaranteed corrupt. So President Trump swallowed bile and signed a monstrosity of a spending bill to get funding for the military. He despised having to do that. I know he did. But in his situation, I believe he did the right thing. And, from his perspective, I think it was a no-brainer once the options in reality became clear. Right now, the Democrats are crowing victory and many of Trump's supporters are bitching to the high heavens, but the truth is, when anyone wants to take President Trump's power from him now, they will have a well-paid and well-equipped military in the way. When push comes to shove, now that the boneheaded projects of the Democrats (and crony Republicans) are well-funded, let them face off their save an exotic fish foundation or gender studies institute against a group of loyal soldiers and see who wins. President Trump consolidated his main law enforcement agencies with this budget. Once law enforcement is consolidated and happy with the way he is running things, he will have no more need to make budgetary concessions to keep from being taken out by his enemies. The downside to this is if power ends up corrupting President Trump's soul. He knows the philosophy of government well enough to have done what he did. He has gained power and has now reinforced it. In the end, will he be a George Washington or will he become a dictator? It's fully his choice now. I believe he will be a George Washington. He was already comfortable wielding power before he ran for office. And he used his pre-presidential power to produce great things in the marketplace. The temptation to corruption and oppressive force is not as strong a pull to someone with that experience as it is to a run-of-the-mill politician and power-monger. I believe a fundamental part of President Trump's driving motor is that he wants more great things in the marketplace, not useless wars or world conquest or anything like that. I can't predict the future 100%, but I can say that President Trump has a hell of a lot better chance of being a great president than Hillary Clinton ever did. There is no way in hell she would have ever become a George Washington. Her way was already paved with death and destruction of innocents. Lots of it, too. With more power, there is no way that would have become less. On the contrary, it would have grown. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: I just had a random thought about President Trump signing the spending bill. He said he will not sign another like it and I believe him. But not because I simply believe him. It has more to do with philosophical principles. The government has a monopoly on initiating force. A government without force to back it up will not be a government for long. When President Trump was sworn in, the upper management of the government people who wielded force were, essentially, ruling class elitists and their muscle. They used individual rights and protecting the peace as a smokescreen for their scams and crony schemes. President Trump has replaced some of those people, but there are a whole lot left over. Even the military had become something is was not supposed to be--a tool for elitist ruling class boondoggles (mostly run by the endless war for profit schemes). The entire existence of the force arm of the government was being corrupted into oppressive might and even a formal secret police. And the foot soldiers did not share in the booty the elitists were getting. They had to make do with crumbling everything except at show time when they were deployed against the harmless. Then they got top grade equipment, extra hours, and so on. President Trump knows that in the current environment, with politically agenda-driven hostile management of many of the US force organizations, standing unarmed on any kind of principle in the face of a gun is suicide. It's one thing to be a spiritual leader and stand on principle with non-violence. That works a lot of the time. It's quite another to be a head of state. That doesn't work. If the head of state cannot deploy force, those who can will replace him. It's just that simple. (Should it be in a perfect world? That's another question. In the reality we currently live in, and with human nature being what it is at this stage of evolution, there is no way to divorce power and force from the government.) So President Trump faced a critical decision. If he doesn't keep his power for his term of office and be able to wield it, all his principles will be nothing but words. They will not turn into concrete reality. But to consolidate his power enough to ensure his vision is implemented, he had to face a dilemma. Sacrifice principle or turn power back over to the guaranteed corrupt. So President Trump swallowed bile and signed a monstrosity of a spending bill to get funding for the military. He despised having to do that. I know he did. But in his situation, I believe he did the right thing. And, from his perspective, I think it was a no-brainer once the options in reality became clear. Right now, the Democrats are crowing victory and many of Trump's supporters are bitching to the high heavens, but the truth is, when anyone wants to take President Trump's power from him now, they will have a well-paid and well-equipped military in the way. When push comes to shove, now that the boneheaded projects of the Democrats (and crony Republicans) are well-funded, let them face off their save an exotic fish foundation or gender studies institute against a group of loyal soldiers and see who wins. President Trump consolidated his main law enforcement agencies with this budget. Once law enforcement is consolidated and happy with the way he is running things, he will have no more need to make budgetary concessions to keep from being taken out by his enemies. The downside to this is if power ends up corrupting President Trump's soul. He knows the philosophy of government well enough to have done what he did. He has gained power and has now reinforced it. In the end, will he be a George Washington or will he become a dictator? It's fully his choice now. I believe he will be a George Washington. He was already comfortable wielding power before he ran for office. And he used his pre-presidential power to produce great things in the marketplace. The temptation to corruption and oppressive force is not as strong a pull to someone with that experience as it is to a run-of-the-mill politician and power-monger. I believe a fundamental part of President Trump's driving motor is that he wants more great things in the marketplace, not useless wars or world conquest or anything like that. I can't predict the future 100%, but I can say that President Trump has a hell of a lot better chance of being a great president than Hillary Clinton ever did. There is no way in hell she would have ever become a George Washington. Her way was already paved with death and destruction of innocents. Lots of it, too. With more power, there is no way that would have become less. On the contrary, it would have grown. Michael In the meantime Trump said one thing and did another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said: In the meantime Trump said one thing and did another. Bob, I think this applies differently to President Trump than it would to a normal politician. In Trump's case, I think he evaluated the big picture in light of where he will go and made a distasteful short-term concession to achieve a long-term goal. This fight is far from over with him. In the case of normal politicians, they not only try to take what they can get when they can get it, they aim for this. And once they make the concession, it gets baked into law. I don't think that is where President Trump's intentions are. Nor where the final results will end up. Not only that, this thing is set to explode again in October, right before the midterm elections. For some reason I think this time-factor is part of President Trump's calculations and strategies, but I don't see the advantage yet. Meanwhile, you might like the way Rush Limbaugh characterized it (Rush is pretty pissed and disappointed): Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 Some lady said a billionaire had sex with her years ago, gave her money, then gave her some hush-money. Now she wants more. His enemies want you to know. Yawn... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 LOL... Scott Adams, the Dilbert guy, said the Stormy Daniels interview was Anderson Cooper doing revenge porn. I like it... Revenge porn... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 An unexpected and odd backlash has started against Stormy Daniels. Was she coked up for the interview? Bright lights make your pupils shrink, not dilate. Yet her pupils were huuuuuuge... Stormy Daniels’ ‘Super’ Dilated Pupils Spark Accusations She Was High On Meds For ‘60 Minutes’ Interview Mark Dice shows pics. btw - If you think Gateway Pundit and Mark Dice are not credible, this thing by them hit Drudge above the main headline. So in this case, that's not much of a concern. Pupils tend to constrict due to the bright lights used for TV interviews. Stormy Daniels Pupils vs Her Lawyer's vs Anderson Cooper's. Interesting. pic.twitter.com/54GoP00zgZ— Mark Dice (@MarkDice) March 26, 2018 Or, if you prefer a video: Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 On 3/23/2018 at 6:12 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: ... what Silicon Valley tech giants do--in practice, not in theory. Here is the reason Silicon Valley giants are having so much trouble today, from a 2011 Mashable article: Obama Toasts Tech With Industry Luminaries [PICS] No need for words when the pics say it all: And here is the main reason Zuckerberg is now being roasted by the left and the ruling class elites. In top power games, you don't get that close to the center and promise to deliver, then not deliver, and still stay in good graces. btw - Notice who's missing? Peter Thiel... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 Gotta love Ann ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted March 26, 2018 Share Posted March 26, 2018 The dilation is permanent. That’s the effect of my President Donald J. Trump! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 This must have hurt like hell for CNN to air. They brought a bunch of evangelical ladies together to interview them about Stormy Daniels. Instead of getting what they wanted, i.e. Trump bashing (visible through the leading questions), they got an earful about how rotten the media is. Female Trump Supporters on CNN Panel: "You Are Looking For A Way To Impeach My President" Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 Did President Trump just to a head-fake with the Democrats re the Omnibus Spending Bill? Here's what I understand so far. President Trump got the Democrats to agree to a massive increase in military spending in exchange for cutting his budget for the wall to an amount too small to make a difference. So it looked like he rolled over and his base was getting pissed while the Democrats were dancing on his imagined grave. But... (drum roll)... this is a spending bill and not another kind of financial budget. The Executive, not Congress, has an enormous amount of control over the funds, including the power to re-allocate them. So President Trump simply said the lack of a wall is a security threat and that gives him a legitimate rationale to divert about $700 billion from the military budget to build the wall. If this is the case (and it looks more and more like it is), the Democrats got played big-time--they inadvertently funded the wall--and didn't even do DACA. So in the midterms, they are going to look like incompetent clowns to their respective constituencies. As a result, this just might be a windfall for the Republicans. I think that's what just happened right in front of the whole world while no one was looking... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 There's a saying by an unknown author going around on the Internet that I like a lot: Fate whispers to the warrior, "You cannot withstand the storm." The warrior whispers back, "I am the storm." Someone made a video about President Trump with this: I'm thinking of a variation the anti-Trumpers say. They don't say: "I am the storm." The poor things say: Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now