On 8/14/2024 10:10 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:snip
Nehemiah Scudder was a religious demagogue who on the strength of his
politically tinged faith gained power and ended the US republic.
How the heck you equate that to Trump is beyond me.
Project 2025, written by Christian Nationalists many of whom were in the Trump administration and expect to be there again.
On 15/08/24 13:10, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
On 8/14/2024 10:10 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:snip
Nehemiah Scudder was a religious demagogue who on the strength of his
politically tinged faith gained power and ended the US republic.
How the heck you equate that to Trump is beyond me.
Project 2025, written by Christian Nationalists many of whom were in the
Trump administration and expect to be there again.
As not a customer of the restaurant where waiters can be only Democrats
or Republicans serving up the same old central kitchen crap, I had not
read of this but found the Wikipedia article very scary. It will be a
worry if they are as powerful as you imply.
Project 2025, written by Christian Nationalists many of whom were in the
Trump administration and expect to be there again.
As not a customer of the restaurant where waiters can be only Democrats
or Republicans serving up the same old central kitchen crap, I had not
read of this but found the Wikipedia article very scary. It will be a
worry if they are as powerful as you imply.
On Thu, 15 Aug 2024 17:59:40 +1200, Titus G <[email protected]> wrote:
On 15/08/24 13:10, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
On 8/14/2024 10:10 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:snip
Nehemiah Scudder was a religious demagogue who on the strength of his
politically tinged faith gained power and ended the US republic.
How the heck you equate that to Trump is beyond me.
Project 2025, written by Christian Nationalists many of whom were in the >>> Trump administration and expect to be there again.
As not a customer of the restaurant where waiters can be only Democrats
or Republicans serving up the same old central kitchen crap, I had not
read of this but found the Wikipedia article very scary. It will be a
worry if they are as powerful as you imply.
Unless they do something /really/ stupid, like dump Kamala for Hilary,
the Dems should win as they will /not be running a Boomer/ for
President. Registrations of younger voters are up. And I expect that
they will vote anti-Boomer in large numbers.
I haven't bothered with the details because they will find a few
roadblocks:
-- Trump's own ego, since he didn't write it
-- Civil Service rules (founded on Civil Service /laws/ passed by
Congress) once they try to replace below a certain level
Myself, I am not nearly so optimistic.
Kamala Harris is neither white nor male, and that terrifies me, as I
think that a lot of potential
swing voters will simply refuse to consider her on those grounds,
preferring to vote even for Trump
instead.
Yes, she has ignited a great deal of enthusiasm among Democrats, and
higher turnout helps matters
as well. But to elect a President, a party will need to get votes from
at least some rural areas,
the ones more inclined to support Trump. Remember that votes are
filtered through the Electoral
College, so it's not enough to just have a majority of the popular vote
due to a high turnout
in the most populous mainly Democratic states; one has to have a
majority in many states.
John Savard
On 8/16/2024 8:40 AM, Paul S Person wrote:snip
And who ever said Chrstian Nationalism had anything to do with Jesus
Christ, who clearly stated that his kingdom is /not/ of this world?
snip
On 8/15/2024 3:39 PM, quadibloc wrote:
Myself, I am not nearly so optimistic.
Kamala Harris is neither white nor male, and that terrifies me, as I
think that a lot of potential
swing voters will simply refuse to consider her on those grounds,
preferring to vote even for Trump
instead.
Yes, she has ignited a great deal of enthusiasm among Democrats, and
higher turnout helps matters
as well. But to elect a President, a party will need to get votes from
at least some rural areas,
the ones more inclined to support Trump. Remember that votes are
filtered through the Electoral
College, so it's not enough to just have a majority of the popular vote
due to a high turnout
in the most populous mainly Democratic states; one has to have a
majority in many states.
Quaddie's projecting his own problems with women and brown people onto >undecided Americans.
He should remember that we've already elected a black president, and
Hillary failed only because Comey announced re-opening the 'emails' >investigation just 11 days before the election.
On 8/16/2024 8:40 AM, Paul S Person wrote:snip
And who ever said Chrstian Nationalism had anything to do with Jesus
Christ, who clearly stated that his kingdom is /not/ of this world?
That strikes me with surprise because I have you pigeon holed as a
religious nutter of a Christian cult bent.
From my childhood Presbyterian brainwashing, with nothing to contradict
it since, the definition of a Christian is someone who is a believer in
and follower of the biblical Jesus (Christ), not necessarily in all the
evil machinations of the warlike Old Testament God and incredibly vague
about the function of the Holy Ghost, who being one of an inseparable
trinity would also be a king of this other worldly kingdom. Would it be >addressed as Your Holiness? They are not Godians nor Ghostians but >Christians. And the kingdom doesn't have an organisational hierarchy
chart nor a coloured wall chart with an arrowed "You Are Here" overlay.
If you also agree that Western cultures worship of commercialism,
including borrowing and lending, of Christmas also has nothing to do
with Jesus Christ, it is not too difficult to realise that most
Christians are brilliant if unknowing hypocrites.
The NZ Prime Minister, (who until recently spelt cat with a k), is a
devout member of some weird USA Christian cult that preaches that Jesus >Christ's kingdom is on earth right now and that the righteous believers
like himself, are those being rewarded right now with monetary wealth.
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private
server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really
should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a
private server, who can say?
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person ><[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private
server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at
any time they choose without a warrant.
The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person >><[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private >>>server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>>should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>>private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at
any time they choose without a warrant.
This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of >requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication
on down to particular header formats. It's a major pain in the neck
(and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).
One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and >consequently needs to be archived. Its not just that it can be accessed
by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived
in specific ways. This is also a pain, but in the case of something
like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
On 8/19/2024 9:58 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On 18 Aug 2024 23:41:31 -0000, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person
<[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private
server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>>>> should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>>>> private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at
any time they choose without a warrant.
This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of
requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication >>> on down to particular header formats. It's a major pain in the neck
(and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).
One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and
consequently needs to be archived. Its not just that it can be accessed >>> by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived
in specific ways. This is also a pain, but in the case of something
like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
Which all goes to show why the Trump/Republican attacks on Hillary for
having her own server had a certain ... weight and solidity ... that
the other attacks mostly lacked.
One of the issues was whether anything on it was classified. I seem to
recall that the story was that some things may have classified
elsewhere, but had all been declassified on reaching the State Dept.
Which sounds a bit ... loosy goosy ... to me, but then Trump was found
to have undeniably classified paper documents at Mar-a-Lago after he
left office. And, since they have it camera, tried to hide them when
asked to give them up.
Hillary's mail server seems almost ... quaint ... in comparison. Still
not a good idea, however.
Trump, as PRESIDENT of the USA, had the power to declassify ANYTHING he wanted to. All those supposedly classified papers were declassified by
him while he was President.
And now the case has been thrown out of court due to the improper
appointment of the prosecutor and the mismanagement of the papers seized
from Trump's house. Trump has now filed a civil lawsuit against the DOJ
for $100 million due to the incompetence of the DOJ.
Lynn
On 8/19/2024 9:58 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On 18 Aug 2024 23:41:31 -0000, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person
<[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private
server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>>>> should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>>>> private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at
any time they choose without a warrant.
This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of
requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication >>> on down to particular header formats. It's a major pain in the neck
(and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).
One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and
consequently needs to be archived. Its not just that it can be accessed >>> by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived
in specific ways. This is also a pain, but in the case of something
like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
Which all goes to show why the Trump/Republican attacks on Hillary for
having her own server had a certain ... weight and solidity ... that
the other attacks mostly lacked.
One of the issues was whether anything on it was classified. I seem to
recall that the story was that some things may have classified
elsewhere, but had all been declassified on reaching the State Dept.
Which sounds a bit ... loosy goosy ... to me, but then Trump was found
to have undeniably classified paper documents at Mar-a-Lago after he
left office. And, since they have it camera, tried to hide them when
asked to give them up.
Hillary's mail server seems almost ... quaint ... in comparison. Still
not a good idea, however.
Trump, as PRESIDENT of the USA, had the power to declassify ANYTHING he wanted to. All those supposedly classified papers were declassified by him while he was President.
And now the case has been thrown out of court due to the improper appointment of the prosecutor and the mismanagement of the papers seized from Trump's house. Trump has now filed a civil lawsuit against the DOJ for $100 million due to the incompetence of the DOJ.
Lynn
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 8/19/2024 9:58 AM, Paul S Person wrote:Really? That's great news! Probably that is why european news have
On 18 Aug 2024 23:41:31 -0000, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person
<[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private >>>>>> server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>>>>> should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>>>>> private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at >>>>> any time they choose without a warrant.
This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of
requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication >>>> on down to particular header formats. It's a major pain in the neck
(and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).
One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and
consequently needs to be archived. Its not just that it can be accessed >>>> by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived
in specific ways. This is also a pain, but in the case of something
like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
Which all goes to show why the Trump/Republican attacks on Hillary for
having her own server had a certain ... weight and solidity ... that
the other attacks mostly lacked.
One of the issues was whether anything on it was classified. I seem to
recall that the story was that some things may have classified
elsewhere, but had all been declassified on reaching the State Dept.
Which sounds a bit ... loosy goosy ... to me, but then Trump was found
to have undeniably classified paper documents at Mar-a-Lago after he
left office. And, since they have it camera, tried to hide them when
asked to give them up.
Hillary's mail server seems almost ... quaint ... in comparison. Still
not a good idea, however.
Trump, as PRESIDENT of the USA, had the power to declassify ANYTHING he
wanted to. All those supposedly classified papers were declassified by him >> while he was President.
And now the case has been thrown out of court due to the improper appointment
of the prosecutor and the mismanagement of the papers seized from Trump's
house. Trump has now filed a civil lawsuit against the DOJ for $100 million >> due to the incompetence of the DOJ.
Lynn
completely stopped reporting on it. It was only news worthy once things looked bad for Trump. Any eventual victories for Trump are seldom, or
never reported.
On 2024-08-20, D <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 8/19/2024 9:58 AM, Paul S Person wrote:Really? That's great news! Probably that is why european news have
On 18 Aug 2024 23:41:31 -0000, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person
<[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private >>>>>>> server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>>>>>> should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>>>>>> private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at >>>>>> any time they choose without a warrant.
This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of >>>>> requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication >>>>> on down to particular header formats. It's a major pain in the neck >>>>> (and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).
One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and >>>>> consequently needs to be archived. Its not just that it can be accessed >>>>> by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived >>>>> in specific ways. This is also a pain, but in the case of something >>>>> like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
Which all goes to show why the Trump/Republican attacks on Hillary for >>>> having her own server had a certain ... weight and solidity ... that
the other attacks mostly lacked.
One of the issues was whether anything on it was classified. I seem to >>>> recall that the story was that some things may have classified
elsewhere, but had all been declassified on reaching the State Dept.
Which sounds a bit ... loosy goosy ... to me, but then Trump was found >>>> to have undeniably classified paper documents at Mar-a-Lago after he
left office. And, since they have it camera, tried to hide them when
asked to give them up.
Hillary's mail server seems almost ... quaint ... in comparison. Still >>>> not a good idea, however.
Trump, as PRESIDENT of the USA, had the power to declassify ANYTHING he >>> wanted to. All those supposedly classified papers were declassified by him
while he was President.
And now the case has been thrown out of court due to the improper appointment
of the prosecutor and the mismanagement of the papers seized from Trump's >>> house. Trump has now filed a civil lawsuit against the DOJ for $100 million
due to the incompetence of the DOJ.
Lynn
completely stopped reporting on it. It was only news worthy once things
looked bad for Trump. Any eventual victories for Trump are seldom, or
never reported.
The charge will undoubtedly be back. I regard it as the only
legitimate prosecution of the major ones against Trump. He deserves at
least a slap on the wrist for his disregarding of classifications. It >doesn't deserve the attention the Democrats have focused on it, but
that's politics (and how the Democrats persuaded the FBI to go full
SWAT mode for the seizing of documents is undetermined, but obviously
a great political success for them.)
The case got thrown out until a different special prosecutor is appointed. >The one appointed is legitimate according to Department of Justice's
rules, but other laws strongly imply that he needed to be approved by >Congress at some point in his life (and all other special prosecutors have >been.) It all depends on definitions, as so many things do.
On 8/19/2024 9:58 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On 18 Aug 2024 23:41:31 -0000, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person
<[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private
server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>>>> should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>>>> private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at
any time they choose without a warrant.
This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of
requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication >>> on down to particular header formats. It's a major pain in the neck
(and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).
One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and
consequently needs to be archived. Its not just that it can be accessed >>> by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived
in specific ways. This is also a pain, but in the case of something
like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
Which all goes to show why the Trump/Republican attacks on Hillary for
having her own server had a certain ... weight and solidity ... that
the other attacks mostly lacked.
One of the issues was whether anything on it was classified. I seem to
recall that the story was that some things may have classified
elsewhere, but had all been declassified on reaching the State Dept.
Which sounds a bit ... loosy goosy ... to me, but then Trump was found
to have undeniably classified paper documents at Mar-a-Lago after he
left office. And, since they have it camera, tried to hide them when
asked to give them up.
Hillary's mail server seems almost ... quaint ... in comparison. Still
not a good idea, however.
Trump, as PRESIDENT of the USA, had the power to declassify ANYTHING he >wanted to. All those supposedly classified papers were declassified by
him while he was President.
And now the case has been thrown out of court due to the improper >appointment of the prosecutor and the mismanagement of the papers seized >from Trump's house. Trump has now filed a civil lawsuit against the DOJ
for $100 million due to the incompetence of the DOJ.
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 16:48:56 +1200, Titus G <[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/16/2024 8:40 AM, Paul S Person wrote:snip
And who ever said Chrstian Nationalism had anything to do with Jesus
Christ, who clearly stated that his kingdom is /not/ of this world?
If you also agree that Western cultures worship of commercialism,
including borrowing and lending, of Christmas also has nothing to do
with Jesus Christ, it is not too difficult to realise that most
Christians are brilliant if unknowing hypocrites.
The claim that we "worship" commercialism is one I have never
understood.
The NZ Prime Minister, (who until recently spelt cat with a k), is a
devout member of some weird USA Christian cult that preaches that Jesus
Christ's kingdom is on earth right now and that the righteous believers
like himself, are those being rewarded right now with monetary wealth.
As others have noted, the cult is one of the "prosperity gospel"
groups. This works well for the leader, who gets lots of money from
his followers, but not so well for the followers, who may wait their
entire lives for their reward. The leaders are among the guys you may
have read about who have golden cars and very large mansions as a
result of the money they rake in. The end up in the news because the
IRS tends to get after them because they register as Churches for tax purposes, and there are expectations that go along with that type of non-profit organization involving where the money goes.
On 18/08/24 04:36, Paul S Person wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 16:48:56 +1200, Titus G <[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/16/2024 8:40 AM, Paul S Person wrote:snip
And who ever said Chrstian Nationalism had anything to do with Jesus >>>>> Christ, who clearly stated that his kingdom is /not/ of this world?
much snippage for brevity
snipIf you also agree that Western cultures worship of commercialism,
including borrowing and lending, of Christmas also has nothing to do
with Jesus Christ, it is not too difficult to realise that most
Christians are brilliant if unknowing hypocrites.
The claim that we "worship" commercialism is one I have never
understood.
With hindsight, my choice of the word "worship" was foolish as it was >extreme. My point was that Jesus, crucified about a week after his
terrorist gang of twelve violently invaded and assaulted Temple >officials/contractors carrying out the Temple's commercial activities,
stood for the exact opposite of commercialism which is the real emphasis
of the Christian's Christmas.
snip--
snip
The NZ Prime Minister, (who until recently spelt cat with a k), is a
devout member of some weird USA Christian cult that preaches that Jesus
Christ's kingdom is on earth right now and that the righteous believers
like himself, are those being rewarded right now with monetary wealth.
As others have noted, the cult is one of the "prosperity gospel"
groups. This works well for the leader, who gets lots of money from
his followers, but not so well for the followers, who may wait their
entire lives for their reward. The leaders are among the guys you may
have read about who have golden cars and very large mansions as a
result of the money they rake in. The end up in the news because the
IRS tends to get after them because they register as Churches for tax
purposes, and there are expectations that go along with that type of
non-profit organization involving where the money goes.
That was interesting. Unsubstantiated rumour is that the current NZ
prime minister's rise to a management position and wealth in the USA was
due to his religious connections as he has been completely useless as a >politician behaving like a CEO surrounded by yes men.
On 8/19/2024 9:58 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On 18 Aug 2024 23:41:31 -0000, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person
<[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private
server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>>>> should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>>>> private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at
any time they choose without a warrant.
This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of
requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication >>> on down to particular header formats. It's a major pain in the neck
(and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).
One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and
consequently needs to be archived. Its not just that it can be accessed >>> by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived
in specific ways. This is also a pain, but in the case of something
like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
Which all goes to show why the Trump/Republican attacks on Hillary for
having her own server had a certain ... weight and solidity ... that
the other attacks mostly lacked.
One of the issues was whether anything on it was classified. I seem to
recall that the story was that some things may have classified
elsewhere, but had all been declassified on reaching the State Dept.
Which sounds a bit ... loosy goosy ... to me, but then Trump was found
to have undeniably classified paper documents at Mar-a-Lago after he
left office. And, since they have it camera, tried to hide them when
asked to give them up.
Hillary's mail server seems almost ... quaint ... in comparison. Still
not a good idea, however.
Trump, as PRESIDENT of the USA, had the power to declassify ANYTHING he >wanted to.
All those supposedly classified papers were declassified by
him while he was President.
And now the case has been thrown out of court due to the improper
appointment of the prosecutor
and the mismanagement of the papers seized
from Trump's house.
Trump has now filed a civil lawsuit against the DOJ
for $100 million due to the incompetence of the DOJ.
On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 17:37:28 -0500, Lynn McGuire
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/19/2024 9:58 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On 18 Aug 2024 23:41:31 -0000, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:12:15 -0700, Paul S Person
<[email protected]d> wrote:
Still probably a bad decision, though. But then, so was the private >>>>>> server itself. When working for the gummint on gummint time one really >>>>>> should use the gummint server. It might even be harder to hack than a >>>>>> private server, who can say?
Perhaps, but Washington has the right to access a server they own at >>>>> any time they choose without a warrant.
This is true, but government-owned mail servers have a whole host of
requirements that come down from the DHS, from two-factor authentication >>>> on down to particular header formats. It's a major pain in the neck
(and it's why small governmental organizations will try and use
unauthorized mail servers whenever they possibly can).
One of the big deals is that email is considered a public record and
consequently needs to be archived. Its not just that it can be accessed >>>> by some other governmental organization, it all needs to be archived
in specific ways. This is also a pain, but in the case of something
like the Clinton server in question it's also very important for
historical reference.
Which all goes to show why the Trump/Republican attacks on Hillary for
having her own server had a certain ... weight and solidity ... that
the other attacks mostly lacked.
One of the issues was whether anything on it was classified. I seem to
recall that the story was that some things may have classified
elsewhere, but had all been declassified on reaching the State Dept.
Which sounds a bit ... loosy goosy ... to me, but then Trump was found
to have undeniably classified paper documents at Mar-a-Lago after he
left office. And, since they have it camera, tried to hide them when
asked to give them up.
Hillary's mail server seems almost ... quaint ... in comparison. Still
not a good idea, however.
Trump, as PRESIDENT of the USA, had the power to declassify ANYTHING he >>wanted to.
'In all cases, however, a formal procedure is required so governmental >agencies know with certainty what has been declassified and decisions >memorialized. A federal appeals court in a 2020 Freedom of Information
Act case, New York Times v. CIA, underscored that point:
�Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow
specified procedures,� the court said.'
All those supposedly classified papers were declassified by
him while he was President.
No they weren't
as he acknowledges in a transcipt of a meeting where he was showing
people papers he'd taken
https://abcnews.go.com/US/secret-information-trump-audio-recording-talks-declassifying-documents/story?id=99960824
Trump is heard on the audio recording saying, as described to ABC
News, "As president I could have declassified, but now I can't."
"Except it is like, highly confidential. Secret. This is secret
information. Look, look at this. This was done by the military and
given to me,"
"Well, with Milley -- uh, let me see that, I'll show you an example.
He said that I wanted to attack Iran. Isn't that amazing? I have a big
pile of papers, this thing just came up. Look. This was him. They
presented me this -- this is off the record, but -- they presented me
this. This was him. This was the Defense Department and him,"
And now the case has been thrown out of court due to the improper >>appointment of the prosecutor
No, the Trump appointed judge has decided that the appoinment of the
Special Counsel was improperly selected
A judgement that goes against decades of precedent
�The dismissal of the case deviates from the uniform conclusion of all >previous courts to have considered the issue that the Attorney General
is statutorily authorized to appoint a Special Counsel,"
and the mismanagement of the papers seized
from Trump's house.
Bullshit
Trump has now filed a civil lawsuit against the DOJSure, Trump suing somebody just proves there's a lawyer dumb enough to
for $100 million due to the incompetence of the DOJ.
take his case and hope they'll eventually get paid...
On 22/08/2024 11.03, Paul S Person wrote:
IOW, it can be argued that it is not the /Christian's/ Christmas that
is commercialized. Which is why it is more commonly called "the
Holiday Season", and starts (at latest) the day after Thanksgiving and
extends to (at earliest) New Year's Day. That is to say, I don't think
it's been extended to the day after Halloween or Epiphany. Yet.
The Christmas season runs to Epiphany. ><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Christmas.
On 9/6/2024 12:28 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 09:13:41 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 22/08/2024 11.03, Paul S Person wrote:
IOW, it can be argued that it is not the /Christian's/ Christmas that
is commercialized. Which is why it is more commonly called "the
Holiday Season", and starts (at latest) the day after Thanksgiving and >>>> extends to (at earliest) New Year's Day. That is to say, I don't think >>>> it's been extended to the day after Halloween or Epiphany. Yet.
The Christmas season runs to Epiphany.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Christmas.
The religious one (and its cultural attachments) does, to be sure.
That is why each year I listen to one movement of JS Bach's Christmas
Oratorio on as close to the proper day as possible, and then take down
my decorations (which went up on Christmas eve).
But I was talking about the /commercial/ version, with all its madness
building to the 25th. Amazon will warn you if your order won't arrive
before Dec 25th, aka The End of the World if your kid doesn't get the
toy you ordered; I don't think it warns you the same way about Jan 6.
"Epiphany tree" and "Epiphany gifts" are not terms I recall seeing
very often.
Similarly, while the /commercial/ season begins the day after
Thanksgiving (or at least did until relatively recently), the
/religious/ season in a sense starts with the First Sunday in Advent.
These are at about the same time, but the commercial one was timed to
not detract from Thanksgiving, while the religious one serves a
different purpose.
The 'Holiday Season' now starts with Halloween. I'm seeing tons of
Halloween themed bricabrac in stores, and Hallmark is trying to
convince me to send out 'Halloween Cards".
On 06/09/2024 11.28, Paul S Person wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 09:13:41 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 22/08/2024 11.03, Paul S Person wrote:
IOW, it can be argued that it is not the /Christian's/ Christmas that
is commercialized. Which is why it is more commonly called "the
Holiday Season", and starts (at latest) the day after Thanksgiving and >>>> extends to (at earliest) New Year's Day. That is to say, I don't think >>>> it's been extended to the day after Halloween or Epiphany. Yet.
The Christmas season runs to Epiphany.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Christmas.
The religious one (and its cultural attachments) does, to be sure.
That is why each year I listen to one movement of JS Bach's Christmas
Oratorio on as close to the proper day as possible, and then take down
my decorations (which went up on Christmas eve).
But I was talking about the /commercial/ version, with all its madness
building to the 25th.
And then all Christmas music disappears from the radio on the 26th. Got it.
I don't think it warns you the same way about Jan 6.
"Epiphany tree" and "Epiphany gifts" are not terms I recall seeing
very often.
Not in the US, but I'm pretty sure that in Eastern Europe, Epiphany is
more significant than is Christmas.
Similarly, while the /commercial/ season begins the day after
Thanksgiving (or at least did until relatively recently), the
/religious/ season in a sense starts with the First Sunday in Advent.
No, the First Sunday of Advent is when the season of Advent starts. The >(religious) Christmas season starts on December 25, or for traditionalists, >the evening of December 24.
The main reason I don't listen to music on the radio is that it isn't
/my/ music, it's someone else's music and prefer to listen to the
music I have assembled in the order I have put it.
On Sat, 7 Sep 2024, Paul S Person wrote:
The main reason I don't listen to music on the radio is that it isn't
/my/ music, it's someone else's music and prefer to listen to the
music I have assembled in the order I have put it.
But how do you discover new music if you only like to listen to your
music in your order?
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 09:13:41 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper" ><[email protected]> wrote:
On 22/08/2024 11.03, Paul S Person wrote:
IOW, it can be argued that it is not the /Christian's/ Christmas that
is commercialized. Which is why it is more commonly called "the
Holiday Season", and starts (at latest) the day after Thanksgiving and
extends to (at earliest) New Year's Day. That is to say, I don't think
it's been extended to the day after Halloween or Epiphany. Yet.
The Christmas season runs to Epiphany. >><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Christmas.
The religious one (and its cultural attachments) does, to be sure.
That is why each year I listen to one movement of JS Bach's Christmas >Oratorio on as close to the proper day as possible, and then take down
my decorations (which went up on Christmas eve).
On Fri, 06 Sep 2024 09:28:58 -0700, Paul S Person ><[email protected]d> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 09:13:41 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper" >><[email protected]> wrote:
On 22/08/2024 11.03, Paul S Person wrote:
IOW, it can be argued that it is not the /Christian's/ Christmas that
is commercialized. Which is why it is more commonly called "the
Holiday Season", and starts (at latest) the day after Thanksgiving and >>>> extends to (at earliest) New Year's Day. That is to say, I don't think >>>> it's been extended to the day after Halloween or Epiphany. Yet.
The Christmas season runs to Epiphany. >>><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Christmas.
The religious one (and its cultural attachments) does, to be sure.
That is why each year I listen to one movement of JS Bach's Christmas >>Oratorio on as close to the proper day as possible, and then take down
my decorations (which went up on Christmas eve).
In our family we usually got our tree up about a week before (though
last year only on Christmas Eve) but the twelveth day is when we were
taught the tree was SUPPOSED to come down. Our couch is right next to
the tree's normal location so we didn't but decorations on one side of
the tree to prevent the cat knocking the ornaments down...since kitty >normally sits on that arm of the chair the rest of the year.
I don't remember the timing when I was growing up, but a week or so
before sounds right (if only to give time to put the tinsel on one
piece at a time, placed carefully -- /that/ I remember). After New
Year's seems likely for disposing of the tree although it could have >stretched to Epiphany.
Last Christmas, my younger daughter came home and insisted
on re-erecting the 8 footer. Of course, she did not take
responsibility for putting the decoration away.
On Mon, 16 Sep 2024 08:43:17 -0700, Paul S Person ><[email protected]d> wrote:
I don't remember the timing when I was growing up, but a week or so
before sounds right (if only to give time to put the tinsel on one
piece at a time, placed carefully -- /that/ I remember). After New
Year's seems likely for disposing of the tree although it could have >>stretched to Epiphany.
We only used tinsel during years we had no cat - we had one incident
where we found a piece of tinsel about 18" dangling from the cat - she
had eaten it and let's just say the tinsel didn't stay in her litter
box. We figured she could badly injure herself if it caught on
something so didn't use it the following year (nor since).
On Mon, 16 Sep 2024 08:43:17 -0700, Paul S Person <[email protected]d> wrote:
I don't remember the timing when I was growing up, but a week or so
before sounds right (if only to give time to put the tinsel on one
piece at a time, placed carefully -- /that/ I remember). After New
Year's seems likely for disposing of the tree although it could have
stretched to Epiphany.
We only used tinsel during years we had no cat - we had one incident
where we found a piece of tinsel about 18" dangling from the cat - she
had eaten it and let's just say the tinsel didn't stay in her litter
box. We figured she could badly injure herself if it caught on
something so didn't use it the following year (nor since).
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 44:58:21 |
| Calls: | 12,111 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 15,010 |
| Messages: | 6,518,466 |