Jump to content

U.S. Politics: Who's Cohen Down?


LongRider

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Shryke said:

All I know is red states consume more porn then blue states from any study I've seen. There seems to be a small but measurable effect where there conservative and religious consume more porn on average.

 

51 minutes ago, Zorral said:

They also have more divorces than blue states, and more red state citizens are swingers than in blue states.  Which always is always sooperdooper hilarious! :D:D:D

In terms of porn, I'm not gonna judge.  I don't think it's useful to compound the hypocrisy (how exactly do you describe being hypocritical about those being hypocritical?) by criticizing the puritan ethic then casting aspersions on those that don't abide it.  Besides, it may simply be those in red states last longer.  Or maybe they spend more time browsing.

As for divorce rates, that's true as well, but I think there's a very clear cultural explanation for that.  Whenever I go to my uncle's in Texas, he's always asking me when I'm gonna get married.  I tell him I don't want to marry every time, but it never gets through.  More rural (and thus red) states will have more people marrying at a young age because that's what you do.  Then, it's not surprising it ends up in more divorce.  I'd like to see data that controls for age of marriage - plus obviously the amount of marriages per capita, not just divorces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

I'm not even mad, that's amazing.

It might be even older than that:

Quote

According to Mr. Powner, the agency’s legacy hardware systems are programmed with assembly language, a computer language initially used in the 1950s.

...........

Danny Verneuille, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration’s assistant inspector general for audit, told House lawmakers in October that the IRS’s main computer system has been using “outdated” code for more than 50 years.

https://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2018/04/18/irs-grapples-with-decades-old-computer-systems/

1 hour ago, Shryke said:

All I know is red states consume more porn then blue states from any study I've seen. There seems to be a small but measurable effect where there conservative and religious consume more porn on average.

It’s probably in line with a study I read in college which found that homophobic males become more aroused than non-homophobic males when shown gay “prawn.”

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

How the orange squash lied his way onto Forbes's richest list:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/trump-lied-to-me-about-his-wealth-to-get-onto-the-forbes-400-here-are-the-tapes/2018/04/20/ac762b08-4287-11e8-8569-26fda6b404c7_story.html?

Roy Cohen is in the article too, fully part of the orange bs.

New Yorkers have always known all this, at least in broad outline, as orange has always been notorious among even just 'little' tax-paying NYers, as well as the movers and shakers and bankers as nothing but a bser poseur, the lousy bidness dork that he is.  How the entire country swallowed his orange bs we still can't quite comprehend, beyond -- tv.  Is the country as a whole that gullible?  Really? Don't they seem complicit more than gullible, really?  If so, then the only answer is white supremacy, anti-intellectualism and just plain meaness.

Yowza!  That's less even than his o-so-loathed nemesis, Obama:

 

 
 

One of my best friend’s uncle is an ultra-rich hedge fund manage in NYC, and he once told me that everyone with real money thought Trump was a fraud and a joke (he also said those in his circle suspected that Madoff was scamming people). He likes to say he’s the biggest real estate player in the country, but he was really just a small player in the city. Anyways, it’s easy to explain why Trump tricked so many people. He’s a cartoon character of what a rich person is supposed to be, and at the end of the day, most Americans want to be rich. That’s his appeal. And people eat it up.

For example, when I was 20 and got a hot internship, I spent a lot of money I didn’t have on a number of fancy suits and dress clothes. I wasn’t any better than anyone else in the program, and yet I kept getting invited to all the hot shot meetings and dinners. One of the girls who dressed super fancy got the same treatment. If you project wealth and power, people will believe that you’re wealthy and powerful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

 

In terms of porn, I'm not gonna judge.  I don't think it's useful to compound the hypocrisy (how exactly do you describe being hypocritical about those being hypocritical?) by criticizing the puritan ethic then casting aspersions on those that don't abide it.  Besides, it may simply be those in red states last longer.  Or maybe they spend more time browsing.

As for divorce rates, that's true as well, but I think there's a very clear cultural explanation for that.  Whenever I go to my uncle's in Texas, he's always asking me when I'm gonna get married.  I tell him I don't want to marry every time, but it never gets through.  More rural (and thus red) states will have more people marrying at a young age because that's what you do.  Then, it's not surprising it ends up in more divorce.  I'd like to see data that controls for age of marriage - plus obviously the amount of marriages per capita, not just divorces.

“Post-Hypocriticalism”

@sperry , You’re a patent lawyer, right? Get on that for me.

Double middle fingers to anyone that tries to steal my term. I HAVE THE BEST TERMS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It might be even older than that:

https://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2018/04/18/irs-grapples-with-decades-old-computer-systems/

It’s probably in line with a study I read in college which found that homophobic males become more aroused than non-homophobic males when shown gay “prawn.”

One of my best friend’s uncle is an ultra-rich hedge fund manage in NYC, and he once told me that everyone with real money thought Trump was a fraud and a joke (he also said those in his circle suspected that Madoff was scamming people). He likes to say he’s the biggest real estate player in the country, but he was really just a small player in the city. Anyways, it’s easy to explain why Trump tricked so many people. He’s a cartoon character of what a rich person is supposed to be, and at the end of the day, most Americans want to be rich. That’s his appeal. And people eat it up.

For example, when I was 20 and got a hot internship, I spent a lot of money I didn’t have on a number of fancy suits and dress clothes. I wasn’t any better than anyone else in the program, and yet I kept getting invited to all the hot shot meetings and dinners. One of the girls who dressed super fancy got the same treatment. If you project wealth and power, people will believe that you’re wealthy and powerful.

A primary fact about people with real money and assets, they don't talk about them.  They prefer people not know their real worth at all. They often go out of their way to conceal serious information about their worth and assets.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

 

In terms of porn, I'm not gonna judge.  I don't think it's useful to compound the hypocrisy (how exactly do you describe being hypocritical about those being hypocritical?) by criticizing the puritan ethic then casting aspersions on those that don't abide it.  Besides, it may simply be those in red states last longer.  Or maybe they spend more time browsing.

As for divorce rates, that's true as well, but I think there's a very clear cultural explanation for that.  Whenever I go to my uncle's in Texas, he's always asking me when I'm gonna get married.  I tell him I don't want to marry every time, but it never gets through.  More rural (and thus red) states will have more people marrying at a young age because that's what you do.  Then, it's not surprising it ends up in more divorce.  I'd like to see data that controls for age of marriage - plus obviously the amount of marriages per capita, not just divorces.

How does that change what is hypocrisy of their own behaviors re divorce, swinging, infidelity, and that they downright lie about people who aren't them, claiming that these 'intellectuals' are in favor of broken families, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

“Post-Hypocriticalism”

Meh, "post" indicates after the fact, which isn't really accurate.  It's like you're defining 2 + 2 when I'm looking for 2 * 2.

19 minutes ago, Zorral said:

How does that change what is hypocrisy of their own behaviors re divorce, swinging, infidelity, and that they downright lie about people who aren't them, claiming that these 'intellectuals' are in favor of broken families, etc.

It doesn't.  It just means I'm not going to judge them for having the same problems just because they judge me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shryke said:

The point of Giuliani is not to be a lawyer. He's a shitty lawyer. The point is his tons of personal connections within the FBI, especially the NY branches.

Giuliani was one of the main sources of leaks during the campaign from the Clinton-haters within the FBI (tons in the NY branch from what we know from reporting) and he pushed that stuff into the media all the time.

His now self-admitted role in Trump's defence will be to get information about the Cohen case especially to Trump's people and to try and use his personal connections to influence and stymie the investigation.

I think that's what Trump wants/expects, but not what will happen. Per WH leaks, Giuliani didn't want to be on the legal team and it took a lot of cajoling to get him to join. I suspect the issue is that the people he knows in the FBI's NY Branch are not on the Cohen case (and certainly aren't on Mueller's team) and therefore he won't be able to provide information.

If his connections were able to get him anything, there'd already be a lot more news about both investigations; because they didn't just leak to him, they went to the press multiple times (remember that NYT article right before the election with unnamed sources saying that neither Trump or his campaign were under investigation?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should be some great stuff in discovery...

DNC sues Russian government, Trump campaign, WikiLeaks alleging 2016 conspiracy plot

'This constituted an act of unprecedented treachery,' DNC Chair Tom Perez said.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/20/dnc-sue-trump-campaign-russia-plot-539521

Quote

 

The Democratic National Committee alleges in a new multimillion dollar lawsuit that the Russian government, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks engaged in a sweeping plot to interfere in the 2016 election in President Donald Trump's favor.

The lawsuit accuses top officials for the Trump campaign, Russian government officials and their military intelligence service, the GRU, of engaging in a vast, coordinated effort to inflict damage on Trump’s general election rival, Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Even more interesting, Trump has finally found some real lawyers to join his team, a husband and wife who both have a history as federal prosecutors and have a Miami based firm specializing in white collar crime. Jane and Marty Raskin both have excellent reputations.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/20/politics/trump-jane-and-marty-raskin-legal-team/index.html

eta: This follows the earlier discussion Zabs and I had about boutique law firms probably being the way Trump has to go, because the big firms look on him like kryptonite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Meh, "post" indicates after the fact, which isn't really accurate.  It's like you're defining 2 + 2 when I'm looking for 2 * 2.

It doesn't.  It just means I'm not going to judge them for having the same problems just because they judge me.

Honestly I feel this is more of a plus situation than a multiply one, but if you’d like, I can offer “Snowballing Hypocriticalism” or  “Hypocriticalism Proliferation.” Play around with those if you’d like.

Best I got for ya man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Honestly I feel this is more of a plus situation than a multiply one, but if you’d like, I can offer “Snowballing Hypocriticalism” or  “Hypocriticalism Proliferation.” Play around with those if you’d like.

Best I got for ya man.

I'll continue to play the field...:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

A primary fact about people with real money and assets, they don't talk about them.  They prefer people not know their real worth at all. They often go out of their way to conceal serious information about their worth and assets.

 

Not exactly. That’s more of the divide between old and new money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Not exactly. That’s more of the divide between old and new money.

I give you Cargill.  Try and find out info about them or any of the family.

Quote

Founded in 1865, it is the largest privately held corporation in the United States in terms of revenue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...