Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

paperburn1
Posts: 2314
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby paperburn1 » Sun Jul 08, 2018 7:23 pm

I
Last edited by paperburn1 on Sun Jul 08, 2018 7:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

williatw
Posts: 1645
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby williatw » Sun Jul 08, 2018 7:26 pm

williatw wrote: And Trump has taken serious notice and he clearly likes the idea; that don't hurt.



Probably indirectly related to Trump's proposed "space force":

As Trump pushes Space Force, support quietly builds for 'Space Guard'

A constabulary force modeled on the Coast Guard is viewed as 'more Swiss army knife than Ka-Bar.'

Image
Donald Trump, to the sumarily in the Air Force — into a separate Space Force.

Forget President Donald Trump’s Space Force. What the U.S. may need more is a Coast Guard for space.

Trump wants a stand-alone branch of the military — co-equal with the Army, Navy and Air Force — to ensure “dominance in space” and deter nations such as Russia and China from threatening America’s reliance on space technologies for defense and commerce.

But civilian and military strategists are also pondering the idea of a U.S. Space Guard to meet a variety of other needs in and beyond orbit. Those include enforcing laws and regulations to manage a burgeoning civilian space economy, ranging from asteroid mining to moon bases, private space stations and tourism — all functions that the military would be ill-suited to handle.

The Coast Guard, a quasi-military arm of the Department of Homeland Security, serves a similar law enforcement and regulatory role in the maritime domain. And in a recent paper, one military officer argued that a Space Guard could “extend this role naturally to the next frontier.”

“It is internally debated quite hotly,” said Air Force Lt. Col. Peter Garretson, an instructor at the Air University at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama, where the issue has been the focus of a series of recent discussions and publications.

People inside the Trump administration are also debating the idea.

“There are a lot of us advocating for this and we are getting some traction,” said a former Trump adviser who asked not to be identified discussing conversations he is having with administration officials. The former adviser is pushing the idea of a Space Guard in part out of concern that military moves alone could bring international blowback.

Even NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, a vocal supporter of a Space Force, seemed intrigued by a companion Space Guard when asked about it at a recent POLITICO Live event.

“It’s an interesting concept,” Bridenstine said. “When you talk about all of the civilian things that are going to be happening in space, that’s why you would need that kind of capability.”

But the administration’s emphasis so far has been on establishing a militarized space department within the armed forces.

Trump, to the surprise of many of his top national security advisers, last month ordered the Pentagon to begin reorganizing its space mission — now residing primarily in the Air Force — into a separate Space Force.

“I am hereby directing the Department of Defense and Pentagon to immediately begin the process necessary to establish a Space Force as the sixth branch of the armed forces,” Trump said during a meeting of the National Space Council. “That’s a big statement. We are going to have the Air Force and we are going to have the Space Force. Separate but equal. It is going to be something. So important.”

The Pentagon was already studying how to elevate the space mission at the direction of Congress, including how to best reorganize the Air Force’s space personnel and bases into a separate department or corps.

One study directed by Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan is due next month and another, recently undertaken at the Pentagon’s request by CNA Corp., a government-funded think tank, is set to be completed by the end of the year.

Ultimately, any major changes will require an act of Congress. “[The Space Force], as you know, is going to require legislation and a lot of detail planning that we have not yet begun,” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis recently told reporters.

But calls are growing for the same emphasis being placed on military preparedness in space to be applied to the civilian side of the space renaissance, which Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross predicts could soon become a trillion-dollar industry.

“The concept of a Space Guard — roughly modeled on a Coast Guard — has a lot of attractive features in dealing with non-warfighting pieces of all this,” said George Nield, who retired in March as the associate administrator of the FAA responsible for commercial space.


Space Force could 'distract' military space mission, CEO warns

He said that if the organizational changes under consideration focus too heavily on military questions, “there are a number of gaps in authorities and missed opportunities that are not being addressed.”

Whether as part of the Commerce or Transportation departments, a Space Guard could “could focus on safety, could have an enforcement arm, do inspections — all things very different from warfighting, which is important but is not the whole picture,” added Nield, a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy.

Michael Sinclair, a Coast Guard commander who has been studying space issues as a graduate student in national security at Georgetown University, contends that the Coast Guard model for a space constabulary force makes sense because of its hybrid nature: It's partly a military force, including in wartime, but primarily a regulatory and law enforcement arm of the government in peacetime.

That is not the case with the military, which is designed for one primary mission: war.

The idea of such a force for space is also picking up steam in military circles, where leading strategists are debating how the government might best secure a so-called cislunar economy — between the Earth and the moon — as well as constellations of thousand of satellites planned by companies in the United States and overseas.

“People who believe in this future cislunar economy think that private industry would want similar sorts of services that people in the maritime domain receive,” said Garretson, the Air Force lieutenant colonel, in an interview. “And those include maintenance of navigational aids, ensuring freedom of navigation, things that are analogous to dredging the harbor, removing icebergs, things that are analogous to search and rescue, inspections of cruise ships.

“Those things are certainly imaginable in a future when we might have 20,000 satellites that require active space situational awareness and space traffic management,” he added. “At some point in time, if we have citizens in orbit, then they are going to expect somebody to provide some sort of constabulary function.”

Maj. Anna Gunn-Golkin, a member of the Executive Action Group advising the the secretary and the chief of staff of the Air Force, recently outlined in a leading space journal what a U.S. Space Guard might do.

It could license space launches and inspect rockets and spacecraft for safety — much as the Coast Guard does for commercial ships. It could also have authority to “prevent legal infractions through its prevention program, and it will be ready to respond and enforce the laws when needed.”

“As part of this duty, the [Space Guard] will take on all aspects of commercial space management licensing,” she added.

She also argued that such an approach is a way for the United States to lead the way in peaceful space activities internationally.

“In being the first nation to establish a comprehensive government construct for safe and secure commercial space operations, America will set international space operating norms for spacecraft, debris and astronauts.”

James Vedda, a senior policy analyst at The Aerospace Corp., a government-funded think tank, also sees a major international component, given the number of nations that already cooperate with the United States in space.

“I would think it is most likely to be an international Space Coast Guard,” he saysThe White House National Space Council, which was re-established last year to review government space programs and regulations to help fuel the new commercial space industry, declined to say whether the topic of a Space Guard is on the agenda.

“We don’t have anything to share at this time,” said Thea McDonald, spokeswoman for the body headed by Vice President Mike Pence.

But Nield thinks the issue is only going to get more attention.

“I’ve been surprised at how much interest and traction it has received so far,” he said in an interview. “You can have a Space Guard as a component of a larger Space Force or you could do it independently to address these non-warfighting issues.”



https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/ ... ard-666917

paperburn1
Posts: 2314
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby paperburn1 » Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:13 pm

Ajit Pai and the Federal Communications Commission successfully rolled back Barack Obama-era net neutrality guidelines earlier this year, but they’re not done screwing with consumers yet. According to the Verge, the FCC is now mulling a plan that could ensure its staff will only review complaints against telecoms after the complainant has paid a $225 fee. It could be pushed through as soon as Thursday.

$225 to file a complaint, Is this even legal? That is the last straw for this idiot Pai.
There’s ample room to be skeptical of the FCC’s intent here. Under Pai’s tenure, the FCC has not only rolled back net neutrality guidelines, but scaled back subsidies to native populations, scrambled to remove regulatory barriers to conservative media giant Sinclair Broadcast Group’s takeover of local media, spread misinformation about supposed cyberattacks on its comment systems, and charmingly refused to release records related to a video it produced showing Pai joking about being a Verizon shill.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M7bHNwgTFo

costs can’t be related to the specific labor of the activity if it is inherent to the agency’s mission. Meaning, receiving and dealing with complaints against organizations licensed by their own agency are part of their mission. The cost has to ancillary to the activity. For example, the IRS charges you a small user fee to provide you a copy of the tax return you submitted to them. That activity is arguably a service above and beyond their core mission (you had a copy in your possession) and the fee covers the cost of the paper and ink, not the labor.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

Diogenes
Posts: 6912
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm
Location: Ft. Sill Oklahoma

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby Diogenes » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:01 pm

After Trump diss, Pfizer announces lowering of drug prices.

Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer on Tuesday announced that it would roll back planned drug price increases for July — following a discussion with President Donald Trump, who had just criticized the company on Twitter a day before.

"We applaud Pfizer for this decision and hope other companies do the same. Great news for the American people!" Trump said on Twitter Tuesday evening.




https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/af ... es-n890431
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

paperburn1
Posts: 2314
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby paperburn1 » Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:35 am

More truthspeak from trump
Pfizer really delayed the increases rather than canceling them: The company says Trump has until the end of the year to implement a drug pricing blueprint he introduced in May, and if he doesn’t, it will go ahead and hike prices again. They already hiked most prices by ten percent and were going to do it again. I will place good money the second price hike happens.
Trump is right about one thing, drug prices are far higher in the USA than overseas. That I have seen with my own eyes.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

Diogenes
Posts: 6912
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm
Location: Ft. Sill Oklahoma

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby Diogenes » Thu Jul 12, 2018 8:42 pm

paperburn1 wrote:More truthspeak from trump
Pfizer really delayed the increases rather than canceling them: The company says Trump has until the end of the year to implement a drug pricing blueprint he introduced in May, and if he doesn’t, it will go ahead and hike prices again. They already hiked most prices by ten percent and were going to do it again. I will place good money the second price hike happens.
Trump is right about one thing, drug prices are far higher in the USA than overseas. That I have seen with my own eyes.



He can always threaten to use the Canadian approach on them. :)
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

choff
Posts: 2390
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby choff » Fri Jul 13, 2018 12:22 am

Diogenes wrote:
paperburn1 wrote:More truthspeak from trump
Pfizer really delayed the increases rather than canceling them: The company says Trump has until the end of the year to implement a drug pricing blueprint he introduced in May, and if he doesn’t, it will go ahead and hike prices again. They already hiked most prices by ten percent and were going to do it again. I will place good money the second price hike happens.
Trump is right about one thing, drug prices are far higher in the USA than overseas. That I have seen with my own eyes.



He can always threaten to use the Canadian approach on them. :)


Good idea, far more free enterprise and far less Socialist.
CHoff

williatw
Posts: 1645
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby williatw » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:50 pm

Strzok clown show hearing was everything I said it would be and more
LIZ SHELD


Congressman Gohmert delivered a massive bombshell that went unacknowledged yesterday. While questioning the smirking FBI agent, Gohmert asked about a meeting Strzok attended with the the Intelligence Community's Inspector General's (ICIG) office where the FBI was informed that almost every single one of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's emails were being forwarded to an unspecified foreign agent. This discovery was made while examining Clinton's home-brewed bathroom server used to traffic all of her government communications, including classified material. Let me repeat that: all of the former United States secretary of state's emails (around 30,000 emails) were being forwarded to a foreign power. All the folks shrieking about imaginary foreign influence on Trump do not seem to care about this AT ALL.

Strzok remembered the meeting but did not remember what was discussed because of course, one wouldn't remember being told that all of the secretary of state's emails had been obtained by a foreign country.



https://pjmedia.com/blog/liveblogevent/ ... ry-234960/
Last edited by williatw on Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

williatw
Posts: 1645
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby williatw » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:24 pm

12 Russians indicted in Mueller investigation


Washington (CNN) — The Justice Department announced indictments against 12 Russian nationals as part of special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, accusing them of engaging in a "sustained effort" to hack Democrats' emails and computer networks.


Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said the indictment does not name any American citizen, but told reporters that defendants "corresponded with several Americans during the course of the conspiracy through the internet."

"There is no allegation in this indictment that any American citizen committed a crime," Rosenstein said at a news conference. "There is no allegation that the conspiracy altered the vote count or changed any election result."


https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/13/politics ... index.html


So that would have to logically mean that Trump and his associates (Manafort, Donald Trump Junior, Kushner etc.) are so far after around 2 years worth of "impartial non-partisan investigation" in the clear at least as far as "collaborating with Russia to influence the 2016 election" the stated purpose of said investigation right? After all this is the 2nd wave of just apparently Russians being indicted; people or entities that will likely never be put on trial with little mention of Americans (or the Trump people):

On February 16, 2018, Special Counsel Robert Mueller obtained a federal indictment of 13 Russian nationals and 3 Russian companies for conspiring to wage “information warfare” by “impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of the United States by dishonest means in order to enable Defendants to interfere with U.S. political processes, including the 2016 presidential election.”

https://spectator.org/robert-muellers-g ... ted-wound/
Last edited by williatw on Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.

williatw
Posts: 1645
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby williatw » Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:57 am

williatw wrote:So that would have to logically mean that Trump and his associates (Manafort, Donald Trump Junior, Kushner etc.) are so far after around 2 years worth of "impartial non-partisan investigation" in the clear at least as far as "collaborating with Russia to influence the 2016 election" the stated purpose of said investigation right?



House conservatives prep push to impeach Rosenstein

Image
Conservative GOP lawmakers have been plotting to remove Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for weeks.



House conservatives are preparing a new push to oust Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, according to three conservative Capitol Hill sources — putting the finishing touches on an impeachment filing even as Rosenstein announced the indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers for interfering in the 2016 election.

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, in fact, had the impeachment document on the floor of the House at the very moment that Rosenstein spoke to reporters and TV cameras Friday.

Conservative GOP lawmakers have been plotting to remove Rosenstein for weeks, accusing him of slow-walking their probe of FBI agents they’ve accused of bias against President Donald Trump.


https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/ ... ent-719816

paperburn1
Posts: 2314
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby paperburn1 » Sat Jul 14, 2018 7:00 pm

we have been influencing election for decades, so have the russians . I understand the concern but it has been happening forever.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

williatw
Posts: 1645
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby williatw » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:19 pm

paperburn1 wrote:we have been influencing election for decades, so have the russians . I understand the concern but it has been happening forever.


Agreed paperburn1...but you seem to be dodging commenting on the core point; that it is conspicuously Russians being indicted once more in droves, but a conspicuous lack of Americans (to say nothing of Trump's people) being indicted (for collusion). What does that say about the efficacy of Mueller's probe so far, given that the purpose is to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election & collusion with the Trump administration? I see the interference, but where is the collusion; the supposed real point of the whole investigation?

choff
Posts: 2390
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby choff » Sun Jul 15, 2018 4:13 am

It's my understanding that the indictment is on all the senior GRU officers in Russia for spying on the United States. Isn't that supposed to be part of their job description in the first place? How seriously would a Russian court indictment on top CIA officers for spying on Russia be taken?
CHoff

ladajo
Posts: 6153
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby ladajo » Sun Jul 15, 2018 12:47 pm

It is not about the court case. It is about outing methods and sources. This is a shot fired at the Russian Cyber Ship, and scoring a hit, "you aren't as smart as you think, and now you need to wonder what else we know you are doing as we were willing to out you on this..."
The court case will go nowhere. This is well understood. Using the world of intelligence perspective, you should be wondering what and when the Russian reciprocity event will be. Will it be substantive or invented?
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

paperburn1
Posts: 2314
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

Postby paperburn1 » Mon Jul 16, 2018 8:08 pm

From the NPC
The term “collusion” is defined as “concerted activity toward a common purpose.”[2] The colloquial connotation of the word indicates that people who “collude” have worked together, usually in secret, to do something illegal. Still, other than in an antitrust context, “collusion” is not the name of a crime. (In antitrust law, two product sellers who conspire to set the price for goods may be guilty of “collusion,” but that is obviously not relevant here.) Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy recently wrote that “collusion is a hopelessly vague term.” There is no federal law that criminalizes collusion between a political campaign and foreign government. Even though “colluding” with a foreign government, especially one as hostile as the Russian government may be inappropriate or politically damaging, it’s not illegal. In this sense, collusion is viewed as a political term and not a legal term.
As a result, Trump Jr, Manafort, and Kushner could not be prosecuted under a charge called “collusion.”
So why would Muller even be investigating something that is not a federal crime.
Collusion...Meh
Side note, I wonder how many were with the SVR? :wink:
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests