POTUS 2017

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2090
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by DooDoot » Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:49 am

Why is Fox New's Tucker Carlson preaching the common sense truth? Does he want to get fired? Did someone somewhere grow a human conscience? :shrug:


User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 19930
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by retrofuturist » Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:11 am

Greetings DooDoot,

Tucker very often speaks common sense. The prejudice and aversion in some quarters regarding Tucker seems to be primarily due to the network he is on, and his aptitude at highlighting hypocrisy and incongruous perspectives in certain guests.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

pulga
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by pulga » Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:01 am

Tucker nailed it.

chownah
Posts: 7333
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by chownah » Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:57 pm

Premptive strike:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney% ... ,_or_fraud
When the privilege may not apply
When an attorney is not acting primarily as an attorney but, for instance, as a business advisor, member of the Board of Directors, or in another non-legal role, then the privilege generally does not apply.[7].......
.....
......
Disclosure in case of a crime, tort, or fraud
The crime-fraud exception can render the privilege moot when communications between an attorney and client are themselves used to further a crime, tort, or fraud. In Clark v. United States, the US Supreme Court stated that "A client who consults an attorney for advice that will serve him in the commission of a fraud will have no help from the law. He must let the truth be told."[8] The crime-fraud exception also does require that the crime or fraud discussed between client and attorney be carried out to be triggered.[9] US Courts have not yet conclusively ruled how little knowledge an attorney can have of the underlying crime or fraud before the privilege detaches and the attorney's communications or requisite testimony become admissible.[10]....
....
....
chownah

pulga
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by pulga » Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:33 pm

Granted that campaign violations are crimes, they happen all the time. I think the DOJ is being too aggressive in its investigation of Cohen, possibly with the intention of baiting Trump to fire Mueller.

chownah
Posts: 7333
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by chownah » Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:47 pm

pulga wrote:
Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:33 pm
Granted that campaign violations are crimes, they happen all the time. I think the DOJ is being too aggressive in its investigation of Cohen, possibly with the intention of baiting Trump to fire Mueller.
Of course you do.
chownah

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 19930
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by retrofuturist » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:47 am



Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by Sam Vara » Fri May 11, 2018 6:35 am

David Reynolds with a typically incendiary article about Trump.

http://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogs ... rn_10.html

You can read this dispassionately, as another sentient being's thoughts about a topic which affects us all and merits wise consideration. Or, if you prefer, you can treat it as very high-octane fuel for one of your own fires.

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 2766
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by robertk » Fri May 11, 2018 8:15 am

Sam Vara wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 6:35 am
David Reynolds with a typically incendiary article about Trump.

http://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogs ... rn_10.html

You can read this dispassionately, as another sentient being's thoughts about a topic which affects us all and merits wise consideration. Or, if you prefer, you can treat it as very high-octane fuel for one of your own fires.
love it.

User avatar
Pseudobabble
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 11:11 am
Location: London

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by Pseudobabble » Fri May 11, 2018 1:20 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 6:35 am
David Reynolds with a typically incendiary article about Trump.

http://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogs ... rn_10.html

You can read this dispassionately, as another sentient being's thoughts about a topic which affects us all and merits wise consideration. Or, if you prefer, you can treat it as very high-octane fuel for one of your own fires.
Very nice.
"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.'" - Aggi-Vacchagotta Sutta


'Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.' - Genesis 3:19

'Some fart freely, some try to hide and silence it. Which one is correct?' - Saegnapha

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Fri May 11, 2018 6:20 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 6:35 am
David Reynolds with a typically incendiary article about Trump.

http://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogs ... rn_10.html

You can read this dispassionately, as another sentient being's thoughts about a topic which affects us all and merits wise consideration. Or, if you prefer, you can treat it as very high-octane fuel for one of your own fires.
So this typically incendiary article is commented on as:
  • Meriting wise consideration
  • Very nice.
  • Love it
I'm attempting to understand what the beliefs and views are here.
I'm thinking that all three comments may indicate sarcasm or derision.

QUESTION:
Inquiring minds would like to know one or two ideas in this "typically incendiary article" you liked, was nice, merited wise consideration.

My thinking:
The level of anti-Trump criticism is what might be expected from a news media that is staffed to a high degree with persons with contrary viewpoints.

There seem to be major differences in ideas between political left and right in the US about what constitutes constructive protest and behavior on behalf of the "loyal opposition".

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3855
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by Sam Vara » Fri May 11, 2018 8:32 pm

Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 6:20 pm
Sam Vara wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 6:35 am
David Reynolds with a typically incendiary article about Trump.

http://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogs ... rn_10.html

You can read this dispassionately, as another sentient being's thoughts about a topic which affects us all and merits wise consideration. Or, if you prefer, you can treat it as very high-octane fuel for one of your own fires.
So this typically incendiary article is commented on as:
  • Meriting wise consideration
  • Very nice.
  • Love it
I'm attempting to understand what the beliefs and views are here.
I'm thinking that all three comments may indicate sarcasm or derision.
I can only speak for myself, of course, but my point about wise consideration was not sarcastic or derisory. We can indeed subject the political and media phenomenon of Donald Trump to wise consideration, just as we can any phenomenon that arises in our world. In fact, I would prefer that people take that approach rather than the other I mentioned. The "wise consideration" referred to Trump rather than the article, but of course, the same applies.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 19930
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by retrofuturist » Wed May 16, 2018 11:06 pm

Greetings,



Metta,
Paul. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
Kamran
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 3:14 am

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by Kamran » Sat May 19, 2018 6:07 pm

Hey Paul,

Have you seen this video of Bill Gates meeting with Trump.

Its so funny :)

"Silence gives answers"

Jalal ad-Din Muhammad Rumi

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 11658
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: POTUS 2017

Post by DNS » Sun May 20, 2018 4:47 am

Trump will not be impeached. Many Democrats and liberals are hoping to elect a big blue wave this November in the hope of impeaching Trump. It's not going to happen and here it is explained why it won't happen by a progressive/liberal; Bill Maher.



47:35

edit: apparently the video has been removed by youtube. I thought it was uploaded from Bill Maher's own site, but perhaps it was not?

Bill Maher was bashing Trump and of course wants Trump out of the presidency, but he was explaining why it won't happen. Some of the main points were that the Constitution protects him and that it takes 2/3 of Congress to convict him. The Democrats are too wishy-washy to do that and they need several Republican Congressmen to join them in voting for conviction, which isn't going to happen. He of course included some funny comedy into it, but was not praising Trump or wishing him to stay in office, only noting that the reality is that it's not going to happen.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests