Note On Trump Documentary

So I managed to watch some of the Trump documentary. Since I was already familiar with much of the Trump story, I was more interested in details. I recall discussing the recent NYT expose on Fred Trump and the Trump organization's business practices. I commented that this story will probably disappear because the implications were not just against Trump senior and The Donald, but would implicate various persons in NYS and NYC government, without whom many of the things that transpired could not have happened. That is, some people in NYS and NYC government either did not do their due diligence or they did and essentially aided in defrauding the state and private entities. And this is before considering how much Mob influence was involved. So the two things that stood out for me in the documentary was as follows: 1) The HUGE bluffs that Trump played when getting the deal to build Trump Tower. Apparently, when asked for proof that he had permissions from the railroad company that owned the land to build on it (or something to that effect), he produced an unsigned contract. Nobody checked the signature page.

0.o

The only way Trump could have even thought that he could get away with that is if that kind of behavior worked before. IMO. That was some gross negligence to not check for signatures. This kind of behavior seemed to be typical of Trump and I would dare say other high-risk business persons in NY and elsewhere. A lot of negotiations, etc. hinge on misrepresentation. You know the saying: Buyer beware.

This was shown again when he was going for the casino license for the Taj. Again, he said banks were lining up to give him money. No one on the commission apparently asked for proof. Can you imagine going to buy a car and telling the finance guy that banks are lined up to give you money and the finance guy not asking for proof? No? Exactly. But as Trump said, they wanted to be conned. 2) The extent to which Trump depends on others to complete projects. That female contractor who essentially built Trump Tower is representative of that. The guy who ran the two Trump casinos is another example. Trump is really a relationship/transaction guy. He's a 'big picture" guy who needs to have experts around him to do the actual work. It is probably a huge shock to "progressives" that Trump put a woman in charge of building his signature building.

This brings us to president Trump. Point two above has been used by various persons in his immediate circle to undercut the issues that got him elected. He is looking at a high probability of being a one term president due to this.

The quick ejections of Bannon, among others are examples of Trump's transactional relationship style. Bannon was useful for the election. Afterward, not so much.

The thing that may/will trip up Trump is that unlike in his companies, he can be fired. He was elected on very specific issues. Failure to deliver will imperil his 2020 campaign (to the extent that the Democrats don't self-sabotage by being the political arm of the Socialist Party USA).

A Threat To Democracy

Ever since Trump's improbable election to the US presidency, Democrats and anyone in the "Never Trump" camp have wailed about the threat to democracy that Trump represented. The evidence of this has been his use of executive power in the same manner that has been done by his predecessors. However; since his use of said power is in opposition to the way certain interests want it to be, then it is "bad for democracy". One of the points trotted out is that Clinton won the popular vote and therefore Clinton should be president.

It is lost on those making the popular vote claim that the US Constitution was created specifically to thwart the popular vote. The founders realized that if the president (and at the time senators) were elected by popular vote, those areas with dense populations would be able to rule over those in [relatively] sparsely populated areas of the country. This is one of the reasons that while Representatives are delegated in proportion to population, Senators are equally apportioned. This system is a check on the seizing of power via population manipulation. It's not perfect but it is how American democracy works.

To be sure there have been times where the "loser" of popular votes have won the presidency. Those persons understood the system and agreed to abide by its rules and didn't become sourpusses. Then came Clinton. Instead of gracefully accepting defeat as she should have, it was an all-out attack on the institutions. Trump must be a Russian agent and the Electoral College is "not fair". This is typical third-world country shit where the loser claims all manner of interference in order to delegitimize the winner (though there IS often interference). The repeated claims of "unfairness" sets the population up to never trust the process. This is what American electioneering is headed to, but quick. And so the Democrats are attacking the Electoral College directly in Colorado:

he Democrat-controlled Legislature approved a bill Thursday calling for Colorado to join other states in casting presidential electoral votes for the winner of the national popular vote.

Gov. Jared Polis, also a Democrat, has said he will sign the measure. Currently, the state's electoral votes are cast for whoever wins in Colorado.

In essence, the voters of Colorado are going to be robbed of their votes. Trust and believe that this is being done ONLY because Trump won the last election. Had Clinton carried the Electoral votes and lost the popular vote this would not have even been discussed. Colorado's electors do not represent the "national vote". They represent the voters in their state and their state alone. Period. Full stop. If the people in their state voted for the "loser" in the popular vote (whoever it may be) and their electors decide to vote the way say, Florida who voted for the winner voted, it is a misrepresentation of the voters in Colorado. THAT is a threat to American Democracy.

"Trans" Folk Learn About Privilege

If the author of the video looks familiar, well, yeah but I'm not saying. Anyway, 14 minutes and feminism is broken into itty bitty pieces.

All Of Them Were Wrong. None of Them Will Apologize

Click for a larger version. Elected officials who cannot abide by innocent until proven guilty are not fit for office. How many times do these folk have to violate this principle before the people wise up?

Bernie Announces...He's Learned Nothing

Two things about Bernie Sanders recent announcement that he will run again:

1) He's learned NOTHING from Hillary Clinton. In his announcement he went on a tirade against Trump saying that Trump is racist, homophobic, xenophobic, sexist...I think that's it. Basically this is his own Basket of Deplorable comment. Right out the block. Because it implies, strongly that his supporters, about half the country, are also racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, etc. So basically he's flipped off a good portion of the electoral college right out the gate. Good luck with that.

Well let me be careful with that last bit because with the demographic changes going on, in part due to the children of illegal aliens Democrats are hoping 2020 is the year that they tip enough states, not by convincing Americans they have better policies but by having imported a new voting block. We shall see.

2) He couldn't answer the "how to pay for medicare for all" question. When asked about how to pay for his medicare for all he said that prices would fall for doctor visits and for medication. Well that doesn't answer the question. I posted on the potential costs associated with medicare for all:

Medicare presently covers some 58 million people in one or more of its plans. The government last year spent $597 billion on these beneficiaries, representing about 14 percent of all government spending, and generating 3 percent of economic activity. Had the country extended coverage to all 323 million Americans in 2017, it would have cost Washington more than $2.6 trillion, almost 65 percent of the total budget, and over 75 percent of government revenues for the year.

75% eh?

Someone pose this to Bernie. Oh and on top of that he wants free college tuition. Well, having blown 75% of the budget on medicare, how much would the free college tuition cost? And after that, what else gets paid for? Oh we don't have anything left? Welcome to Socialism. Perhaps the state can take 50% or more of your income to pay for all the free stuff Bernie is promising. And you can watch him spend it on people who at the time of ratification, didn't cross the newly abolished border. After all, no one is "illegal" and if YOUR quality of care, which you were taxed through to nose for, takes a nose dive, well that's what you signed up for...ennit?

A Hoax In Chicago

You'll note that I had nothing to say when Jussie's story came out. One reason is because having woken up to the fact that fake "hate crimes" are not only a thing but that they also happen frequently. Also that even when events happen too many black people are willing to tell bald faced lies in order to "stick it to the man". To paraphrase Yoda:

The truth is my ally and strong ally it is.

Other people jumped to Jussie's "defense" because of course there are roving gangs of white men in red MAGA hats looking to noose up, bleach up and beat up black men in the middle of the night. Of COURSE there are. Except that there aren't. Even people who are running for the highest office of the land. The office in which we uphold the constitution where supposedly people are innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. People running for that office, quickly jumped to conclusions, offered up new "legislation" and quickly did the Orange Man Bad routine. These people showed all that they are unfit for office. If a person in government cannot zip their mouths and let the professionals do their jobs and withhold blanket condemnations of supposed citizens until the facts are all in, then they shouldn't be president. But this isn't about candidates for office.

The story as told was preposterous on it's face. It was the beginning of the polar vortex that had Chicago at -9 degrees F. Supposedly a wind chill of -18. Allegedly two white men lay in wait for Jussie at 2AM in this kind of weather. These men were soooooooooo motivated by a hate of black people that they sat in a park at 2AM in -18F temps with bleach and rope to target one black guy and not take shit from him.

Look, there weren't even any shootings in Chicago that night. Real crooks were looking for somewhere warm (and possibly wet) that night.

Even more preposterous is that these "white men" yelled "This is MAGA country"....in Chicago.

Really.

In. Chicago.

Anyone with an once of sense should have been skeptical.

It is fitting to me that the great unraveling happened after Disney gave Jussie a platform with Robbin Roberts.

Disney is best known for it's fiction. Quite fitting. Robin Roberts lost my respect when she went after Chris Brown during an interview that was supposed to be about his album release. And while I think he should have handled it better (Rihanna was subject to a similar ambush and handled it much better) Roberts was out of order. Hence I was glad that the day she gave him national air time to tell his lie, it was dealt a devastating blow by Chitown PD.

One of the great laughs I got out of this was how various news agencies declined to identify the race of the Nigerians. I mean seriously. We all know where Nigeria is located on the map. Hell, you don't even have to know where Nigeria is *in* Africa to know it is *IN* Africa and that since 99% of the population *IN* Africa are black, you can say so. Why should they have said so? Because they were quick to assume white people were responsible. One news outlet even said that the Nigerian nationals were African-American. This is a mistake I've witnessed Black Americans make.

******
[edit 10:39PM: Reports say that the brothers were in fact born in Chicago. That would make them African-Americans. ]
********

As of this writing the claim by CPD is that Jussie paid the men $3500. That won't even pay the lawyers.

But lets get serious here. How NOT oppressed are people when they have to make up "hate crimes" against themselves. Feminists do it. Muslims do it. Blacks do it. I'll remind the reader that in NYC alone:

During the past 22 months, not one person caught or identified as the aggressor in an anti-Semitic hate crime has been associated with a far right-wing group, Mark Molinari, commanding officer of the police department’s Hate Crimes Task Force, told me.

Also when it comes to attacks on black people:

In 2016, 52% of anti-black crimes were committed by Latino/as (compared to 59% the previous year). Latino/a on black crimes plunged from 64 to 38, a 41% drop.

Please note that many "latinos" are actually identified as white in crime statistics because many latinos identify and are in fact white. (something I did not know before) which inflates white crime rates in which "white" is assumed "non-hispanic white". This may change in the future as the benefits, both socially and economically, of being not-white increase. Yes, you read right, "benefits".

So what should be learned from this fiasco?

1)NEVER believe "The Victim" unless you actually witnessed the event in question. If you weren't there you have no reason to believe anyone. You respect the alleged victim by supporting them and encouraging them to report the alleged offense. Anyone unwilling to report *should not be trusted*.

2) Believe the evidence. Properly obtained and handled evidence is how things are to be judged. None of this "my truth" shit. "My truth" is another term of "anecdotal evidence" which is not useful.

3) Stop trusting media entities. This particularly applies to major media outlets both left and right. Consider any and all of them to be agents of propaganda for their particular narratives and interests. They will promote whatever fits with what they want you to think and omit (even by going back and editing their websites) whatever does not. In academia (outside of grievance studies) no one takes media references as "proof" or evidence. They are not considered primary sources. If a article quotes a paper or a person, you follow that link or search for that publication and read it yourself. Many times the news article has completely misrepresented what is said in the paper.

Treat news reports like you treat snow forecasts: Wrong enough times to be skeptical.

4) Stop believing every black person who says they were profiled or otherwise done wrong. Not that these things don't happen, but OFTEN the stories are extreme exaggerations of actual events AND the person usually behaved in a way that escalated the incident. Black people are not angels...or devils. Black people are humans with all the flaws that come with that.

5) The police can get your phone records without your permission. Giving them an edited version of them looks bad.

Covington Truth

I learned my lesson on believing the mainstream media during the Mike Brown fiasco. While I wait out the latest from Chicago, here's a video on the Covington kids.