Jump to content

chocolat steve

Board Sponsors
  • Content count

    9530
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    67

Everything posted by chocolat steve

  1. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    Two things about Hillary and the server. It is not totally clear she broke the law. It's open to interpretation. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31806907 When she became secretary of state, the controlling interpretation of the 1950 Federal Records Act was that officials using personal email accounts must ensure that official correspondence is turned over to the government. Ten months after she took office, a new regulation allowed the use of private emails only if federal records were "preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system". Mrs Clinton maintains that this requirement was satisfied because most of her emails from her personal account went to, or were forwarded to, people with government accounts, so they were automatically archived. Any other emails were turned over to State Department officials when they issued a request to her - and several of her predecessors - in October 2014. She said it is the responsibility of the government employee "to determine what's personal and what's work-related" and that she's gone "above and beyond" what she was asked to do. In November 2014 President Barack Obama signed the Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments, which require government officials to forward any official correspondence to the government within 20 days. Even under this new law, however, the penalties are only administrative, not criminal. The State Department inspector general report, released in May 2016, found that Mrs Clinton's email system violated government policy and that she did not receive permission prior to instituting it - approval that would not have been granted had she asked. Such transgressions, however, do not constitute criminal conduct. FBI director James Comey announced the results of a separate FBI investigation on 5 July and concluded that that while "there is evidence of potential violations" of criminal statues covering the mishandling of classified information, "our judgement is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case". It referred the matter to the Justice Department, which closed the case against Mrs Clinton and her aides with no charges. It's not a slam dunk, it's totally about perception of the law. FInally, the FBI, led by a Republican pretty much slammed the door on any prosecution. It's not a winnable case. I don't have a horse in this race. I wouldn't have voted for her (didn't vote and being out of the country is not a good excuse). Also, if we go down that road we MUST also file a case against a whole lotta folks in the Bush administration as well as Ivanka and what makes Ivanka worse is she knows better from the Clinton issue. Precedence says its up to interpretation. I appreciate you don't like her (hate is probably more accurate), but it's done. I've posted links to similar types of breach of protocal. And we simply can't dismiss Trump's insistance on using an unsecured phone. He KNOWINGLY did it. It's done. The whole 'lock her up thing' is dead and If Trump was serious he could easily have ordered her prosecuted. Why hasn't he? Because there is nothing there. It's political theater. I get that. Either side would do the same. But its just that. Political theater and nothing else.
  2. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    Not that I'm defending Hillary, because I am not a fan, BUT the fact of the matter is the whole email thing with her is hypocrisy and "selective prosecution". Can it be seen as technically illegal? Sure and so is jay walking on a deserted street. There was NOTHING uniquely wrong that she did that hasn't been happening in previous administrations. In fact Trump himself uses an unsecured phone for all those tweets despite White House security telling him not to. https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/19/politics/ivanka-trump-personal-email-account/index.html https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/05/trumps-unsecured-iphones-make-clintons-basement-server-look-like-fort-knox https://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/george-w-bush-white-house-lost-22-million-emails-497373.html https://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/colin-powell-defends-personal-email-227889
  3. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    There have always been a few rumors about the Saudis involved financially with Trump. https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20160825-saudi-prince-says-he-twice-saved-trump-from-bankruptcy/?fbclid=IwAR0gVY3FP_ioSvXq8G7dM3a9PD6S-LSYepLhkIVZLUjBMC2hwKCPWNzaaBo#.W_FHh7Dc8Js.facebook
  4. chocolat steve

    Manila And Angeles Update

    Only place I know in Manila is Burgos street, in Makati very close to the Century Mall. Are there other places?
  5. chocolat steve

    Is Japan F*cked?

    Japan's economy has been stagnant for the most part since the end of their boom years of the'80s. Starting in the early 90s its had a moribund, stagant period that hasn't gone away. Its going on nearly 30 years!! The reason that is whispered about is they are a top heavy society. Meaning the members who are retirement age are way too high and not enough young people paying into the system to sustain their great healthcare, pension and other things they have enjoyed for decades. Their birthrate is the real issue. The young people aren't marrying. A fairly high percentage of thier millennial males have pretty much accepted a life of no wife, anime and bleak existance. The Japanese need immigration, but the Japanese have always seen themselve as unique, even superior. They don't consider themselves Asian than just Japanese...a unique and special "race" The government has done all it can to encourage people to get married, even date but its not happening. About 4 years ago it was estimated 1/3 of their population was over 60 years old and its only increasing. Their kids have started abandoning them which is very Un-Japanese. Retirement homes was never a significant part of their society now its becoming so. The Japanese are going to 'live or die' by remaining homogeneous. My guess is the next global recession/crash will force a change in society. What that change will be is anyone's guess. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/13/economy/bank-of-japan-economy/index.html
  6. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    Hopefully not invidually, but NZ isn't immune as well. I know I sound alarmist but it's pretty much a dead on certainty. The ones who are prepared will obviously not be as badly as affected as others. The rich will get richer because, just like post 2008, they will pick up valuable assets for pennies on the dollar. Maybe we can be one of those who get cheap assets?
  7. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    It's going to be global. Australia, the UK, China, all the usual suspects.
  8. I'm not going to go so far as blame Hillary Clinton. However, slavery in some form or another has been going on in North Africa in perpetuity. The migrant issue just made it bigger. It was going when Qadaffi was there as well but it was far more underground. The arabs have been enslaving Africans (and others) for over well over 1500 years to varying degrees of quantity. That said, the lack of global outcry is alarming. What is more alarming is why the subsaharan African countries aren't boycotting, threatening war, whatever. It's 2018!!
  9. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    It's not going to end well. This non partisan. We are nursing at least 4 bubbles (Housing, Credit Card, Student Loan, Car Loans) and I would suggest a couple others (shale/fracking bubble..don't laugh there is one. http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/will-fracking-industry-debts-set-off-financial-tremors/ and corporate debt bubble https://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/beware-the-mother-of-all-credit-bubbles national debt bubble if/when interest rest rise https://www.newsmax.com/finance/trevorgerszt/united-states-ever-growing-debt-bubble/2017/09/12/id/813086/ ) https://www.npr.org/2018/10/16/657790901/federal-deficit-jumps-17-percent-as-tax-cuts-eat-into-government-revenue?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR0zIdlpVVQUqAXII2W6ExAQ5NWY6CtvvJtqO5PSsp7y0rgxWfNfQd45d2U
  10. chocolat steve

    Britain

    Help me completely understand the whole issue of Theresa May and Brexit? The news media doesn't really spell it out. What are Brits who complain about her handling of it, have problems with how she is managing it? What are the main impediments?
  11. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    He has a lot of hardcore support. He is not really the issue if that is someone's concern.
  12. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    Melania is now doing the public thing with officials https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/13/politics/melania-trump-mira-ricardel/index.html?fbclid=IwAR2ZORdTj6_gQ4CVhVISDbG9hnQyUmZUAMM-RwpRfngzhBNPqjMG7vpiyWw
  13. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    No one in terms of the Fed Chief, the President, the talking heads on MSNBC, and the financial media. They were all complicit. There were plenty of people saying it but they weren't let on the major media and major financial news shows. The movie The Big Short talks about a couple of them who saw the housing bubble well in advance. The smart money (or at least some of them) aren't going to lose out this time around. The next crisis can happen at any time. The prevailing wisdom is at or near 2020 but no one has every been able to pin it down exactly, even the year. The ones who called in 2008 were saying 2006...no? 2007 then....and so on. Financial history tells us though that there is a strong possibility it will happen in the month of October. For whatever reason that no one can figure out the biggest financial crashes in the last 100 years or so have happened in October. The Panic of 1907 that almost bankrupted the banking system and ushered in the need for the Federal Reserve, the Great Depression, the 1987 crash and The Great Recession of 2008 all happened in the month of October and all of them were triggered by different factors and economists have no idea why its so. Only theories but nothing concrete. The next crash could happen in 2019 or 2021 or tomorrow. No one really knows. I do think though it may not happen until the prevailing rise in consumer confidence since the Trump election turns to disillusion. The Federal Reserve raising interest rates will likely cause it and its why Trump is publicly criticizing them. There is a critical mass point where the raising of rates will make the national debt minimum payment amount to 1 trillion and that is untenable. Which is roughly .20 cents of every dollar we take in used just to service the debt and the debt is rising at a faster under Trump than it did under Obama.
  14. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    The Stock Market I follow the market fairly closely because I have some sadistic desire to lose money (traders understand that sarcasm). Anyway, today was another one of is sometimes referrred to as a 'flash crash'. Meaning the market takes a signficant drop but its not sustained into a full blown crash like it did in 2008. The stock market has been on an almost geometrically perfect incline since March 2009 all the way up till February of this year. If you had your 401(k) pegged to the market, you didn't make anything this year. First time in 9 years. Economists now say the 2008 "Great Recession" was actually already in a recession in 2007. No one told the American people. The powers that be who are in charge will always lie about the economy because consumer confidence is a big part of any economy. The economy is not really much better now than it was under Obama. What has changed? The ones who support Trump "think" its better. The ones that haven't may have 'drank the kool aid' and think its better or are neutral. The fact is the economy has actually gotten a little worse and Trump was dead on when he said during the primaries and general election that the true unemployment rate is about 20 percent and the economy is not good. http://fortune.com/2016/08/08/donald-trump-hoax/ He was right about Obama's economy. It wasn't as good as the numbers were saying they were. But Trump had the benefit of those numbers and using the same exact calculations now takes credit for a "booming" economy. It's not. The stock market is having hiccups and the shock is no one is talking about especially the Democrats which, politically, shows how terrible they are at setting narratives. ] If you no are no longer actively looking for a job after 18 months or whatever the time that is now being used, you are taken off the column for unemployed. Obama didn't invent that but he took advantage of the accounting and now Trump is. Also, people are grossly under employed. Many if not most of the great jobs pre 2008 simply are gone, and hasn't returned and probably won't. If you ask the average person if they have a good job, they will look at you like you farted. 15, 20 years ago if you walked into a FedEx, or went to Whole Foods, or Starbux, the manager there didn't have a college degree, maybe some college, often one of the minority groups or single moms. College educated people rarely worked at those jobs. II'm not criticizing these jobs. It's a decent job, an honest days work. But people in those jobs can't afford a mortgage and rent or they are married to someone with a better job and/or part of a 2 income family. I was in Los Angeles in April and May of this year and those jobs are young college educated, largely white guys/gals. Why? They can't find office jobs. Those entry level office jobs for recent grads are gone. You also find more college grads trying to work for the city, county, state of federal government. They wouldn't take those jobs 20 years ago. People are grossly under employed. People are also one paycheck away from insolvency. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/most-americans-are-one-medical-emergency-away-from-financial-disaster-2017-01-12 https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/millions-americans-underemployed-0820 I listen to a guy named Peter Schiff sometimes. He is a pure capitalist. He agreed with Trump's view of the economy in the primaries and voted for him. He now says Trump is accepting data he shitted on before. And he has made a grave mistake by publicly taken ownership of a rotten economy and when it crashes he won't be able to blame anyone else like Obama did with Bush.
  15. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    I used to like the Clintons. Back in the '90s. I no longer like them and so in full disclosure, i am still not a fan and blame Bill for legislation that has resulted in deep endemic issues in America. Hillary isn't one of my faves either. I also find it within Bill's M.O. that a lot of the allegations when he was Arkansas governor is true. Rape may be a bridge too far I would be willing to go but sexual harassment is well within what we know about him. I think he is too smart for forcible rape (as opposed to statutory rape as he is rumored to have committed on a black minor). Anyway, if we are going to use prior acts before becoming president as a standard. I understand that but for me, it was well known. The people elected him knowing these rumors and allegations and so if that is the standard, why isn't there multiple investigations into Trump? It's not just allegations, a great man things are facts. The people elected him warts and all. Let's be honest. These investigations in past acts is not about justice but to reverse an election both Clinton and Trump won fair and square. I have to think that if anyone found those Clinton investigations proper and are fair, then the Mueller investigation is valid as well as any further investigations the Democrats may conduct about the mountainous past of malfeasance in Trump's career and life.
  16. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    Turnabout is fair play I guess. Bill Clinton got hit with inane investigations from his Governor days and the first lady at the time as well. Then the longest investigation in government history with regards to Hillary. Longer than the JFK assassination investigation as well as Watergate. And the irony was that Bush deserved far more scrutiny as well.
  17. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    Thiis is going to sound a little crazy considering the fact its obvious I'm not a huge Trump fan BUT I will say this. Unless Mueller finds a "smoking gun" of a magntitude that will shake even Trump's biggest supporters, I wouldn't like to see the Dems use any infraction as a reason to impeach. I would prefer Trump to be removed by the simplest (but hardest) way and that is the people vote him out. My personal opinion is that impeachment should be something that would even persuade a President's supporters if we believe that our fellow Americans when faced with a moral decision as a collective will do the right thing. Nixon lost the faith of the people as well as his own party. Clinton didn't. Both cases suggest what it implies.
  18. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    This is my huge fear and what I have to think the government is thinking the same but are keeping it to themselves. What happens if/when the next market crash happens and its worse than 2008 and it hits the working and middle class severely? What kind of trigger in terms of shootings, etc. will this incur? I think its a very real possiblity the severity and frequencty of mass shootings will escalate and perhaps spill over to groups of people who didn't do that prior. That is my big fear. And if so, how do you cope with it? Gun control isn't going to stop it. I think the toothpaste is already out the tube. Too many in circulation and anything that hints of a ban will only increase the number of guns bought and attempts to hide them.
  19. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    I wish it were that simple. I will assume judging from Cav and Flash's posts that the mainstream media (CNN, MSNBC) and even conservative mainstream (Fox News, Breitbart) will not report this? I do have misgivings if it were as simple as pschiatric drugs. But then again, I will also say big Pharma has a very powerful lobby in Washington DC. Hmmm...its just too narrow a group, if it was spread more evenly across all strata but I'd love to see a study about the level of psychiatric drug use and the shooters in a formal study.
  20. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    Only almost always white men over 40 or so are prescribed these drugs? Maybe the shooters are all on drugs but those types of prescriptions are prescribed to thousands of people, thousands of men, across all walks of life. So, I find it hard to see how these shootings aren't distributed more across society with regards to gays, blacks, latinos, women, etc. That question isn't answered. Any possible reason?
  21. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    There is definitely a Blue Wall. It's simply not good for you professionally and personally if you try to expose bad cops. The police carry a unique position in society. We give them the right to kill fellow citizens. Let that sink in. They get to legally kill fellow citizens an with that privilege brings an awesome lot of responsibility. These days, iit's very, very difficult to find a cop guilty. They get the beneif of a doubt. If you have no physical evidence, the cop's narrative of events is the accepted narrative. If I ever do live in America again, the very first thing I do with my car when I drive it off the lot is install secret audio/visual cameras that cover all angles of my car. Not only for traffic stops but for the lawsuit crazy people out there. I've gotten sued once by a couple women who blatantly lied. The facts didn't support them and they wanted a quick payout. Their 60k lawsuit was going to go away for 5k each and I told them, I'd rather to go to court. Their lawyer said a decent lawyer is going to cost to me 10-12k so its a wash. I told him, I would gladly pay a lawyer 12k even 20k and max out my credit cards rather than pay extortion. I was not going to go through life knowing I was extorted. My self respect and dignity is worth more than that. He called me bluff and dropped the case the morning I showed up court. To this day it was worth every penny so those two lying thieves wouldn't see a cent. As for cops and bad traffic stop,, if the cop crosses the line and tries to dehumanize me, I will sue the pants off him, his pension, the department, the city. And I won't settle out of court. If I live in LA (or any other city) I will have a lawyer on retainer. I get arrested, I'll shut up and call my lawyer who will come to the precinct any hour of the night. I did some preliminary research and its too expensive to have lawyer on retainer for such instances. I may sound melodramatic but I'm not going to be a statistic. And if my car is impounded, one of the first things my lawyer or family member should do is get that video out of the car.
  22. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    I hope its thoroughly investigated if there is fraud. I can't see how this is not national news. Not to minimize the report but I can't see how Republicans would allow it without a lot of bruhaha if it was a Democrat dominated country. And visa versa. We'll wait and see.
  23. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    My guess is Trump has used his office to go after enemies just as Nixon did. But that probably won't be proven. That would be impeachable but as I said, I doubt it would happen.
  24. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    There is a rap song with a hook that says "It's not what you know, its what you can prove" lol My guess is he won't be convicted if impeached and its a huge IF. Republicans that don't like him are going to be hesitant because of how the party will look in upcoming elections with an impeached President. GOP lost big in 1976 due to Nixon. My guess is he won't be impeached. But I think Mueller will make sure people around him are charged and he will try to make it as personally close to the President as he can like his family. It's personal with Mueller I'm guessing because Trump has publicly attacked him and he can't respond publicly but will respond legally. What may happen is Trump not run in 2020 in order to avoid public embarrassment. I think his taxes if known publicly would make him very, very embarrassed.
  25. chocolat steve

    Usa Thread

    I don't believe the Clinton impeachment was even constitutional. I think (not sure and too lazy to look it up), he was investigated about sexual misconduct when he was the Governor of Arkansas and part of the questioning was if he had sex with Monica Lewinsky. He was asked this under oath. There are two precedents that Presidents can not be impeached for acts that did not involve using their office to commit 'high crimes and misdemeanors'. First was Vice President Aaron Burr, sitting Vice President, went to New Jersey to have duel with the sitting Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, killed Hamilton but dueling was technically illegal in New Jersey. The state of New Jersey issued a warrant to the Congress to extradite Burr back to NJ. The Congress did not comply or impeach Burr because they said Burr was dueling as Aaron Burr private citizen and was not representing the office of Vice President. Part of the articles of impeachment against Nixon was tax evasion. The Republicans got it removed because they said although evaded taxes while in the White House, he did so as Nixon the private citizen and was not representing the office of the President when he files taxes. Clinton was under questioning in a private lawsuit. He gave his erroneous testimony as Bill Clinton private citizen. He was not representing the office of the President. So, I believe precedence says he should not be impeached. Trump may have grounds as well under the same line of thinking I think depending on what they bring charges to him if he is charged. Basically, impeachment as it was explained to me in school was a president using his office to commit a crime or for personal gain. Bribery, treason, etc.
×