All_Pro_Bills

Meanwhile, special interest groups like NOW claiming to represent women on issues such as equal pay and reproductive rights stand and applaud as men masquerading as women win awards during International Women's Month while the definition of a women is erased.

You're just proving my point. The story says the Supreme Court vacated the conviction and DOJ declined to pursue the case. So, no harm, no foul. What about fast forwarding to the present to something like Biden's documented family run organized influence peddling operation with entities in places like China? Millions transferred to family members. In exchange for what exactly? That's the concern. Legal, illegal, that sounds like a national security issue. Something that requires investigation. The DOJ checking into it? Forget about that happening anytime soon. The potential for a sitting President to be compromised by payoffs from our #1 adversary. Not a peep about the situation in the media or Washington elites. The story just doesn't exist. You swap out Biden for Trump and I guarantee it's a 24/7 shitstorm. Impeachment, treason, article 25. The whole 9 yards. I'm not making any case for defending Trump but merely pointing out there's one set of rules for insiders and another set of rules for outsiders. Insiders get protection. Outsiders face prosecution. Tell me I'm wrong?

Many see a legal system that has been effectively weaponized by a political establishment clinging to power, while overseeing a controlled demolition of our country in every way possible, that prosecutes its enemies to fullest extent on even the most minor of offenses while allowing members of the political establishment to without exception skate on even the most egregious of offenses. Personally, I agree with this assessment, and try as I may, I cannot make any intelligent argument to the contrary given the circumstances. In this case making a $130,000 payment through an attorney instead of making it directly. Given the litany of things Trump has been accused of I personally find it comical that his enemies need to settle on something so trivial. if this fails what the next step? Checking into a couple unpaid parking tickets? Are they out to get him? They sure are and it can't be any more obvious.

I don't consider myself as a "righty", more a will of the people kind of guy. I'd say this Trump thing is pretty much consistent with Joe Biden raging away at MAGA extremists minus the Marine guards and red lighting. Although I've got to say these emotional rants on one side or the other turn me off. My dad used to say that when you make important decisions with your emotions, you'll more times than not end up regretting it. I've found that to be true. We need less ranting and name calling and more debate and discussion of facts and rational choices. I think that's something most of us here can rally around regardless of our views. Unfortunately, a lot of the political leadership avoids that kind of approach at all costs. I'd add my overall view of Trump is that his time has come and gone. And it would be best if he'd step aside and let somebody else take the lead.

The problem is these folks pushing all this crap don't eat their own cooking. So round up all the Greenies. Drop them off on some island. Then tell them "do what you say". Adopt your own proposals and make a go of it. And I'll be back in two years to check on how many of you are still alive. Good luck and otherwise F off.

I'd ask all the US Empire advocates and supporters to examine their belief in some core guiding principal of an altruistic moral and ethical duty of self-sacrifice to defend the weak and powerless from evil. I suggest that's nonsense. I suggest the Empire's intentions are defined purely from a perspective of self-interest. I suggest everything that comes out of Washington, including the unlimited funding and weapons flows to Ukraine is done from a perspective of self-interest. It's not out of love for Ukrainian sovereignty or democracy. I suggest the Empire's focus on self-interest is no different than the focus on self-interest of some America First philosophy some perceive as "isolationism". But self-interest and a what's in it for me attitude might be selfish, but it is hardly synonymous with isolationism. It's a methodology of assessing whether or not I want to get involved different from that used by the Washington Empire crowd. I suggest the only difference is the specific self-interests are different. I'd ask that posters consider the US empire has been in business for about 78 years since the end of WW2. Assuming the role of rule maker and relegating almost every other country coming along for the ride as a rule taker. Using enforcement mechanisms of political, social, economic, or military nature. Doing some things wrong but most things right during that time. American has accomplished many great things and its leadership has produced a prosperity never before seen on the Earth. But lately almost the entire focus is to hang on to power and stop anybody else from taking a seat at the big-boy's table. Nobody hangs on to power forever and Empires rise and fall. It's the cycle of history.

No, it hasn't ended yet. While you can claim this has weakened Russia, its clearly weakened America too, perhaps to a greater degree. The conflict has driven Russia into a growing alliance with China along with elevating China to the status of potential "peace broker". Xi is looking to arbitrate a peace deal between Zelensky and Putin, dangling significant promises of economic and political cooperation without the Americans at the table. Individual talks with each leader to be followed by a sit down of the parties. How big a kick in the balls would that be? We do all the heavy lifting and China swoops in to be the hero. Sanctions are ineffective and hurt the US consumer and business more than they did Russia. Add to that Saudi Arabia drifting closer to Russia/China. Inroads into Africa, Asia, and the Middle East by both countries. And unknown to most, China has entered deals and cooperative arrangements and integration with almost every country is South America. All while we're distracted here. Our influence and standing in the world isn't growing, its shrinking at a quick pace. As a nation we're weaker today and nobody seems to see it or care to do anything about it other than engage in military adventures. While that still sells among the ranks of the captive European leadership the remainder of the world is getting tired of this act. Almost everyone in any official capacity in Washington appears oblivious to the situation or has any answers other than conflict. Following the directives of their masters in endless wars establishment. The people in charge are fools and pointing out that truth is a greater act of patriotism than blindly following these idiots into the abyss. But that's where we're heading right now.

There's always a choice. We can refuse to fulfill the terms of the agreement if something isn't to our liking. Otherwise, that implies the Constitutional powers of Congress to declare war have been transferred though some arrangement to NATO.

Europe is a big place. If conflict spreads let those governments vote to send their forces into the battle first. I think that's fair. In the case of Poland let them commit a couple 100 thousand troops, incur causalities, and then do a temperature check for their enthusiasm. For America, its a matter of priorities. Our government should worry less about the sovereignty of places like Poland and worry more about public safety in places like Portland. Representatives from both political parties sent to Washington that agree on nothing domestically are in almost complete lockstep when it comes to prosecuting all types of foreign military adventures. I'm hard-pressed to name one of these past interventions that could be called a qualified success. There's no reason to expect this will end any differently. Public support for unconditional escalation or direct involvement In Ukraine is in the minority yet Washington ignores the wishes of the people they claim to represent. Why are these representatives ignoring the desires of their citizens to proceed with caution and what other master do they serve? With that, its unacceptable for officials to demand our military personnel lay their lives on the line to engage and support conflict half-way around the world while they ignore problems in the hometowns, cities, and communities of these soldiers. And to make matters worse, President Nero fiddles away while his administration pursues and champions the implementation of social and economic policies that establish mediocrity as the new standard for American performance. A country so eager it seems to fight yet close to 3/4 of military eligible citizens cannot mentally or physically qualify for service. Add to this using political tests "weeding out" experienced enlisted personnel and officers from the forces. Hence the need to lower standards all around. If you wanted to weaken and emasculate America no foreign power engaging in some grand conspiracy could have a better plan than Biden's crew.

Not wrong until he bought a $20 million dollar estate on Martha's Vineyard that will be under water in just a few years because of climate change. Why didn't he listen to what Greta and Al Gore said and instead buy property in the Rockies well above rising sea levels? It's inconceivable the omnipotent ex-President could be a science denier!

From the reserve currency and trade settlement status of the US dollar transferred to the US after WW2. Its quite a racket and something that's been passed down from empire to empire. Previously held by Britain through the Pound. Its the privilege that lets our country and government run huge trade and budget deficits while exporting most of the consequences to the rest of the world. Its why other central banks hold treasuries and what creates a big demand for dollars. Without this status the ability to run these huge deficits wouldn't exist absent major currency debasement and inflation. The military's role in this is to act as an enforcement arm of last resort after political and economic methods fail to convince renegade countries to comply with the program. Like efforts to make arrangements to settle trade in local currencies. That's the biggest threat China and Russia and others pose to the US. Their plans and efforts to development and initiate alternative trade settlement and currency systems. Which lowers demand for dollars and as a result will see each unit of currency lose a good percentage of its purchasing power. Control the value of money and you control the value of everything. That's the game.

I'm familiar with the Putin quote, that the break up of the Soviet Union was the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.” Which many have translated into some strategic intent to reclaim dominion over those countries. I just don't see it. As it makes no sense to re-capture countries that would be a net drain on resources and funds. Why not let the Americans take care of them and drain their resources? Basically, Moscow offloaded a bunch of costly States to Washington to fund. Why would they want them back? Let the Americans support them, like we're doing now. While draining away funds diverted from our core national interests. We need to re-focus our resources on our core interests. Worrying about Poland and Ukraine. Not on that list.

I'm not clear why Putin would be gunning for Poland mainly because empires and imperialism are typically driven by the desire to acquire resources, not just territory for the sake of more land. As Russia is a resource rich country with a large land area already and Poland's main resource is coal reserves and production I don't see any strategic reason to go to the trouble. And while the former Soviet Union engaged in gobbling up nations of Eastern Europe after WW2 that ended with the dissolution of the Union. I'm aware of the theory being tossed about that Putin is obsessed with re-assembling the former Soviet Union but I think that's less fact and more fiction peddled by people using it to serve their own purposes rather than it being an accurate assessment of some policy objective. For one, none of these countries are economic powerhouses and anybody taking them on would need to sink lots of cash into them. Right now its the German's doing that though the EU and the Euro common currency. Why not just wait until Germany gets tired of subsidizing everyone else and things fall apart to make any move? Why start a fight?

Anybody watching Credit Suisse? As it looks like they're about to go under. Also, "Auditing giant KPMG is standing by its audits of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank, which collapsed when customers rushed to withdraw their savings in panic-fueled bank runs. The two banks failed not long after their respective annual reports were certified by KPMG," More experts looking stupid or merely high paid experts at "rubber stamping" financial books.

Some suggest we should pretend its more like 1914 when various alliances and treaties among nations brought those parties into a conflict that would be called Word War I. Triggered by the assassination of an Archduke when soon after Austria-Hungary declaring war against Serbia followed by countries allied via treaty with no direct interests getting involved in one side or the other. Millions died as a result of the killing of one man most had never heard of before.

I believe the ultimate problem is the financial system in its current form is addicted to low to zero interest rates. All kinds of cheap loans for things like homes, business investment, cars, and other items. And when money is "free" lots of investments and projects that are economical at zero are not economical or justified at 5%. When rates go up, asset prices dependent on credit financing go down. This is a problem brought about by politics invading the world of economics and finance but it is by no means a liberal or conservative, left or right induced situation. Its been a series of decisions by Treasury department officials and Federal Reserve officials. Something most people fail to realize is the Fed is not a government agency. One check of their website provides a clue, its a .org. The Fed exists to serve the needs of its member banks. For that it has done well enriching the financial class at the expense of almost everyone else. The fact President Biden's Treasury head is Janet Yellen, a former Fed chairman is a clue to how this system functions. Its a deal with the Devil where the government gets a system rigged to provide it with lots of cheap financing in exchange for surrendering control of the value of the money it sponsors. Like an addict that has their fix taken away there are going to be withdrawal symptoms, failures, defaults, bankruptcies, and painful adjustments for higher rates. I think we're at the beginning of that process. My expectation was the Fed will keep raising rates until they break something. Well, something broke. I've been slowly accumulating investments in hard assets like gold, oil, other natural resources that have tangible value and dumping high multiple stocks and investments that I'd label as discretionary. Tech stuff mostly. I recite one of Warren Buffet's famous quotes for this time which is "when the tide goes out we get to see who's swimming naked". I think that's what we're going to find out soon enough in the markets.

And the campaign was fined by FERC for mis-representing the payment category for those disbursed funds on official campaign finance filings. But I believe the money trail went from the Clinton campaign to Perkin Coie to FusionGPS to Steele.

How many votes did this "help" change from Hillary to Trump? https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/inconvenient-facts/201908/did-russian-interference-change-votes-in-2016

Ya know, I'm still trying to understand this DEI stuff. I saw an African-American women discuss health care delivery issues from a DEI perspective last week. She said there needs to be more POC in the medical fields because they are in the best position to serve communities of color because they understand the culture and the specific needs of the patient. That might make sense from some socioeconomic and health perspective, but I can't distinguish between her statement and conclusion and what a 1950's white segregationist would argue about the merits of "separate but equal". What she was saying is people are better off sticking with their own kind. My conclusion is this DEI dogma is racism disguised by "good" intentions. Nice, polite, educated racists instead of the traditional mean, rude, clueless racists. Racism comes in many forms and colors. Personally, I've had white, black, Asian, Indian doctors in my lifetime and my only concern was how good a doctor is this person.

He's saying the people pushing others into war to die while personally profiting or benefiting from the conflict are mostly gutless cowards.

I think a general rule is men and women that have faced the reality of combat situations and warfare tend to be very discriminating and careful to commit to it again with their lives or the lives of others.

I'd simply argue the trajectory of the financial system, including government spending and consumer spending for that matter, is unsustainable and either you make conscious decisions to rein in spending and debt or you'll be forced by circumstances to do it later under less pleasant conditions.

How about slowing Federal government spending? They borrow a lot of money too.

I believe some of our "progressive" members here have already assigned blame to Trump on page one. Its only been 3 years. I should talk. I was going to suggest it was Alan Greenspan for setting the precedent, followed by every successor to the former chairman, the Fed would backstop the industry with bailouts and accommodation when necessary while insuring that all risks of loss will be socialized and profits would still be kept private. So take risks and be as reckless as you want because you will never be hurt.

Interestingly enough, and according to the latest stats Blackrock owns about 7 1/2% of the shares.