Tariffs...what to make of them.

[Bike N Gear]

Why would it be ok for that group to have a reporter on the text chain? To me, that clearly shows ineptitude, doesn't it?

The only good thing about the reporter being included was that he reported about it. If they hadn't accidentally included him no one would know and they would continue to use Signal for military operations. Despite all their proclamations that they did absolutely nothing wrong, I bet they never do it again.

 

[Doom]

@Doom

Why would it be ok for that group to have a reporter on the text chain? To me, that clearly shows ineptitude, doesn't it?

Yeah, something got screwed up for that to happen. There were reports that multiple signal accounts were hacked but it's probably just damage control.

Signal is an alphabet honeypot and those communications were going to get leaked regardless.

 

[thegock]

Yeah, something got screwed up for that to happen. There were reports that multiple signal accounts were hacked but it's probably just damage control.

Signal is an alphabet honeypot and those communications were going to get leaked regardless.

Ur best post! (ETD/

 

[Doom]

Ur best post!

View attachment 258185

Ty ty

 

[rjr44]

I don't believe snopes is accurate, he clearly stated there were "fine people" on both sides. If you read the link you provided:
Editors' Note: Some readers have raised the objection that this fact check appears to assume Trump was correct in stating that there were "very fine people on both sides" of the Charlottesville incident. That is not the case. This fact check aimed to confirm what Trump actually said, not whether what he said was true or false. For the record, virtually every source that covered the Unite the Right debacle concluded that it was conceived of, led by and attended by white supremacists, and that therefore Trump's characterization was wrong.

I'm not sure in what other context anybody could take this. He clearly stated that a bunch of white supremacist were "very fine people". Let's remember, the scumbag who drove the car, killed one and injured dozens. I'm not sure how anyone could need to take a stance that there were good people on both sides. It was asinine.

I dunno, I'm just reading the black and white of the transcript, not footnotes or explainers or asides, so I'm not arguing whether or not Snopes is accurate, we could be here all day w/ that (tho I did use it as a reference cuz most people seem to rely on it as one of the main fact checking websites for better or worse):

"Reporter: You said there was hatred and violence on both sides?
Trump: I do think there is blame — yes, I think there is blame on both sides. You look at, you look at both sides. I think there's blame on both sides, and I have no doubt about it, and you don't have any doubt about it either. And, and, and, and if you reported it accurately, you would say. But you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."

I am just not finding where he said that the folks that were violent were very good people. He said there is blame on both sides. He said along w/ the bad folks there were also good people on both sides. Not that the bad folks were very fine people, but "you also had people that were very fine people...".

Am I reading that wrong?

I have an open mind here, can you pls highlight where he said the violent folks, the neo Nazis, the white supremecists, were very fine people?

I do think his rambling and word play/salad and repetetiveness does get him into trouble, but I'm just not finding it here. Again, willing to be swayed.

 

[Santapez]

I dunno, I'm just reading the black and white of the transcript, not footnotes or explainers or asides, so I'm not arguing whether or not Snopes is accurate, we could be here all day w/ that (tho I did use it as a reference cuz most people seem to rely on it as one of the main fact checking websites for better or worse):

"Reporter: You said there was hatred and violence on both sides?
Trump: I do think there is blame — yes, I think there is blame on both sides. You look at, you look at both sides. I think there's blame on both sides, and I have no doubt about it, and you don't have any doubt about it either. And, and, and, and if you reported it accurately, you would say. But you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."

I am just not finding where he said that the folks that were violent were very good people. He said there is blame on both sides. He said along w/ the bad folks there were also good people on both sides. Not that the bad folks were very fine people, but "you also had people that were very fine people...".

Am I reading that wrong?

I have an open mind here, can you pls highlight where he said the violent folks, the neo Nazis, the white supremecists, were very fine people?

I do think his rambling and word play/salad and repetetiveness does get him into trouble, but I'm just not finding it here. Again, willing to be swayed.

Makes sense to look at the actual video for full context. I hate to be defending Trump, but he was pretty clear here that the "fine people" on both sides referred to the people that were there for the statues. 2:39 he actually goes into it specifically that he's talking about the innocent, peaceful protestors supporting the statues, not the white supremacists who were causing violence.

 

[thegock]

Makes sense to look at the actual video for full context. I hate to be defending Trump, but he was pretty clear here that the "fine people" on both sides referred to the people that were there for the statues. 2:39 he actually goes into it specifically that he's talking about the innocent, peaceful protestors supporting the statues, not the white supremacists who were causing violence.

When do I get my commission check for putting u and JR into equities in 2018?

 

[scott62]

Makes sense to look at the actual video for full context. I hate to be defending Trump, but he was pretty clear here that the "fine people" on both sides referred to the people that were there for the statues. 2:39 he actually goes into it specifically that he's talking about the innocent, peaceful protestors supporting the statues, not the white supremacists who were causing violence.

You do realize the statues were traders to the county? that most of those statues were put up on the 1920’s to keep the non white veterans that came back from ww1 “in their place”? You can’t have the non white people that have been trained to fight getting to “uppity” can you? It’s the same thing with the naming of the military bases…. Hey let’s name this base after a general that broke his oath to the United States and was pro slavery. I am a old fat white guy so sometimes I don’t get it but people who’s relatives were bought and sold as farming equipment hear the messages loud and clear.

 

[thegock]

There's is a steak place in Naples, really good, and fancy but golf clothes work. I'll look it up. Capital Grill?

Snook Inn was fantastic sunset boat themed fun. Jimmy Buffett clone going at it at happy hour. Bathing suit and sweat shirt. Excellent food in a basket.

Go inshore fishing. No waves, lots of action.

We also went someplace east off the island
Might have been Little Bar.?

I'll need to look at some pics.

I'd move there in a minute

We hit Little Bar in Goodland. Best stone crabs ever. Coowner Sammie is Rutgers '83. Nice view of the harbor, too.

Both LaTavola and DaVinci were very good, though Mrs' G didn’t like her entree at LaTavola. Oyster Society was very good for both of us.

The Deck at 560 (Hilton) was very good and just on the other side of the lobby. Great buffet every morning. Only complaint is they pull the coffee at 9am.

Didn't try the Snook Inn, cuz a couple of people who do Marco every year said it was too crowded and past its prime.

Oh, and Fin Bistro had a good harbor view as did one of the places in Capri, which name escapes.

Thanks for your and @Bike N Gear recommendations...it helped.

 

[Bike N Gear]

We hit Little Bar in Goodland. Best stone crabs ever. Coowner Sammie is Rutgers '83. Nice view of the harbor, too.

Both LaTavola and DaVinci were very good, though Mrs' G didn’t like her entree at LaTavola. Oyster Society was very good for both of us.

The Deck at 560 (Hilton) was very good and just on the other side of the lobby. Great buffet every morning. Only complaint is they pull the coffee at 9am.

Didn't try the Snook Inn, cuz a couple of people who do Marco every year said it was too crowded and past its prime.

Thanks for your and @Bike N Gear recommendations...it helped.
View attachment 258194View attachment 258195

Thanks. A la carte for breakfast was better than the buffet at the Hilton. They had good grouper tacos for lunch too.

 

[Santapez]

You do realize the statues were traders to the county? that most of those statues were put up on the 1920’s to keep the non white veterans that came back from ww1 “in their place”? You can’t have the non white people that have been trained to fight getting to “uppity” can you? It’s the same thing with the naming of the military bases…. Hey let’s name this base after a general that broke his oath to the United States and was pro slavery. I am a old fat white guy so sometimes I don’t get it but people who’s relatives were bought and sold as farming equipment hear the messages loud and clear.

Um yeah. That's common knowledge at this point. That's why there's was such a movement to remove those statues. It was less so about what the historical people did than why the statues were put there.

Traitors not Traders. Well I'm sure some were businessmen.

But just because someone was on the side of keeping the statues doesn't mean they're a racist. In fact I can't say removing the statue of Matthew Fontaine Moury was right with his positive contributions to science.

 

[Red Mosquito]

I don't believe snopes is accurate, he clearly stated there were "fine people" on both sides. If you read the link you provided:
Editors' Note: Some readers have raised the objection that this fact check appears to assume Trump was correct in stating that there were "very fine people on both sides" of the Charlottesville incident. That is not the case. This fact check aimed to confirm what Trump actually said, not whether what he said was true or false. For the record, virtually every source that covered the Unite the Right debacle concluded that it was conceived of, led by and attended by white supremacists, and that therefore Trump's characterization was wrong.

I'm not sure in what other context anybody could take this. He clearly stated that a bunch of white supremacist were "very fine people". Let's remember, the scumbag who drove the car, killed one and injured dozens. I'm not sure how anyone could need to take a stance that there were good people on both sides. It was asinine.

I don’t take issue with the snopes article. It’s not a 100% cut and dry situation, and snopes acknowledged that with their editor’s note. They were simply confirming the facts of what actually came out of moron’s mouth. IMO, that’s their role.

If snopes starts analyzing and making decisions on gray areas or attempting to interpret the implied meaning, then they lose all credibility. To me, that role belongs to the reader. Now in this specific example it’s very easy to read between the lines. But not every situation lies on the same part of the bell curve of ease of interpretation.

All that said, I do not regularly check snopes. Maybe they do exactly what I mentioned above and have actually lost their credibility.

 

[Red Mosquito]

Now in this specific example it’s very easy to read between the lines

And maybe I’m putting my foot in my mouth here after that video was posted, I’ll give it a watch later.

 

[Red Mosquito]

I do think his rambling and word play/salad and repetetiveness does get him into trouble

100%, and the same for Biden. And I think that helped sink Harris a bit too. Not every snake has the same bite…

I’m sure it must have been done already, but it would be hilarious to hear a fake conversation between Trump and Biden using actual nonsense that has come out of their mouths.

 

[roc]

Makes sense to look at the actual video for full context. I hate to be defending Trump, but he was pretty clear here that the "fine people" on both sides referred to the people that were there for the statues. 2:39 he actually goes into it specifically that he's talking about the innocent, peaceful protestors supporting the statues, not the white supremacists who were causing violence.

Valid point.

 

[Mtbdog]

We hit Little Bar in Goodland. Best stone crabs ever. Coowner Sammie is Rutgers '83. Nice view of the harbor, too.

Both LaTavola and DaVinci were very good, though Mrs' G didn’t like her entree at LaTavola. Oyster Society was very good for both of us.

The Deck at 560 (Hilton) was very good and just on the other side of the lobby. Great buffet every morning. Only complaint is they pull the coffee at 9am.

Didn't try the Snook Inn, cuz a couple of people who do Marco every year said it was too crowded and past its prime.

Oh, and Fin Bistro had a good harbor view as did one of the places in Capri, which name escapes.

Thanks for your and @Bike N Gear recommendations...it helped.
View attachment 258194View attachment 258195

Yes, the Burrowing Owls 🦉 👏

 

[roc]

Traitors not Traders. Well I'm sure some were businessmen.

Not sure why this cracked me up, but it did.

But just because someone was on the side of keeping the statues doesn't mean they're a racist. In fact I can't say removing the statue of Matthew Fontaine Moury was right with his positive contributions to science.

Maybe, but you don't see any statues of nazi scientists in Germany.

 

[scott62]

Traitors not Traders. Well I'm sure some were businessmen.

Yea, apple auto correct > me🙄

 

[Santapez]

Not sure why this cracked me up, but it did.

Maybe, but you don't see any statues of nazi scientists in Germany.

That's because the good ones left. That's how we got the bomb! 🙂 Although I'd be surprised if there wasn't a Heisenberg statue in Germany.

Germany is a bit different because the Nazi's got crushed, outlawed including any displays. The Confederates were integrated back into the US. It's hard for us Northerners to comprehend the different culture the South had back when the country was a few days travel to go across a state.

We tend not to have issues with people who fought for their loosing side in other wars, but we do with the Civil War. Being a slave owner to me is much worse than having fought in the war. Overall I'm not losing sleep over the statues coming down.

 

[UtahJoe]

So for the record answer the below…
1- was the mission completed?
2- was any US service members killed or in any danger?
3- did it stop the targeting of shipping?
4- did it put Iran on notice… you bet!
So it’s a win..!

Unlike the past administration (what a joke!) The withdraw from Kabul that killed 13 US service members! And sleepy Joe kept looking at his watch at the memorial of the planes arrival….you got to be kidding!! that administration was the worst ever!

You know what I find even more comical about this mess......

So we all know Trump hates Jeff Goldberg bc of what Goldberg wrote regarding Trump calling WWI & WWII vets suckers and losers.....Im not saying I believe that bc it was he said/she said stuff....but Trump did have some unbelievably idiotic comments about McCain not being a war hero because he was captured....so it wouldn't shock me.

Mike waltz claims he doesn't know Goldberg and that his number must have gotten sucked into his phone some how...I mean that sounds like a good enough excuse to the fox news crowd. Of course anyone with a brain knows this is bullshit....There are now pictures of them together floating around and as Goldberg said on meet the press this weekend:

This isn’t The Matrix,” Goldberg told NBC’s Kristen Welker on Sunday’s Meet the Press, referring to the classic science fiction movie about humans unknowingly living in a simulated reality. “Phone numbers don’t just get sucked into other phones.


“I don’t know what he’s talking about there.”

Goldberg continued: “You know, very frequently in journalism, the most obvious explanation is the explanation. My phone number was in his phone because my phone number is in his phone.”
Goldberg's number was in there because Mike Waltz not only wanted it in there, he's been leaking information to Goldberg......Trump now knows the Waltz and Goldberg have some kind of relationship which is why Waltz is now in trouble in the White house

https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/mike-waltz-is-losing-support-inside-the-white-house-2b17459c

But Trump can't fire him and give Goldberg/The Atlantic something the MAGA idiots would call a "win"

Truly an epic mess of incompetence....