It's water under the bridge. Move on.

No, I think a dangerous and expensive injustice has been perpetrated, and I’d like to see these transcripts with my own eyes.

I do. He’s a big player in these hoaxes.

This is a great op-Ed by the WSJ editorial board detailing Schiff’s hypocrisy. The man who tried to impeach the president for stonewalling, crying coverup, is now stonewalling. What is Schiff hiding?

Our sources say that process is now complete for 43 interviews, yet Mr. Schiff is refusing to make them public. The Chairman is also blocking declassification of the other 10. In a letter sent more than a year ago to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Mr. Schiff claimed ownership of the transcripts and insisted that “under no circumstances” could they be shared with “any persons associated with the White House or [President Trump].” This makes declassification impossible, as it bars the White House from its necessary role of checking the transcripts for privileged or other sensitive information.

Mr. Schiff isn’t explaining his new opposition to transparency, though it seems likely he wants to shield promoters of the collusion theory from scrutiny. Among the transcripts he’s blocking are interviews with former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice and former Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power. Their authority was used to “unmask” the names of Trump campaign officials who talked with foreigners who were wiretapped by U.S. intelligence.

We’re told that another blocked interview is with former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates—who in early 2017 used a wild reading of the Logan Act that helped lead to the ouster of President Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn.

Mr. Schiff is also sitting on interview transcripts with Donald Trump Jr., son-in-law Jared Kushner and former Trump campaign advisers Corey Lewandowski, Sam Clovis and Steve Bannon. Is he worried that the transcripts will highlight how little substance there was to his collusion claims? The interviews would also allow the public to compare the early testimony of former FBI and intelligence officials (James Clapper, Andrew McCabe) against what we now know really happened.

Mr. Schiff spent years shouting cover-up only to be exposed for making things up. Now that the evidence is ready for public release, he’s defying the unanimous vote of a bipartisan committee to make them public. What doesn’t Mr. Schiff want America to see?

Schiff’s Secret Transcripts

In America at least it was both left and right who believed that, with a little liberalization, China would become just like us. Though opening the markets and privatizing land saved China from another looming famine and largely lifted the nation from extreme poverty, the Communist party still rules, meaning democracy and political freedom are out of the question. Hence the repression of dissidents and minorities, the censorship and propaganda.

I think it is accurate to say that China’s “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” is a form of state capitalism, but not the state capitalism of say Norway. It is a Communist state capitalism, where a Communist political party reap all the benefits of economic liberalization and privatization (often at the expense of their own people) with their stated goal of achieving Communism.

As some commentators have predicted, China’s rise to power will heavily alter the political and cultural landscape of the future. China’s entrance into the world market has made them a big player. Now western companies and bureaucracies have to kowtow to Chinese influence, for fear of loosing that market. Unfortunately China’s rise hasn’t made them more like us; it has made us more like them.

You lied about being in the right circle, obviously.

I said “Money is already earned, friend. Unfortunately that’s something they won’t teach you in certain circles.” So another lie. Sorry bub, but the only one caught in a web of lies is yourself.

Let me put it this way, those who are taught in the right circles have a pretty good idea of how long money lasts, whereas you appear to be clueless, yet you claimed to have been taught in the right circle.

So what did I lie about? You called me a liar and claim I was caught in a lie. What did I lie about?

Nothing in there about being near broke, I’m afraid. So I suppose that was a lie. Which of my statements were false, and used with the intent to deceive?

I am financially independent. Where do I say I was almost broke?

The thought policing, used as it is in combination with sensationalism, is more dangerous than Trump’s questions about injecting disinfectant. It creates a culture of silence and public relations. Where we once had unbridled access to our leader’s thoughts, their overreaction at such an innocuous question has convinced him it is just not worth it, so instead we are given the prepared and sanitized speeches of unelected bureaucrats.

The sensationalism dangerously replaces any reporting on vital information.

Hey I only take medical advice from politicians.

Yeah I have no qualms about you guys roasting me. I figure you need it. So carry on.

You lied by accusing me of lying, whether by malice or stupidity, but then you keep perpetuating it.

That’s what I was wondering, if it’s rather a big coating of tar on the lungs that may help more than the nicotine.

As for the disinfectant I went with the injection route.

I'm sorry to show weakness but I am getting ready to give in on giving up hope. :worry: it's hard to see the screen through the tears....

That’s understandable. But despair will only make things worse. Maybe it’s best to just get through this one day at a time.

Is there a reason why NOS4A2 is being treated like this? I searched his post history expecting to find him trolling or flaming, but his posts have actually been rather cordial and subdued. While I disagree with almost everything he says, there's enough anti-Trump people here such that we don't need to resort to bullying. Yes, Trump and many of his supporters often do it, but we're not them either.

It’s an aspect of anti-trumpism. Anyone or anything that looks favorably on the president is subject to hostility and persecution and censorship. It’s a sort of fanaticism. They actually think I’m a Russian bot, not because I’ve spoken Russian or anything, but because it’s what they’ve been taught to believe.

Any smokers? It appears that in their infinite wisdom the media was wrong about Covid-19 being horrible for smokers. It appears it’s the other way around, and I’m considering taking up smoking or trying nicotine patches for the remainder of the year.

Conclusions and relevance: Our cross sectional study in both COVID-19 out- and inpatients strongly suggests that daily smokers have a very much lower probability of developing symptomatic or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection as compared to the general population.

https://www.qeios.com/read/article/569

Taking into account the age and sex of the patients, the researchers discovered the number of smokers was much lower than that in the general population estimated by the French health authority Santé Publique France at about 40% for those aged 44-53 and between 8.8% and 11.3% for those aged 65-75.

Advertisement

The renowned French neurobiologist Jean-Pierre Changeux, who reviewed the study, suggested the nicotine might stop the virus from reaching cells in the body preventing its spread. Nicotine may also lessen the overreaction of the body’s immune system that has been found in the most severe cases of Covid-19 infection.

The findings are to be verified in a clinical study in which frontline health workers, hospital patients with the Covid-19 virus and those in intensive care will be given nicotine patches.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/22/french-study-suggests-smokers-at-lower-risk-of-getting-coronavirus

Or am I being duped by big tobacco?

Breathing through this moment preparing for the next. Even when it feels like we are all gasping for life in one way or another.
I find myself holding my breath.....

I’m with you. But if it’s one thing we can count on it is the fallibility of human prediction. Who knows? Maybe we can quickly recover.

I don’t know the answer to the question. Care to enlighten me?

Frightening forecasts.

Jan Vlieghe, a member of the BoE’s interest-rate setting committee, made this warning in a speech just released:

“Based on the early indicators, and based on the experience in other countries that were hit somewhat earlier than the UK, it seems that we are experiencing an economic contraction that is faster and deeper than anything we have seen in the past century, or possibly several centuries.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2020/apr/23/uk-government-borrowing-covid-19-recession-pmi-us-jobless-claims-business-live?page=with:block-5ea165128f084784dca5874c#block-5ea165128f084784dca5874c

Yeah I don’t know why he’s backtracking on this one. But if idiots are pretending he suggested drinking bleach and shoving lightbulbs up their ass I suppose it’s warranted.

The Anarchist response to opportunists would be that such were 'created' in turn by a system that values greed (I believe it was Chomsky). Arguably then, Anarchism is more of an ideal theory than a short-term practical one. Take away all centralized power and very likely such mayhem would ensue, the question is, if the power remained taken away-would future generations act in such a way? Perhaps not.

That's true. I can't see how Anarchism could be implemented through traditional party politics. I think it could only come about through collapse or disaster, perhaps settling after a period of strife. But that's also unlikely; there is always that power vacuum, where some group would eventually assert its authority for the sake of order, and many would probably welcome it.

Perhaps anarchism serves better as a way of thought than a political system.

It's not a brainstorm, which implies there's thought involved. Try this: Speculate on injecting disinfectant into someone's lungs as a treatment for COVID with a nine-year child. Here's the response I got: "That's stupid! It would make them die quicker!" The fact that you're not concerned that your president is considerably intellectually less able than a nine-year-old says everything we need to know about your level of political analysis.

I think he's just curious and asking questions.

What about some nebulizer filled with something that kills the virus?

I can only find this paper on the possibility of using ethanol solutions.

Possibility of Disinfection of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) in Human Respiratory Tract by Controlled Ethanol Vapor Inhalation

What do you mean by "how long"? Would you suggest that after a period of time, people that originally were taking advantage of the moment would stop due to some reason?

I think so. I don't think it would be long before others banded together to defend their property and rights.

The author Steven Pinker claimed he was once anarchistic until the Montreal police went on strike in 1969. The police were forced back to work to restore order to the ensuing mayhem. There were riots and looting.

I agree with him to the extent that there can be no doubt that opportunists would capitalize on such a moment. But for how long? And what of the vast majority of people who never acted on such an opportunity, but abided by the law even though there was little enforcement of them?

A President doing a press conference to address an ongoing crisis should stick to setting out the facts about what the administration is doing and the like. Some off-the-cuff question about possibly injecting disinfectant or irradiating the body has no place on the podium.

I disagree with that. I like being able to watch the leadership spitball and brainstorm. But maybe I am one of the few who don’t look to politicians for medical advice.

I’m not accusing you of anything. I’m just asking how one can misconstrue Trump’s question to the doctor into an official suggestion that the public should inject disinfectant into their veins. Can you suggest that I do something by asking someone else a question? I just don’t understand it, but perhaps that’s my own blinkers.

A layman? What a joke. Anything to cast your hero in the most innocent light.

So...he’s not a layman?

That’s one of the things I’m trying to figure out. I’m not sure how one can misconstrue a layman’s question to a doctor into an official suggestion that the public should do such and such.

Trump’s innocent question to the doctor about how to get disinfectant into the body or lungs gets twisted into “Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment”. Antitrumpism in a nutshell.

Your choice. My interest here is in how you justify your position.

I hope I can defend any statement I make or position I hold. Which position do you wish to see me justify?

Anyway, the point is that even if they are scapegoating Trump, there are criticisms of substance in the article that remain unaddressed.

That’s fair. Is there any one in particular you’d like me to address?

I’m not attacking the author in particular, I was attacking those who scapegoat the president in general. Hence my use of the plural pronoun “they”. Some of them write opinion articles at the Atlantic.

I am using the term “scapegoat” in the colloquial sense, not in the biblical sense.

I know your opinion if Trump supporters, what is your opinion on the matter at hand? Surely philosopher wouldn’t pass off someone’s opinion as his own.

I shared my opinion; you shared someone else’s. When you want to reflect on your ideas, or mine, let me know.

Methods certainly play a role. They almost always involve some form or other of authoritarianism, the suppression of dissent, and the oppression of their own citizens.

Now, since you are of a philosophical disposition, go back and have a look at your reply and tell me, what are the forms of the arguments you have use.

Why would I do that?

I had a Trotskyist friend once who said an anarchist is really just a liberal with a gun.
@NOS4A2 What socialist societies have there ever been that would allow us to empirically measure successes and failures of socialism? Perhaps there are some, but I really hope you did not have in mind societies like the USSR.

I think the best we can do is to find out which nations explicitly say they are/were Socialist or in the process of building socialism. So we can weigh their intention to bring about socialism with the direct result of that intention.

So you haven't read the article because it's not blaming Trump. Meanwhile, you're setting up pathetic strawmen in place of the criticism that has been rightly levelled at Trump. Trump has been criticised for denying climate change in the face of overwhelming evidence and unilaterally breaking the promises of the Paris accord without regard of the withdrawal mechanism. He's not blamed for a pandemic but for downplaying the risks, touting an unproven and ineffective medicine as the cure and reacting way to fucking late to the whole thing. And then turns around and blames the governors.

The problem is your only criticisms are about his optimism. You suspiciously leave out everything he has done while magnifying the trite, superficial complaints of a few of Washington journos and Democrats. Another mouthful of turd from you.

In a pandemic, it would probably be a good idea to lockdown a relatively small area that gets 10 million people traveling through it a year regardless of what's happening in NY. Also, it speaks to the interconnectedness of the world in terms of travel.

I don't think lockdowns are a good idea for the simple reason it is never a good idea to destroy one's own economy. The main reason for doing so was the fear that a surge would overwhelm the healthcare system, which largely hasn't happened, even in states with no stay-at-home restrictions like Wyoming, Iowa or South Dakota. It's becoming more apparent that treating the entire country as if it were New York City or Italy was a huge mistake.

Last year Hawaii had a bit over 10 million visitors, ya nincompoop.

And?