Author Topic: So Let's Speculate about the Future of a Full Trump Presidency...  (Read 498840 times)

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2121
I have my mental list of people who complained about the Clinton/Uranium One deal, and I'll be waiting for those people to express outrage about this transfer of technology to Saudi Arabia.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9438
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
I have my mental list of people who complained about the Clinton/Uranium One deal, and I'll be waiting for those people to express outrage about this transfer of technology to Saudi Arabia.
God I a has somehow forgotten about the whole Uranium One non-scandal.
Kind of like how Trumpeters brushed of Ivanka's use of a private email server after calling HRC a 'traitor' for doing something eerily similar.


sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7868
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Reading the news about Trump's senior staffers trying to personally profit by illegally selling nuclear secrets to the middle east, while terrible, doesn't even raise my eyebrows anymore.  It's like OF COURSE they did.  Is anyone really surprised by this?

ysette9

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3734
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
    • Insert Snappy Title Here (Journal)
Reading the news about Trump's senior staffers trying to personally profit by illegally selling nuclear secrets to the middle east, while terrible, doesn't even raise my eyebrows anymore.  It's like OF COURSE they did.  Is anyone really surprised by this?
Right. My Shock-o-meter has been in the red for so long it isn’t registering anymore.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9438
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Reading the news about Trump's senior staffers trying to personally profit by illegally selling nuclear secrets to the middle east, while terrible, doesn't even raise my eyebrows anymore.  It's like OF COURSE they did.  Is anyone really surprised by this?
Surprised?  Sadly no... but I'm left wondering if more people in Trump's orbit won't wind up with criminal convictions because of it.  Thomas Barrack would be a new one, and Kushner's been a point of focus since day 1. Flynn's gone from respected 3-star general to likely incarcerated inmate in two short years.

A better question to me is: what competent person would still want to be in Trump's orbit?  Few leave stronger than when they entered, and the legal peril seems considerable. 

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7868
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
what competent person would still want to be in Trump's orbit?  Few leave stronger than when they entered, and the legal peril seems considerable.

You're looking at it backwards.  It's not that competent people enter trumpworld and are exposed to legal peril, it's that criminals seek out trumpworld for the really big scores. 

Paul Manafort didn't go to work for the Russians after becoming trump's campaign chair, he was appointed to be trump's campaign chair because he was working for the Russians.  Michael Flynn didn't betray his country because he joined team trump, he joined team trump in order to betray his country.  Cohen isn't a super shady lawyer because he worked for trump, trump hired him years ago because he was always a super shady lawyer.  Konstantin Kilimnik and the Russian GRU officers were always enemies of America, long before they came to work with trump.  Roger Stone has always prided himself on playing fast and loose with the rules in order to win political battles, and he literally told trump to run for president years before he was indicted for working with the GRU and wikileaks on trump's behalf.  Sam Patten, Richard Pinedo, George Papadopoulos,  Alex van der Zwaan, Rick Gates, these people have all pled guilty to various crimes linking trump's campaign to Russia by exploiting existing contacts with Russia.  It's not like they were squeaky clean patriots before trump came along and put them all on his payroll, somehow corrupting them.

In fact, the best example of someone who blindly and stupidly entered into Trump's orbit without any pre-existing criminal or Russian background that we know of might be Mike Pence.  He's totally embraced all of this business, but doesn't appear to have been hired because he was working with the Russians.  He was hired to win over the votes of evangelicals, and has only coincidentally gotten himself wrapped up in the criminal charges, it seems.
« Last Edit: Today at 12:12:50 PM by sol »

talltexan

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2121
I predicted for a while that Rick Perry was going to come out of this thing looking really good.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1893
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
And the Future of a Full Trump presidency includes a lot of pollution:

Scientist says some pollution is good for you — a disputed claim Trump’s EPA has embraced
https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-secret-science-20190219-story.html

 A researcher who has suggested that exposure to toxic chemicals can be good for humans is helping to shape Environmental Protection Agency policies.
In early 2018, a deputy assistant administrator in the EPA, Clint Woods, reached out to a Massachusetts toxicologist best known for pushing a public health standard suggesting that low levels of toxic chemicals and radiation are good for people.
“I wanted to check to see if you might have some time in the next couple of days for a quick call to discuss a couple items …,” Woods wrote to Ed Calabrese.
Less than two weeks later, Calabrese’s suggestions on how the EPA should assess toxic chemicals and radiation were introduced, nearly word for word, in the U.S. government’s official journal, the Federal Register.
“This is a major big time victory,” Calabrese wrote in an email to Steve Milloy, a former coal and tobacco lobbyist who runs a website, junkscience.com, that seeks to discredit mainstream climate science.
“Yes. It is YUGE!” wrote Milloy, in response.
It was a glorious moment for Calabrese, who had been snubbed for decades by mainstream public health scientists because of his controversial research and theories.
It also signified the major shift the EPA has taken under the Trump administration. More than any before it, this White House has actively sought out advice from industry lobbyists and the scientists they commission in setting pollution rules.
Denouncing the Obama-era EPA as an agency beholden to environmental extremists, the administration has not only dismissed mainstream science but embraced widely discredited alternatives that critics say are not consistent with the agency’s focus on improving public and environmental health.
Calabrese’s role illustrates a different side of this shift: the potential removal of longstanding public health practices and the incorporation of industry-backed and disputed science into federal environmental policy.
Calabrese spent decades advancing his ideas, facing skepticism and criticism from peers in the toxicology community while winning funding from companies whose bottom lines conformed with his views.
He says most of the pushback he receives comes from left-of-center toxicologists who see him as “the devil incarnate” for accepting industry funding and challenging their ideology. He maintains his science is solid and will be vindicated in time.
“These environmental regulatory people are very closed-minded,” he said. They won’t reconsider their standards, and see that some of the agents they call harmful “actually can induce adaptive responses,” Calabrese said.
This view — that pollution and radiation can be beneficial — has many experts worried. The fact that such a position may become EPA policy, they say, portends a future in which corporate desires outweigh public and environmental health.
“Industry has been pushing for this for a long time,” said David Michaels, former assistant secretary of labor for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration who’s a professor of environmental and occupational health at George Washington University. “Not just the chemical industry, but the radiation and tobacco industries too.”
If the EPA ultimately adopts Calabrese’s proposed new regulations, researchers say it could change decades of standards and guidelines on clean air, water and toxic waste. It could also fundamentally alter the way the government assesses new chemicals and pesticides entering the marketplace.
“This is industry’s holy grail,” said Michaels.



partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2645
I predicted for a while that Rick Perry was going to come out of this thing looking really good.

blessed are the ignorant.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9438
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
what competent person would still want to be in Trump's orbit?  Few leave stronger than when they entered, and the legal peril seems considerable.

You're looking at it backwards.  It's not that competent people enter trumpworld and are exposed to legal peril, it's that criminals seek out trumpworld for the really big scores. 

Yes, all good examples of unethical cockroaches drawn to Trump in hopes of a big score. But that's not everyone that's gotten tarnished.  Think about Jim Mattis, HR McMaster, John Kelly, Sessions, Tillerson and others.  That's not to say that Tillerson or Sessions are people I agreed with pre-Trump, but both left secure jobs to be humiliated by Trump and have their professional reputation tarnished.  The first three (Mattis, McMaster & Kelly) were all supremely respected in military circles, but now are more associated with this dumpster fire than their 3+ decades in uniform.  Granted I believe all three took the job because they believed in serving their country, but .. well.. Trump doesn't.  THeir replacements don't have the defense of not knowing what it would really be like.