The #QAnon Conciousness Phenomena

http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/25/e...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

President Donald J. Trump hosted a dinner with European business leaders and CEOs at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland Thursday evening.
...
In a stunning moment, one by one, European titans of industry from companies like Adidas, Siemens and Bayer went around the table to thank Trump for the passage of tax cuts and the easing of corporate tax burdens. Almost every CEO had a new US-based investment or strategic business to announce.
...
The president of Seimens, Joe Kaeser, said, “since you have been so successful in tax reform we have decided to develop the next generation gas turbines in the United States.”

Trump responded “That’s great!”

Exchanges like this continued all around the table. Those in attendance, according to the White House press pool:

Kasper Rorsted, Adidas (Apparel)—Germany

Joe Kaeser, Siemens AG (Tech)—Germany

Heinrich Hiesinger, Thyssenkrupp AG (Industrials)—Germany

Eldar Saetre, Statoil ASA (Energy)—Norway

Mark Schneider, Nestle SA (Food and Beverage)—Switzerland

Vas Narasimhan, Novartis AG (Pharmaceutical)—Switzerland

Mark Tucker, HSBC (Financial Services)—UK

Patrick Pouyanne, Total SA (Energy)—France

Carols Brito, Anheuser-Busch InBev NV (Food and Beverage)—Netherlands

Rajeev Suri, Nokia Corporation (Technology)—Finland

Punit Renjen, Deloitte (Consulting)—UK

Martian Lundstedt, AB Volvo (Auto)—Sweden

Werner Baumann, Bayer AG (Pharmaceutical)—Germany

Bill McDermott, SAP SE (Technology)—Germany

Ulrich Spiesshofer, ABB Ltd (Manufacturing)—Switzerland

 
I love debating politics, just not here. Some is good. Lately I feel we have too much.
Well you have probably contributed as much as anyone except Jim! Remember that it only occupies one thread.
Yes, it might help, but I don't come to Skeptiko to discuss and debate politics, and right now I don't anyway have the energy for such a discussion, which tends to be interminable, so I'll be brief. Generally, I agree with some of the issues you cite as being relevant to your support for Donald Trump as president, but (1) I'm not confident that Donald Trump is effectively addressing them anyway, (2) I think other candidates would have been more effective, and (3) whatever redeeming features
Well there really was only one other candidate, and she had already destroyed two countries (plus damaging the Ukraine) with war while she was secretary of state!

David
 
Last edited:
And that's me being well-behaved and restraining myself. :)

I misunderstood. I thought you closed down the parts of this forum where political discussion was raging because you didn't want it here, and I was being a good forum citizen.
To be honest, I don't quite know why Alex wanted to close those two sections down - ideally I would like him to reopen one of them as a politics forum.

I don't think Alex wants to get out of politics, because he, of course, has pushed Pizzagate quite a bit.

Jim: It might really help if you could give us a summary of what that last post is about - I mean when you click on a link it seems to just link to further pages of links, and to an executive order that Trump signed last month. Has some fresh information emerged?

David
 
Can I join your http://psiencequest.net forums?

I read the rules. If I'm too radical and you don't want me there, that's okay, no hard feelings.
Sure - you're welcome to join!

(In case of confusion, which might not exist: the forum's ownership so to speak is not mine personally but collective - a group of us founded it and we try to run it according to the community's wishes)
 
...
Jim: It might really help if you could give us a summary of what that last post is about - I mean when you click on a link it seems to just link to further pages of links, and to an executive order that Trump signed last month. Has some fresh information emerged?

David
That's the point. Q's posts are cryptic. He often posts things the significance of which only becomes clear sometime later - he says it proves he has advanced (inside) knowledge. It could mean anything but on the face of it it looks like from the posts on Friday Q wants us to think the corrupt (#4 video) elite (#2 council on foreign relations) are in big trouble (#3 military detentions) because of the executive order (#1).

I am not advocating anything or predicting anything, just discussing it for entertainment purposes.

Friday night Hannity said next week is going to be a big news week, the 4 page memo is going to be released and other stuff too. Then his twitter feed went dead. But it came back some hours later. Temporarily shutting off your twitter feed seems to be the current fashion to get increased attention because people spread rumors that Twitter is censoring the person or some other big event is occurring (Assange did it and people thought it meant he was being released ... or ... arrested). But pundits are always making prediction to get people excited and cause them to tune in to blogs and news shows, and podcasts etc - so you have to take things with a grain of salt. Many people feel like pundits have been stringing people along with hints of big events and nothing ever happens except more accusations and no consequences for the accused. Rumors spread on twitter and facebook because people are addicted (I mean that literally, it is a consequence of the design of the apps) to likes, shares, and retweets so anything exciting gets passed on even if it is of dubious origin.
 
Wow that was an extraordinary video, and if it seemed exaggerated to some who watched him at the time, it sure doesn't now!

David
That is a common theme among Trump pundits: if you think he is saying something stupid, most likely it is because he knows things that you don't. He loves to be underestimated and provoke people into making fools of themselves.
 
Here is a concise explanation of the "memo":

Top officials at the FBI used evidence they knew was fake to justify a surveillance warrant on an American citizen. The fake evidence was misrepresented to a judge and was "confirmed" by a fake news article planted by the same person who created the fake evidence. That crime was committed solely for partisan political purposes: to influence a US election, to protect the candidate the bureaucrats favored and to harm the candidate they didn't like.

https://ijr.com/the-declaration/201...econds-explain-intelligence-memo-jaw-dropper/
Gaetz said:

"Well, Harris, we now know the facts of what happened. The Democratic Party hired the Perkins [Coie] law firm. The Perkins law firm hired Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS hired Christopher Steele to go and dig up the dossier, and then they hired Nelly Ohr, the wife of Bruce Ohr to get the fake dossier from a political environment into the bloodstream of the intelligence community and to convert it into an intelligence document.

And what’s most outrageous to me is that this fake dossier was so unreliable that the way that it was validated to the FISA Court was a Yahoo News article written by Michael Isikoff, planted by Christopher Steele.

So Christopher Steele wrote the fake dossier, and then he went and planted fake news stories to validate the dossier.


The FBI was going to pay Christopher Steele. They had authorized payment, but then when they found out he was talking to the media and that he was unreliable, they canceled payment to him. But even after canceling payment to Christopher Steele, the FBI and the Department of Justice re-authorized the FISA warrant to spy on American citizens based on a political document that had its origins at the Democratic National Committee.

Harris, I’ve been waiting a long time to stitch together that fact pattern for the American people."

The memo is here:

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/20180129/106822/HMTG-115-IG00-20180129-SD001.pdf
 
Trump's trade policy finally explained:

NAFTA is a problem because other countries can gain access to US markets through Canada and Mexico, so US manufacturers are forced to relocate there in order to compete effectively. NAFTA hinders our ability to control trade with other countries and it entices US companies to relocate outside the US.

https://theconservativetreehouse.co...nding-why-nafta-exit-is-a-forgone-conclusion/
"Why deal with the U.S. when you can just deal with Mexico, and use NAFTA rules to ship your product directly into the U.S. market?

This exploitative approach, a backdoor to the U.S. market, was the primary reason for massive foreign investment in Canada and Mexico; it was also the primary reason why candidate Donald Trump, now President Donald Trump, wanted to shut down that loophole and renegotiate NAFTA.


This loophole was the primary reason for U.S. manufacturers to relocate operations to Mexico. Corporations within the U.S. Auto-Sector could enhance profits by building in Mexico or Canada using parts imported from Asia/China. The labor factor was not as big a part of the overall cost consideration as cheaper parts and imported raw materials."
 
Here is a concise explanation of the "memo":

Top officials at the FBI used evidence they knew was fake to justify a surveillance warrant on an American citizen. The fake evidence was misrepresented to a judge and was "confirmed" by a fake news article planted by the same person who created the fake evidence. That crime was committed solely for partisan political purposes: to influence a US election, to protect the candidate the bureaucrats favored and to harm the candidate they didn't like.

https://ijr.com/the-declaration/201...econds-explain-intelligence-memo-jaw-dropper/



The memo is here:

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/20180129/106822/HMTG-115-IG00-20180129-SD001.pdf
There seems to be a real problem in the US right now, that the Democrats seem to want to discuss everything using a weird form of non-logic that depends only on shouting and taking offence. To parody this slightly:

There are traditional mathematicians that will tell you that given two numbers X and Y, then X*Y is the same as Y*X. This is typical of a white heterosexual male view of things - so last century. I mean, OF COURSE X*Y is different from Y*X because in one case X is doing something to Y and in the other, Y is doing something to X! We should teach our children that algebra is steeped in such HOMOPHOBIC, RACIST, SEXIST ideas, and should be rejected. We need a new kind of algebra - one that real people devise for themselves - only then can mathematics relate to today's reality!
Thus, the Democrats seem to want to sneer at the very idea that the FBI could have become corrupt, even when the evidence proves the opposite, rather than actually engage the question - was this what happened?

I read that the Democrats have produced a counter memo, that they are pressing the president to release. I rather hope that the President will offer to release this memo on condition that there is then a televised debate between the two authors of the memos, Nunes and Schiff, possibly also including Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. I guess the Democrats couldn't back out easily, but that tactic would bring the truth about what has gone on to the widest possible audience.

David
 
There seems to be a real problem in the US right now, that the Democrats seem to want to discuss everything using a weird form of non-logic that depends only on shouting and taking offence. To parody this slightly:



Thus, the Democrats seem to want to sneer at the very idea that the FBI could have become corrupt, even when the evidence proves the opposite, rather than actually engage the question - was this what happened?

I read that the Democrats have produced a counter memo, that they are pressing the president to release. I rather hope that the President will offer to release this memo on condition that there is then a televised debate between the two authors of the memos, Nunes and Schiff, possibly also including Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. I guess the Democrats couldn't back out easily, but that tactic would bring the truth about what has gone on to the widest possible audience.

David
It is not up to the president alone to release the Democrats' memo. The congressional committee has to first vote to release it then the president has to agree. But the Democrats have not shown their memo to the full committee so they have not voted on it. Up to now, the delay is caused by the Democrats.

What I am seeing in the news now is that every item of data used to justify a FISA surveillance warrant has to be verified, and the Judge must have known that the dossier was unverified so the Judge was corrupt too. (The FBI used a news story to "verify" the dossier - that is not the kind of verification the law requires.) The FBI had the warrant renewed four times - I don't know how many judges that involved.

They are saying there is a lot more that is going to come out on this, it is just the beginning. The state department is supposedly also involved. I suspect that what they are releasing now is preparing the ground work which will later be used to show that Clinton and Obama were involved in wrong doing.

There are midterm elections for congress are in November 2018, so I suspect this will be dragged out to have maximum effect on the election which means we may not see where this is all going until October.
 
Last edited:
There are midterm elections for congress are in November 2018, so I suspect this will be dragged out to have maximum effect on the election which means we may not see where this is all going until October.
Well you really can't blame them! Is there any indication as to how many Americans have read the memo, and what level of interest there is in the general public? It is vital not to start to bore them!

I had wondered about the fact that the democrat memo would presumably require the same congressional vetting as the original one. From what you say, it just sounds like another Democrat attempt to spread confusion - I mean nobody can agree to something they haven't seen!

I wonder how far this poison extends down the Democrat ranks, I mean I'd like to see Democrats peeling off and saying enough is enough!

David
 
Well you really can't blame them! Is there any indication as to how many Americans have read the memo, and what level of interest there is in the general public? It is vital not to start to bore them!

I had wondered about the fact that the democrat memo would presumably require the same congressional vetting as the original one. From what you say, it just sounds like another Democrat attempt to spread confusion - I mean nobody can agree to something they haven't seen!

I wonder how far this poison extends down the Democrat ranks, I mean I'd like to see Democrats peeling off and saying enough is enough!

David
I don't know what people think of the memo. I assume people are not really following politics closely but they believe what they see on the news. Democrats watch the mainstream channels and Republicans watch Fox. I doubt very many people would understand what the memo means even if they read it. The results of the 2018 elections will tell us what people are thinking. If you look at similar situations, historically the party that won the presidential election usually loses somewhat in the following midterms. But there are also exceptions, so everyone is wondering what will happen. It's hard for me to predict what people will do when I don't know if they are paying attention or which propaganda they believe.

Because of campaign finance laws, the parties control a lot of the campaign funding. You can only donate a relatively small amount to a candidate but you can donate a much larger amount to a party. So most of the money goes to the party and they decide who to buy ads for etc, so the party pretty much controls the politicians - if they step out of line they will not get help from the party when they come up for reelection.

The campaign finance laws were a huge scam perpetrated on the voters, the politicians said they had to prevent moneyed interests from buying politicians, but they knew all along they were just giving control to the party.
 
Can I join your http://psiencequest.net forums?

I read the rules. If I'm too radical and you don't want me there, that's okay, no hard feelings.
Who says we don't want you here - I know I didn't, and I doubt if Alex has done so. You are more than welcome to stay and optionally post at the other site as well if you wish!

Really our moderation is pretty liberal, but we do smack down on people that try to deliberately mess the forum up for others. You don't come into that category - in fact very few people do, but when you put anything on the internet, you are bound to pull in some strange fish!

David
 
Top