Steve, you are a prime example of the failure of the public education system :P
On Jan 29, 2017 4:46 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" <[email protected]> wrote: oh.... so you are saying youre complaining about something that hasnt even happenned... at least thats clear On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm saying if you're going to have a meeting of the security council, it > would be fucking prudent to have the Director of National Intelligence. > > You can't file a FOIA request until after something has taken place, and > FOIA requests are redacted or denied in the name of national security. > > On Jan 29, 2017 4:20 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> thats an awful small amount of text to deliver the entirety of the >> message. >> hwat check and balances are you describing here by a person attending a >> meeting that doesnt pertain to them? >> are you saying they have excluded appropriate personell from meetings? >> File a FOIA for the specific meetings you are referencing. >> reply in line now with the specific meetings you are referencing having >> taken place so that when you recieve the FOIA response we can correlate >> them to the listed grievances you are referencing today >> >> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Here's the line you are looking for. Above and below it lists, by item, >>> who is allowed to attend at all times, and who shall attend when it >>> pertains to them. So who's to say that it ever pertains to them? >>> >>> Our government is based on checks and balances, right? This removes >>> quite a bit of balance when the only individuals confirmed by the Senate >>> may spend the next 4 years without anything "pertaining to them". >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jan 29, 2017 4:09 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Im assuming this is excerpt of this: https://www.whitehouse.g >>>> ov/the-press-office/2017/01/28/presidential-memorandum-organ >>>> ization-national-security-council-and >>>> >>>> this sounds like bannon is becoming the equivalent of an executive >>>> secretary, not jesus of jihadi as its being portrayed. The NSA and HSA (why >>>> isnt there a big stink here?) are glorified secretaries (like the girl at >>>> the desk on steroids) >>>> >>>> At no point does it state that the directors are disinvited to anything >>>> that pertains to them. >>>> >>>> A restructuring with formal time management. Have you watched the >>>> senate hearings... very inefficient time management. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> His position is mandatory for them to meet. The JCoS and DNI may only >>>>> attend when it is determined it is required. >>>>> >>>>> Text attached from the order. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 29, 2017 3:39 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> this im still trying to find a legitimate source of what is actually >>>>>> happening on. just like youre saying it makes him more important than the >>>>>> director of the cia, i cant find much other than ego inflated opinions. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> What's your take on making Steve Bannon's new role critical to the >>>>>>> National Security Council (making him more important than the Director >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> the CIA) while only allowing the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Director >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> National Intelligence to attend "when it pertains to them"? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This was an executive order... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 29, 2017 2:40 PM, "Lewis Bergman" <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I can't believe everyone is arguing about who lies more. Wouldn't >>>>>>>> it be great if we could argue about the policy and theory rather than >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> character, or lack thereof? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jan 29, 2017 2:23 PM, "Josh Reynolds" <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It sounds like you want a dictatorship. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 29, 2017 2:11 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> i truly hope you maintain your thought process, exactly as it is, >>>>>>>>>> and those of like mind, it will make 2020 a breeze. And ivankas 8 >>>>>>>>>> year >>>>>>>>>> reign will be glorious >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Josh Reynolds < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> He's trying to use the very tactics he promotes in "art of the >>>>>>>>>>> deal", which basically means "lie about everything, and negotiate >>>>>>>>>>> down". >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I will be absolutely amazed if he makes it into a second term. I >>>>>>>>>>> am also thinking that the Dems won't have their shit together over >>>>>>>>>>> the next >>>>>>>>>>> 4 though. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> What a fucked up place we are in. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 29, 2017 2:04 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> then even more work can be done >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The real question is whether he can keep it up for 207 more >>>>>>>>>>>>> weeks. And once the news organizations stop fawning over him, >>>>>>>>>>>>> what does he >>>>>>>>>>>>> do? Start wars? Drop a nuke on Mexico? He can't stand anything >>>>>>>>>>>>> else >>>>>>>>>>>>> being the shiny object, but you tell the news media to shut up >>>>>>>>>>>>> and listen, >>>>>>>>>>>>> at some point they will shut up and cover something else. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Anybody notice all the old actors kicking off? Did they >>>>>>>>>>>>> really die over the past 18 months and the news is just now >>>>>>>>>>>>> dribbling out, >>>>>>>>>>>>> or did the Trump victory just take away their hope? Barbara Hale >>>>>>>>>>>>> was 94, I >>>>>>>>>>>>> guess waiting 4 more years to see if the Orange One wins >>>>>>>>>>>>> re-election might >>>>>>>>>>>>> seem a bit much to ask. John Hurt was 77, Mary Tyler Moore was >>>>>>>>>>>>> 80. I'm >>>>>>>>>>>>> 66, it's always a bit unnerving when someone younger than me >>>>>>>>>>>>> dies. But >>>>>>>>>>>>> they say, only the good die young. Carrie Fisher must have been >>>>>>>>>>>>> very, very >>>>>>>>>>>>> good. We miss you, Princess. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill >>>>>>>>>>>>> Prince >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 1:25 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT...A fact check on Donald Trump's first >>>>>>>>>>>>> week in office >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> That is just not true. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Several fact organizations made it pretty clear that untruths >>>>>>>>>>>>> from Orange's mouth were about twice as plentiful as untruths >>>>>>>>>>>>> from any >>>>>>>>>>>>> other politician from either party ( and that includes Obama and >>>>>>>>>>>>> Clinton). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bp >>>>>>>>>>>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/29/2017 10:44 AM, Rory Conaway wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> > Nobody will ever lie as much as Obama or Hillary. That is a >>>>>>>>>>>>> bar the will never again be reached. >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > Rory >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>>>> > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill >>>>>>>>>>>>> Prince >>>>>>>>>>>>> > Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 11:32 AM >>>>>>>>>>>>> > To: [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT...A fact check on Donald Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>> first week in >>>>>>>>>>>>> > office >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > Nothing factually incorrect in that piece. It is largely >>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion, so take it for that. >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > One thing that I disagree with is calling him a liar. I >>>>>>>>>>>>> think he's not necessarily lying; he just doesn't know the truth. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Most of >>>>>>>>>>>>> what he says appears to be just made up on the fly, and my >>>>>>>>>>>>> observation is >>>>>>>>>>>>> that his memory is not so good. >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > bp >>>>>>>>>>>>> > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > On 1/28/2017 10:48 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> First week...What a joke... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> http://www.dispatch.com/news/2 >>>>>>>>>>>>> 0170127/fact-check-on-donald-trumps-fir >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> s >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> t-week-in-office >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see >>>>>>>>>>>> your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of >>>>>>>>>>>> the team. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see >>>>>>>>>> your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the >>>>>>>>>> team. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your >>>>>> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your >>>> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >> > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
