TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 8,276
I am not asserting a claim. There is no onus on me to provide an alternate theory.
And here I was foolishly thinking this was a discussion forum. It is, for some posters, BTW.
I am not asserting a claim. There is no onus on me to provide an alternate theory.
And here I was foolishly thinking this was a discussion forum. It is, for some posters, BTW.
![]()
Blatant corruption in the award to rebuild Puerto Rico. No one saw this coming a mile away.
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobby...nterior-chiefs-hometown-wins-massive-contract
Making claims without evidence is not a discussion.
Looks astonishingly bad. As far as I can tell, it looks like Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA) picked these contractors rather than the Dept. of the Interior and PREPA seems to be regulated by the Puerto Rico Energy Commission whose members are appointed by the Governor of Puerto Rico. Something smells rank, but I'm not sure exactly who is giving off the odor. WaPo has an article here.
Under the contract, the hourly rate was set at $330 for a site supervisor, and at $227.88 for a “journeyman lineman.” The cost for subcontractors, which make up the bulk of Whitefish’s workforce, is $462 per hour for a supervisor and $319.04 for a lineman. Whitefish also charges nightly accommodation fees of $332 per worker and almost $80 per day for food.
Making claims without evidence is not a discussion.
So you claim.
Something about these numbers doesn't seem quite right.
Something about these numbers doesn't seem quite right.
Yeah, all of this really begs for some sort of thorough investigation. I particularly want to hear a very good and detailed explanation for not using the mutual aid option. Also of note, Whitefish might be located in Montana but it's a foreign-owned company.
I've seen a couple TV ads today by hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer cataloging Trump's offenses and calling explicitly for him to be impeached. Maybe he can get the ball rolling.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/20/politics/tom-steyer-ad-impeach-trump/index.html
https://www.needtoimpeach.com/
Flake news!Senator Flake is delivering a blistering rebuke to Trump right now.
It's a glottal stop.
Taking to the floor, he said he did not enjoy criticising the president but felt it was "a matter of duty and conscience".
"We must never regard as 'normal' the regular and casual undermining of our democratic norms and ideals," he said.
He lamented the "flagrant disregard for truth or decency, the reckless provocations, most often for the pettiest and most personal reasons".
"I have children and grandchildren to answer to, and so, Mr President, I will not be complicit," he added.
So you claim.
Im not saying my statement is able to be discussed. There are reasons most of what I write is not falsifiable.
He all but said "Has he no sense of decency?".I have NEVER heard a speech so blistering about a sitting President come from a sitting congressman of either party.
I have NEVER heard a speech so blistering about a sitting President come from a sitting congressman of either party.
It started with the Greeks so, yah.The shtick is getting old, folks.
He all but said "Has he no sense of decency?".
Historic.
Someone (CNN?) drew analogies to the "Have you no sense of decency?" quote from the McCarthy hearings. To which I know you were referring.
https://youtu.be/fqQD4dzVkwk
quotes from Flake
honestly, good for him.quotes from Flake
It started with the Greeks so, yah.![]()
I suspect within the GOP in Arizona is looking right now for a more mainstream candidate to run for the GOP Nomination; 'Chemtrail Kelli" is just too risky.
He all but said "Has he no sense of decency?".
Yeah, all of this really begs for some sort of thorough investigation. I particularly want to hear a very good and detailed explanation for not using the mutual aid option. Also of note, Whitefish might be located in Montana but it's a foreign-owned company.
And that is one hell of a coincidence that the company is located in the Secretary of the Interior's home town..
Is using coincidences an appropriate application of skepticism?
Define appropriate.
Whatever I say it is based on whatever whom I have.
Okay, then it is appropriate.
Something about these numbers doesn't seem quite right.