Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 11:17 am:
I pay less than $3000/year in property taxes in Santa Cruz County. One of the most expensive counties in the country, housing cost to income wise. 1200 square feet on half an acre in the Redwoods (43 of them on my property). The piece of land I own across the street, is not build-able, so I pay $35/year in taxes on that parcel, mostly administrative fees, and I have water rights since my property line runs right down the middle of a creek (something unheard of lately). I am free to install a water wheel or a pump to pull water up for irrigation.
My house was originally built as a vacation/hunting cabin in 1910 (or so). It's current size dates back to the early '70's.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 11:49 am:
I'm paying about $3K on a 3K SF house on a half acre of hardwoods. It's considered high for the area, but we have city water/sewer and natural gas. My mom is paying about $2,400 on a 2,800 SF house on 10 acres of wooded land. Your perception of "low taxes" may be slightly skewed.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 12:33 pm:
Compared to all of my relatives' property taxes in Colorado, Texas, New York, Florida, Washington and Connecticut, mine are low.
Yes there are other off-setting taxes and in some cases it is a wash. Texas has some pretty high property taxes but they have to make up for no income tax somehow.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 01:16 pm:
Calling Flynn's ouster an "Assassination" is hyperbole.
This just came across my desk, from the Patriot Post:
quote:
Flynn: Not Suicide, but Political Assassination By Nate Jackson, 02/15/2017
As it turns out, former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn didn’t so much fall on his own sword as he had one plunged into his back. Former Bill Clinton adviser turned conservative pundit Dick Morris explained, “The 0bama appointees still inhabiting the bowels of the State and Justice Departments orchestrated the coup that brought down General Michael Flynn.” They did so by leaking to the press the transcripts of Flynn’s December 29 phone conversation with a Russian official about Barack 0bama’s sanctions. This was followed by dire warnings of Flynn’s susceptibility to potential blackmail by the Russians. (As if Hillary Clinton wasn’t the biggest blackmail risk in the history of the United States.) “The leaks of the content of an intercepted communication are felonies,” said former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova. “All of the disclosures to the Washington Post are federal crimes.”
So: The NSA tapped a high-level government conversation.
And then leaked the contents to the DOJ.
Who then leaked the contents to the Washington Post.
And in perfect, well-coordinated lockstep, all the MSM outlets pick up the story, run with it at the top of their collective lungs, and down goes Flynn. The only thing missing in the cartoon above is a toe tag.
Who was in charge of the DOJ at the time? You know, the gal that was fired?
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 01:32 pm:
Here's the thing ... if you know everyone is out to get you ... why give them ammunition to shoot you. Trump and his administration need to get their shit together.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 01:58 pm:
Yet more hyperbole:
quote:
Dennis Kucinich Acurately Outlines The Danger Of a Rogue Intelligence Community By Sundance, 02/15/2017
Former Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) appeared on Fox News to discuss Gen. Michael Flynn's resignation and the larger, more dangerous issue of a rogue intelligence community undermining the U.S. presidency and operating on behalf of a Deep State construct of subversive government:
Kucinich is not alone; multiple voices across the most broad spectrum of politics are now in agreement that what has taken place within a subversive intelligence network, is far more dangerous to our constitutional republic than any political division or disagreement.
The domestic entities hiding within a Deep State construct are acting independently of legal and constitutional parameters in a direct act of sedition against the U.S. government.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 02:08 pm:
I'm still puzzling this one out. My thoughts so far are...
1) Flynn probably did violate the law when he started diplomacy before taking the office. Every other administration probably did also, but I'm happy to start enforcing the law whenever.
2) The conversation was inevitably going to be recorded by an intelligence agency, and it was perhaps appropriate to do so, because they monitor the all the Russian calls in and out all the time anyway. Duh.
3) Leaking the contents of the conversation, even if it was illegal, is also illegal, so fire all of them too.
3.5) I'm much less worried about Trump being transparently and publicly a power hungry manipulator than I am about a shadow intelligence organization being a power hungry manipulator. So fire anyone involved in that conspiracy also. In fact just shoot the ones that compromised signal intelligence as part of a political hit, that's treason and they knew what they were in the middle of and they can die by the sword they lived by.
4) If Flynn lied about this to the POTUS and VP, then I'm sure they would have fired him for that, even if they would have been willing to defend him otherwise. That's why they said they did it.
5) Unlike other administrations, when crap hits the fan in this administration because people make mistakes, heads start rolling and fixes start getting made instantly. Which is really refreshing, and ought to be terrifying all of Trump's enemies domestic and abroad. It will send a few innocents through the meatgrinder, but it will make Trumps adminstration very effective very fast.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 02:30 pm:
I was amused by the fact that the press - who has criticized Trump for making "hasty" movements on all his campaign promises to date - was asking him today at the end of the US/Israel press conference - "Why did it take you 3 weeks (to fire Flynn)?".
Two-faced jackyls.
The press needs a purge.
The "career politicians" need a purge. There should BE no such thing as a "career politician" - there should be term limits THROUGHOUT. Period. Let 'em stay for life, and this is the crap we get.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 02:54 pm:
I am paying $2k a year on a 40 x 80 foot lot with a hundred year old house on it in a noisy part of Sacramento midtown. The trick to low property taxes in CA is to not move, which is difficult for many Californians to do. The grass always seems greener somewhere else.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 06:11 pm:
HOgwash; Easy for me: I can't afford to move. I live within my means.
I agree with finding who leaked the information and then prosecute them for treason and send them to gitmo. I also feel Flynn did the right thing stepping down.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 06:21 pm:
Trying to wrap my head around the Flynn thing too. I'm not at all clear what law(s) he supposedly broke. If a law was broken, it does seem likely that it's ignored regularly.
Trump was ripped to shreds for statements he had made about lacking faith in the intelligence agencies. Looks to me like he was right to have made those statements. This is a case of government workers working with malice toward our own government. I would say fire every single one of them that had access to this information unless someone can point to the leaker. This sort of thing has to be stopped. National security trumps (lower case t) politics. Period. Where are we when the CIC can't have faith in our intelligence agencies?
Failing the ability fire them all, reassign them all to a single task for the next 4 years. The assignment would be to find the leaker. Make life as miserable for them as possible until the task in accomplished.
I can't count the times in the last couple of days that I've heard that we must investigate what Trump knew and when. Suddenly it's not good enough for a president to just find out about things going on under his nose in the press. Funny how fast that changed!
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 06:58 pm:
quote:
Surprise: At the End, 0bama Administration Gave NSA Broad New Powers By Michael Walsh, PJ Media - 02/15/2017
This story, from the Jan. 12, 2017, edition of the New York Times, was little-remarked upon at the time, but suddenly has taken on far greater significance in light of current events:
quote:
In its final days, the Obama administration has expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.
The new rules significantly relax longstanding limits on what the N.S.A. may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations, which are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. These include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.
One of the central questions behind the Mike Flynn flap that should have been asked but largely wasn't is: who was wiretapping the general? The answer, we know now, was the National Security Agency, formerly known as No Such Agency, the nation's foremost signals-intelligence (SIGINT) collection department.
Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch signed the new rules, permitting the N.S.A. to disseminate “raw signals intelligence information,” on Jan. 3, after the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr., signed them on Dec. 15, according to a 23-page, largely declassified copy of the procedures.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 08:12 pm:
I believe his error, if I understand correctly, was conducting diplomatic conversations and discussions prior to becoming an authorized government agent.
In other words...he jumped the gun.
I have yet to hear anything about non-patriotic content, but I may have missed that. I can only stomach so much of the "news" in one sitting...
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 08:47 pm:
And no different from the Clinton foundation (but not Hillary) negotiating with foreign leaders. I doubt there has been a president elect staff in the last 100 years that hasn't broken that law.
So like I said, I suspect that if he was fired for it, he was fired for lying about it to the wrong person, not for doing it.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 09:02 pm:
As I understand this, the transcript of his phone call hasn't been released to the public. I actually hope that is true, but at the same time, we don't know exactly what was said about the sanctions. It's very possible that the other side brought it up, and he said that he can't discuss that at this time. We have no way of knowing. Trump fired him. That's his call. I don't really question that call. If this were under BO, the wagons (MSM included) would be circled and in full protection mode. The hypocrisy is pretty astounding.
Flynn's gone. Time to move on. At this point, what difference does it make. It's not like 4 of our diplomats suffered unimaginably horrible deaths.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 09:15 pm:
Well, I *would* like to use this opportunity to *also* take out whatever intelligence people decided to play kingmaker. Fire Flynn for lying. Fire them for leaking. Then fire the next 10 people you meet that also want to keep doing "politics as usual" in DC.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 11:36 pm:
Dick Morris has a good explanation of what happened with Flynn. i haven't heard anything to discredit this...sorry about not posting in the proper format. been a long day.
Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 - 11:58 pm:
There is no charge of anything remotely criminal. It's never been illegal for members of a transition team to communicate with foreign diplomats. The left wing press is in hard spin mode trying to gin up a mountain from a mole hill.
The leaking of classified intelligence is a felony.
I believe his error, if I understand correctly, was conducting diplomatic conversations and discussions prior to becoming an authorized government agent.
If true, this is one of the most common things I can think of. You call your counterpart and say "Hi, I'm the new guy, I start next week, looking forward to working with you." SOP.
However, this is most probably not the case here. I don't know what's going on other than treason and Clinton operatives. Google hired the firm to investigate the "Russian hack of the DNC" which is almost certainly not real.
According to M. Savage, radio pundit, ( so get out the salt lick ) A firm run by a Clinton Minion and an anti-Russian pro Ukraine? guy. All parties anti-Trump and all parties willing to lie, as they've all been caught doing so, afaik.
The DNC did not allow the FBI to examine their server, denying evidence to the investigation, thus... the DNC is guilty, not the Russians. This is simple legal theory.
But in any case, I have no idea what the nature of the supposed "diplomatic" contact was. And will withhold opinion.
However, the previous Sec State, DID engage in illegal diplomatic action with the N.Vietnamese in time of ( undeclared ) war and is, was and always will be a treasonous, known liar, criminal, and IMHO, failure. ( except of course for his career as a temporary husband to rich women. He's been darn good at getting rich that way. )
So, yeah, all I got is a Criminal Regime trying to destroy a freely elected one. ( that's Obama & Trump in case I wasn't clear )
Investigations and arrests must be made to plug these leaks, or you can expect rioting and assassination. Don't reward bad behavior.
So when you, a so called news company, collectively call me Hitler and tell America I want to bring back slavery..... the opinion of a guy who so obviously wanted to be mounted in the biblical sense by Obama is not my concern. ( object to that description of "tingle up my leg" Mathews? Sodom is biblical. )
Answering the questions of known propaganda pimps isn't a legal requirement. Go pleasure yourself.
Still don't like Donald. Have real issues with his tweeting compulsion.
Compared to anyone associated with MSNBC, he's a Saint. ( Don't hold your breath for this communist Pope to nominate him )
Former Obama Officials, Loyalists Waged Secret Campaign to Oust Flynn Sources: Former Obama officials, loyalists planted series of stories to discredit Flynn, bolster Iran deal By Adam Kredo, 02/14/2017
The abrupt resignation Monday evening of White House national security adviser Michael Flynn is the culmination of a secret, months-long campaign by former Obama administration confidantes to handicap President Donald Trump's national security apparatus and preserve the nuclear deal with Iran, according to multiple sources in and out of the White House who described to the Washington Free Beacon a behind-the-scenes effort by these officials to plant a series of damaging stories about Flynn in the national media.
The effort, said to include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes—the architect of a separate White House effort to create what he described as a pro-Iran echo chamber—included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn's credibility, multiple sources revealed.
The operation primarily focused on discrediting Flynn, an opponent of the Iran nuclear deal, in order to handicap the Trump administration's efforts to disclose secret details of the nuclear deal with Iran that had been long hidden by the Obama administration.
Insiders familiar with the anti-Flynn campaign told the Free Beacon that these Obama loyalists plotted in the months before Trump's inauguration to establish a set of roadblocks before Trump's national security team, which includes several prominent opponents of diplomacy with Iran. The Free Beacon first reported on this effort in January.
...[M]ultiple sources closely involved in the situation pointed to a larger, more secretive campaign aimed at discrediting Flynn and undermining the Trump White House.
"It's undeniable that the campaign to discredit Flynn was well underway before Inauguration Day, with a very troublesome and politicized series of leaks designed to undermine him," said one veteran national security adviser with close ties to the White House team. "This pattern reminds me of the lead up to the Iran deal, and probably features the same cast of characters."
"It's actually Ben Rhodes, NIAC, and the Iranian mullahs who are celebrating today," said one veteran foreign policy insider who is close to Flynn and the White House. "They know that the number one target is Iran … [and] they all knew their little sacred agreement with Iran was going to go off the books. So they got rid of Flynn before any of the [secret] agreements even surfaced."
..."The larger issue that should trouble the American people is the far-reaching power of unknown, unelected apparatchiks in the Intelligence Community deciding for themselves both who serves in government and what is an acceptable policy they will allow the elected representatives of the people to pursue," said the national security adviser quoted above.
"Put aside the issue of Flynn himself; that nameless, faceless bureaucrats were able to take out a president's national security adviser based on a campaign of innuendo without evidence should worry every American," the source explained.
Eli Lake, a Bloomberg View columnist and veteran national security reporter well sourced in the White House, told the Free Beacon that Flynn earned a reputation in the Obama administration as one of its top detractors.
"Michael Flynn was one of the Obama administration's fiercest critics after he was forced out of the Defense Intelligence Agency," said Lake, who described "the political assassination of Michael Flynn" in his column published early Tuesday.
" [Flynn] was a withering critic of Obama's biggest foreign policy initiative, the Iran deal," Lake said.
"The Obama administration knew that Flynn was going to release the secret documents around the Iran deal, which would blow up their myth that it was a good deal that rolled back Iran," the source said. "So in December the Obama NSC started going to work with their favorite reporters, selectively leaking damaging and incomplete information about Flynn."
"After Trump was inaugurated some of those people stayed in and some began working from the outside, and they cooperated to keep undermining Trump," the source said, detailing a series of leaks from within the White House in the past weeks targeting Flynn.
Y'all remember Ben Rhodes, right? Deputy National Security Advisor under 0bama, brother of CBS News president, and one of the key architects of the official White House Benghazi talking points lies.
quote:
Ben Rhodes (White House staffer) Benjamin J. "Ben" Rhodes (born 1977) was the Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications for U.S. President Barack Obama and was an Advisor on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action with Iran.
His official title was "Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications and Speechwriting." Rhodes was a foreign policy speechwriter for Obama from 2007 until Obama left office in January 2017.
...Rhodes is married to Ann Norris, chief foreign policy adviser to Senator Barbara Boxer.[*]
*This last little factoid is new to me; interesting. One can easily imagine a direct conduit from the black hats in the intel community to certain members of Congress (and vice versa) by virtue of this relationship...
I'm not sure how related to Fb1's story this is, but it's certainly not good. I haven't actually read the story because I refuse to pay to see behind the green curtain, but if the headline is the least bit accurate, it's something to be enraged about. Is the word "coup" still too strong to use?
The irony of the intel folks worrying about preventing leads is pretty rich to boot.
I would also add, that while many of Cityxslicker's predictions weren't spot on, he was right in the essence of the fact that the BO administration hasn't simply turned over power to the new administration. These people are working against our elected government from within. The word treason certainly seems fitting.
But why did Trump accept Flyn's resignation? No crime was committed. He misled Pence. All Trump had to do was smooth things over between Flyn and Pence, asking Flyn to issue a public apology would have done it.
So I don't get it. It's not making a lot of sense. Is Trump that rigid on personnel issues? We know he's not a pushover, so what other explanation is there? More timid than just misleading Pence?
The leakers though need swept up and charged, I definitely agree on that.