The Investigation

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
As to the numbers question - at least it wasn't the 4,600 the New England Journal of Medicine guesstimated back in July.... Yes, this is sarcasm. The numbers vary from an official toll of hundreds to practically "sky's the limit" - depending on your agenda.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1803972?query=featured_home

As to the whom is at fault question - Anyone who has been to PR (as I have) can see it's for all intents and purposes "La Isla de Tijuana" with a few scattered 5 star resorts to hide away from the surrounding squalor.  So that I'm not displaying right wing bias, here's an article from Mother Jones, as far Left as you might find as a news resource. Note how the Governor (D-Kleptocrat) wants a plan to fix their electrical grid that is opposed by the fiscal control board required to help govern the island after their bankruptcy. Perhaps the graft wasn't going to be sufficient enough to warrant going forward on a plan that might really help the islands people.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/07/ricardo-rossello-rob-bishop/

It seems best IMHO to either wipe out the local government and completely Federalize the territory, or cut it loose to straighten itself out. Neither are great options, but status quo on the island gave us the 6, 18, 64, 1,400, or 2,975 deaths that could have been prevented with proper leadership.

My .02c


 
Kings said:
Perspective said:
You're conflating issues. "How many deaths resulted?" is a different question than "Who is responsible for the deaths that occurred?" Trump is disputing the death toll.
Click to expand...

the point is that nobody knows for sure what is going on down there.  we don't know where supplies are going, we have corrupt officials, and we have 10 different "studies" saying there are 5 to 5,000 deaths.
Click to expand...

That most certainly is not Trump's point. He said 6-18 people died and not much after that. He said our response to Puerto Rico was a tremendous success.
 
MAGA geniuses debating numbers - you forgot the simplest argument ? The 2,975 who died did not die ?IN? the storm but in six month period AFTER the storm.  Now you can all say you ?won? the argument . See, you are still
#winning .
 
Kings said:
Perspective said:
You're conflating issues. "How many deaths resulted?" is a different question than "Who is responsible for the deaths that occurred?" Trump is disputing the death toll.
Click to expand...

the point is that nobody knows for sure what is going on down there.  we don't know where supplies are going, we have corrupt officials, and we have 10 different "studies" saying there are 5 to 5,000 deaths.
Click to expand...

By the way, you just engaged in a Trump gas-lighting favorite. Not only did you conflate two issues, but in doing so, threw out a number of alternative potential facts. The purpose is to reach a point where you can throw up your hands and claim "nobody knows what happened."

It works on a lot of fools...
 
Perspective said:
Kings said:
Perspective said:
You're conflating issues. "How many deaths resulted?" is a different question than "Who is responsible for the deaths that occurred?" Trump is disputing the death toll.
Click to expand...

the point is that nobody knows for sure what is going on down there.  we don't know where supplies are going, we have corrupt officials, and we have 10 different "studies" saying there are 5 to 5,000 deaths.
Click to expand...

By the way, you just engaged in a Trump gas-lighting favorite. Not only did you conflate two issues, but in doing so, threw out a number of alternative potential facts. The purpose is to reach a point where you can throw up your hands and claim "nobody knows what happened."

It works on a lot of fools...
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with The Investigation? 

FACT:  Perspective doesn't like Trump.  Everybody knows that.

Another fact is that those that hate Trump with every ounce of their being, like Perspective, were looking for a way to politicize the deaths and carnage of Hurricane Maria right from the start.  This was never about a fair minded assessment of the response to the hurricane for you.

This is your big Kanye moment:  "George Bush hates black people."  We get it.

Just keep in mind that you are selfishly politicizing the deaths of REAL people.  You don't really care about them, because if you did, you wouldn't be doing what you are doing here.  In that way, you are guilty of what you accuse Trump of.
 
Perspective said:
Quite a conclusory statement devoid of any analysis. How exactly did I politicize the deaths?
Click to expand...

You are looking to score cheap points against Trump and his "sycophants" and trying to bait us into an argument about those that died.

Here's the thing.... Let's suppose for a minute that Trump hates brown people.  The media's narrative still doesn't make sense.

Trump is quite cognizant of the heat that GW Bush caught for Hurricane Katrina, so the last thing he would have wanted was for this to be seen as a failure.  Even if he didn't give a rats ass about Puerto Rico, he still cared about how this was seen politically.  He wanted his handling of the three successive hurricanes in 2016 to be seen as a resounding success.  He would have wanted the praise that would have come with that.

So the premise that Trump saved Houston, but decided to let Puerto Rico suffer makes no sense. 

The media was itching to paint this as a failure right from the beginning, and that mayor wearing the goofy shirts was willing to politicize the deaths and suffering of her own people to score political points.  Sick.

What nobody seems to take into account is that:

1)  Two hurricanes hit the island in rapid succession.
2)  Afterwards, the harbors had to be dredged before any ships could dock.  Otherwise they might hit debris and sink.  This took several days to accomplish due to the extreme complexity of the situation.
3)  San Juan's airport was heavily damaged, initially limiting the ability of planes to land.
4)  The electrical grid was already in a shambles before the hurricanes hit.
5)  The government was bankrupt before the hurricanes, meaning no local resources to fund rescue efforts.
6)  A general culture of corruption in government.

All of this stuff compounded to make it a much more difficult job.

So those wanting to make this disaster a failing of Trump, what exactly do you suggest he should have done differently?  We know Bush was asleep at the wheel during Katrina, but that wasn't the case here.  Should Trump have thrown more resources at it?  According to Reuters, PR has received $16 billion so far.  The anti-Trump media is constantly painting it as a failure, but has any analyst provided commentary about what should have been done differently?

Until a comprehensive report is done on the failings that occurred, isn't everybody just operating based on opinions and not FACTS?
 
Perspective said:
Quite a conclusory statement devoid of any analysis. How exactly did I politicize the deaths?
Click to expand...

Perspective - don?t worry ? people who clutch their pearls over politicizing actual deaths from police shootings or hurricanes ...

... won?t wait two seconds before politicizing a peaceful protest by black NFL players or by a corporation like Nike

All they can do is gang up and attack on posters whose viewpoints differ from their carefully curated right wing  bubble on this forum .
 
Probably the best thing about Hurricane Irma and Maria is last year about this time, all the internet investment and business geniuses were touting how they moved to Puerto Rico and eliminated their taxes.

Not hearing that much now.
 
Liar Loan said:
Perspective said:
Quite a conclusory statement devoid of any analysis. How exactly did I politicize the deaths?
Click to expand...

You are looking to score cheap points against Trump and his "sycophants" and trying to bait us into an argument about those that died.

Here's the thing.... Let's suppose for a minute that Trump hates brown people.  The media's narrative still doesn't make sense.

Trump is quite cognizant of the heat that GW Bush caught for Hurricane Katrina, so the last thing he would have wanted was for this to be seen as a failure.  Even if he didn't give a rats ass about Puerto Rico, he still cared about how this was seen politically.  He wanted his handling of the three successive hurricanes in 2016 to be seen as a resounding success.  He would have wanted the praise that would have come with that.

So the premise that Trump saved Houston, but decided to let Puerto Rico suffer makes no sense. 

The media was itching to paint this as a failure right from the beginning, and that mayor wearing the goofy shirts was willing to politicize the deaths and suffering of her own people to score political points.  Sick.

What nobody seems to take into account is that:

1)  Two hurricanes hit the island in rapid succession.
2)  Afterwards, the harbors had to be dredged before any ships could dock.  Otherwise they might hit debris and sink.  This took several days to accomplish due to the extreme complexity of the situation.
3)  San Juan's airport was heavily damaged, initially limiting the ability of planes to land.
4)  The electrical grid was already in a shambles before the hurricanes hit.
5)  The government was bankrupt before the hurricanes, meaning no local resources to fund rescue efforts.
6)  A general culture of corruption in government.

All of this stuff compounded to make it a much more difficult job.

So those wanting to make this disaster a failing of Trump, what exactly do you suggest he should have done differently?  We know Bush was asleep at the wheel during Katrina, but that wasn't the case here.  Should Trump have thrown more resources at it?  According to Reuters, PR has received $16 billion so far.  The anti-Trump media is constantly painting it as a failure, but has any analyst provided commentary about what should have been done differently?

Until a comprehensive report is done on the failings that occurred, isn't everybody just operating based on opinions and not FACTS?
Click to expand...

So, I am politicizing these deaths, because I identified DeSantis as a sycophant, and commented that in spite of his idolotry of Trump, even he wouldn't support Trump's lies this time regarding the death toll in Puerto Rico?

Or in the alternative, I am also politicizing these deaths because the media may be doing so?

Do I understand your analysis correctly?
 
So Marco Rubio  says on TV that ?both sides" need to calm down about Puerto Rico

Would that be the side with 3,000 dead Americans, or the side with Trumpsters saying they aren't dead?
 
eyephone said:
fortune11 said:
So Marco Rubio  says on TV that ?both sides" need to calm down about Puerto Rico

Would that be the side with 3,000 dead Americans, or the side with Trumpsters saying they aren't dead?
Click to expand...

Speaking of Marco Rubio. Did you see the clip when Rubio told Alex Jones not to touch him?
https://www.theguardian.com/global/...uch-me-marco-rubio-and-alex-jones-clash-video
Click to expand...

Ha , that was great . Would have loved to see little Marco take on the king of tin foil hattery  : )
 
fortune11 said:
eyephone said:
fortune11 said:
So Marco Rubio  says on TV that ?both sides" need to calm down about Puerto Rico

Would that be the side with 3,000 dead Americans, or the side with Trumpsters saying they aren't dead?
Click to expand...

Speaking of Marco Rubio. Did you see the clip when Rubio told Alex Jones not to touch him?
https://www.theguardian.com/global/...uch-me-marco-rubio-and-alex-jones-clash-video
Click to expand...

Ha , that was great . Would have loved to see little Marco take on the king of tin foil hattery  : )
Click to expand...

My favorite line: When Rubio said I got to go to committee, you guys can talk to this clown.
 
Here is my ?copy and paste? of the day from fake news media .

Is it the economy , stupid ?  But then What?s up with all the doomsday imagery .

In minority rule (Republican base today ) , you can only win via fear and appeals to tribalism . 

And ignorant me, I  believed all these smart TI posters that tax cuts were popular :)

Bloomberg News :  Nervous Republicans Revive ?Carnage? as Midterm Turnout Strategy
2018-09-14 08:00:16.449 GMT


By Joshua Green
(Bloomberg Businessweek) -- Donald Trump declared in his
inaugural address that the days of ?American carnage? are over.
But the man who wrote those words is summoning images of
violence once again?this time as part of an attempt by anxious
conservatives to persuade uninterested voters to show up at the
polls and save Republican congressional majorities in November.
Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon?s new
film, Trump @War, features scenes of the president?s supporters
being punched, kicked, and clubbed by anti-Trump protesters, as
well as a parade of liberal celebrities wishing violence on
Trump?or, in the case of comedian Kathy Griffin, wielding a
replica of his severed head. The film debuted on Sept. 12 on the
conservative cable station One America News Network and will be
broadcast several more times. Fox News prime-time hosts from
Laura Ingraham to Sean Hannity have devoted substantial airtime
to the supposed scourge of left-wing violence, including the
black-clad, antifascist protesters known as ?antifa.? And
President Trump, in an Aug. 28 White House meeting with
evangelical leaders, warned of ?left-wing violence? if Democrats
win control of Congress in the midterm elections.
?They will overturn everything that we?ve done, and they
will do it quickly and violently. And violently. There is
violence. W
 
fortune11 said:
Perspective said:
Another witch flipped. Just a couple remain.
Click to expand...

:)  you guys not getting indigestion yet from eating those nothingburgers  ?
Click to expand...

Just been burping and adding to the carbon footprint from all the hot air and baloney in those burgers.  Need to wash it down with a beer this weekend.
 
Perspective said:
Another witch flipped. Just a couple remain.
Click to expand...

i'll have my nothingburger with cheese, please

Paul Manafort Pleads Guilty, Agrees To Cooperate With Prosecutors

The plea agreement says Manafort agrees to cooperate in any and all matters as to which the government deems the cooperation relevant. That includes testifying fully and completely before a grand jury in Washington, D.C., or elsewhere.

But one person familiar with the case said the agreement does not include cooperation on matters involving the Trump campaign. The individual asked not to be identified.

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/14/643073024/paul-manafort-to-plead-guilty-in-agreement-to-avert-a-second-federal-trial
Click to expand...
 
Even if it did, who cares?  They have been sweating Manafort's business partner, Rick Gates (remember him?) for seven months with his full cooperation.  If he didn't give them any meat then Manafort's fridge is empty too.  Nothingburgers on the house.

Rick Gates Pleads Guilty And Begins Cooperating With Mueller's Russia Investigation
February 23, 201811:00 AM ET

Rick Gates, the business partner of Donald Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, pleaded guilty on Friday to two charges and will begin cooperating with federal prosecutors investigating the Trump campaign and Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Gates appeared in federal court on Friday afternoon. He told Judge Amy Berman Jackson he was making the plea of his own free will.

Under U.S. sentencing guidelines, Gates could get between four and six years in prison, but prosecutors said they would consider Gates' cooperation with their investigation and could later ask the court to be lenient.

https://www.npr.org/2018/02/23/588253673/rick-gates-paul-manaforts-business-partner-expected-to-plead-guilty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top