[ExI] The Clinton Foundation
spike66 at att.net
Fri Sep 2 00:02:13 UTC 2016
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 3:55 PM
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:51 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net <mailto:spike66 at att.net> > wrote:
…As I said the list hates Hillary far more than it hates Trump
Eh, probably about the same. Easy solution: don’t vote for them.
Spike, we both know that if there were only 2 candidates on the ballot most people on this list would vote for Trump even though he would be the most anti-free market president in a century…
There was a really good interview with Gary Johnson recently that might answer this question. The press queried on his views on taxes. He related that in his view, we should replace the income tax with a value-added tax (and so forth) but then added a key phrase that was music to my ears: US presidents don’t do that, the House does.
Naturally the press had no idea what he was talking about (imagine that (because USians tend to think that everything the government does is on the orders of the president (it really really doesn’t work that way (not at all, not even close (by careful design (by guys who knew firsthand what happens when we concentrate power.))))))
The interviewer then inserted a snarky comment that Johnson is really saying: don’t worry about my promises, they won’t pass anyway. Johnson patiently explained that we have a constitution that defines what various branches of government actually do. He isn’t making any claim that he has any significant influence on tax structure; he is the first candidate in a long time to explicitly state that he is running for president, not king, not emperor. Presidents do not make the call on that. Astonishing! The truth!
As I have said repeatedly, presidents shouldn’t make the call on nukes either. It was set up that way so that we can respond quickly in an attack. But… we now have early warning systems and instant communications. The reason we originally set up that system has passed. John, you have made the case that this system will not change, but I argue that it can and probably will: the next president will likely be one that noooobody trusts. If the congress passes a bill to take back that football (and I hope they do) the president has the option of vetoing that bill. However… a determined senate can do it anyway. It requires a 2/3 vote to override a veto. If we wind up with either a crazy or criminal president, the senate will perhaps realize they better take action forthwith. The world becomes a safer place if no one can trigger nuclear war by merely getting pissed off or indicted.
>…and I'm sincerely trying to figure out why. It's just so asymmetrical, we've got existential issues on the one side and obscure aids who may or may not have filed the proper government paperwork on the other. And the paperwork wins! I just don't get it…John K Clark
It is more than improper or incomplete paperwork. In contract law. If a SoS enters a contract and does not have everything carefully documented, it is automatic contract fraud. There are no exceptions to government contract law as the rank gets higher: in fact it gets more strict as you go up, because the amounts get bigger. An independent organization had Freedom of Information Act demand that contract, and it comes due in a couple weeks. If the State Department can’t produce that contract, everything changes.
Does that explain those numbers John? Note that the contract has nothing to do with Trump (who has never issued a government contract) nor any particular party, not asking about impact on elections, they are not asking that. It has to do with existing contract law and the question of whether or not it was violated, and if not, hand over the contract, and if so, then what?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat