Uncategorised

It's very unlikely Cuomo sex tapes exist, this page is just a test of search engines.

It seems bizarre that Bill Clinton, and hundreds of other politicians, have committed what most people would call forcible rapes, using state troopers as muscle in Bill Clinton's case, but no enforcement authorities ever had an interest. Meanwhile Cuomo is being investigated by the Attorney General of his state for being obnoxious. Both are democrats, which makes it more odd.

Cuomo is Italian, and Italians are more touchy in social situations generally than other Americans. As ridiculous as Cuomo may be as a politician, it's a stretch to say he is even in the same league as Bill Clinton, Or John Kennedy, or most governors, etc.

It seems very unlikely that he is even in the top 50% of people of either sex when it comes to sexual abuse or misconduct.

The current climate affecting Cuomo looks a little like a reaction to the NY Harvey Weinstein investigation.

Weinstein's lawyers had arranged with the then NY Attorney General for him to escape charges by carefully using the 'prosecution' of Weinstein to discredit his accusers. Only cases which had glaring flaws were to be prosecuted. The effort was a little too transparent though and led to a counter project to remove that Attorney General.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schneiderman 

Cuomo married one of RFK's daughters, with whom he has children, then divorced her. By common U.S. standards he is therefore not 'married', even though he has children, and most Americans would call his actions 'flirting', or more accurately 'coercive flirting' because of his job and the circumstances. Not a signature of a great political leader, but also not very high on the scale of abuse. So far there doesn't seem to be any evidence of anything beyond that. Very, very few people reach his age without having done worse things.

Biden, of course, is widely known to have done, many things, many times, much more offensive than anything Cuomo has even been accused of so far.

The obvious deduction then is that the Cuomo issue is directed in some sense at Biden. Whether as a calculated plot or as a simple sociological phenomenon would be anybody's guess.

If it is an entirely natural phenomenon, a 'coincidence', then Biden knows he is in line. When his turn comes he also knows there will be parallels to Clinton. If it is part of a calculated plot then Biden, as a politician, knows he only has to identify  the threateners and obey them, and he will have no problems.

The timing of the accusations against Cuomo, so soon after Biden takes office, are an unusual coincidence, at the least.

~

Now one of the people who might replace Cuomo is being accused of more offensive acts than Cuomo has been accused of https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:nmbOasc5TCIJ:https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/tom-reed-lobbyist-nicolette-davis/2021/03/19/10717562-84f3-11eb-8a67-f314e5fcf88d_story.html+&cd=12&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us 

It's sort of like Republican anti gay politicians. When a U.S. politician starts aggressively opposing gay rights, it is only a matter of time until he is forced to resign for having gay sex with an underage boy in a hotel room, while snorting cocaine.

~

Once vegan rights activists, or animals, get enough power, politics will really change. Most people have been directly involved in promoting the abuse and consumption of animals.

Should that stop after animals or their defenders get political power? https://vimeo.com/209647801 

~

Women have only been legally able to vote in the United States since about the time of WW1. Most blacks long after that. Native Americans even later in many places.

Some people would imagine it is democracy evolving, but really the power structure never gives more than it gets. As the melting pot consolidates locally, it can afford to 'empower' sub groups, giving them an illusion of power, as long as the newly empowered can't follow the trail of real power and see how it shifted.

Sovereignty is the only thing a melting pot cannot afford.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Was the 'Capitol Riot' really such an incredible attack?

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/18/fbi-releases-capitol-riot-videos-seeks-tips-on-police-attackers.html 

Here is an actual page at the FBI website devoted to videos of the 'Capitol Riot'.

https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/capitol-violence/ 

A person has to wonder, has anybody at the FBI actually spent any time on Youtube looking at the daily videos of police abuses?

How could any rational person consider a hillbilly invasion of a federal building, using walking canes, crutches and misspelled protest signs, as worse than the almost daily videos of police beating or shooting unarmed people and routinely lying about those shootings?

This page is in the Worldview wars section because it shows such a blatant attempt by people at the FBI to conflate facts. They want to portray a fairly minor protest as a major 'threat to democracy' because it is a threat to their power. The simple solution to their problem is to tell the truth, but that is not in their playbook. Their videos come with warnings about sensitive or graphic content, but where is that 'disturbing content'? Is tapping a police officer with a stick really a horrendous crime?

In the U.S. there are many people in prison for minimally defending themselves against attacks by police. There are almost no police in prison for violent attacks on unarmed people.

What is the FBI promoting?

~

Initially the media reported four, then five deaths from the riot.

One woman was shot by police

Three more protestors died of medical issues like heart attacks.

At this point, four civilians dead and no noticeable police injuries, it looks bad.

Then, suddenly, a Capitol police officer was announced to have died.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/07/us/capitol-mob-deaths/index.html 

Later it would leak that he was fine after leaving the scene, but had a stroke some time later. The incidence of fatal strokes among 42 year olds, his age was 42, is extremely low. In fact so low that 42 is not on most charts that tally the age of stroke victims.

Then two police officers committed suicide.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/27/second-officer-suicide-following-capitol-riot-463123 

Interestingly, one of the two officers who committed suicide was the son of an influential lawyer who worked on the Church Committee 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee

which investigated abuses by the CIA.

~

Video of Sicknick at the protest clearly shows a person doing something they do not want to be doing. His eyes stay low and move slowly and he clearly does not want to be doing that work that day.

In fact Sicknick was 'an outspoken supporter of Trump'. Was he preparing some kind of public statement or act in support of his personal beliefs?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Sicknick 

The two suicides also were most likely in a similar situation.

According to Politico

"Sixty-five MPD officers reported injuries from the attack, and many more had wounds such as “scratches, bruises, eyes burning from bear mace—that they did not even bother to report,” he said."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/police-officer-jeffrey-smith-who-defended-capitol-during-riot-dies-by-suicide 

Which is ridiculous, of course. Police generally report roughly 65 times more injuries than they receive so its likely one police officer sustained minor injuries. It's virtually certain that once word got out that four protestors were dead and no police were even seriously injured, a call was made to drum up injuries among Capitol police. The supposed 'injuries' police are seen receiving on videos are trivial, getting maced for example, or getting poked with a walking stick.

A few weeks later the number of injured officers jumped to 140 https://www.1011now.com/2021/02/18/family-seeks-line-of-duty-recognition-for-dc-officer-who-died-by-suicide-after-capitol-riot/ 

Then publicity started becoming a problem. Some geriatric Trump fans push their way into a public U.S. building. Most of them are veterans. Police kill four of them. 

How do you fix that?

~

Here is a mostly fair summary of the protest, obviously presented from a mainstream point of view, and generally including the totality of that view.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/justice-department-releases-videos-showing-jan-assault-officer/story?id=77373557 

This was released roughly the same time as the 'Department of Justice' claimed to release more video https://www.npr.org/2021/04/28/991654947/new-videos-show-alleged-assault-on-officer-brian-sicknick-during-capitol-riot explaining the death of Sicknick. None of the video they release clarifies the death.

Although it is odd for a high level politician to egg on protestors, as Trump seemed to do, the bigger issue is his, and his supporters, implicit position that there are values which pre exist the political ideals claimed by the U.S., and which have authority over U.S. political documents like the constitution.

People in the U.S. are conditioned, trained, to fall back on 'constitutional' rights. The premise being that these rights come from the U.S. government or employees, 'public servants' of the government. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRzDsxUOm4M 

The same thing is done in every melting pot of course.

The United States has been a wealthy country for a long time. It has had the luxury of being able to purchase stability, at the expense of less wealthy entities, for a long time.

As in any well indoctrinated society, people in the U.S. have been thoroughly trained in the rhetoric needed to defend their indoctrination. https://www.askdifference.com/doctrination-vs-indoctrination/ 

You can argue with any mainstream political U.S. citizen and the rhetoric always boils down to a few catchphrases. "It's not perfect, but it's the best that exists" or "Would you rather live in North Korea?" are two of the most common. It would not do to defend U.S. exceptionalism by saying "It's not perfect but at least it lets the wealthy keep their wealth" or "Anybody in the U.S. can get enough money to purchase as much liberty as they want".

Trump has enjoyed the fruits of U.S. style liberty. He has enough money that he has just about any liberty he wants. Of course marijuana was never illegal for him https://www.lifeforpot.com/. That liberty is now being 'given' to others? In other words people did not have the right to use marijuana, for example, until the government gave them that right?

Trump's 'extra' liberty was always with the condition that he had to serve the melting pot beast. By reaching for a ridiculous level of power, in a direct challenge to the gang that fed him, he may have put his privilege at risk.

One of the most discouraging things about that protest is that the people involved largely were led to believe that they were 'defending' rights that the government gave them. They are a few steps closer to reality than most U.S. citizens, they understand that the U.S. government is not in the liberty business, but it is defacto illegal for a group to promote that.

 

 

 

 

In Progress

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IBM was one of the first big corporations to get involved with digital currency.

They started World Wire a few years ago, and have had a 'blockchain services' section on their website for a while. They certainly own a vast amount of Stellar Lumens from their World Wire days, and seem to be deliberately sitting on that hoard, maybe because selling at a massive profit would trigger scrutiny. IBM's net profit last year was ~$4 billion and Stellar's market cap right now is almost four times that. IBM probably has a lot of the XLM coin supply.

A year or so ago two key people left IBM blockchain with little noise.

Several months ago Donald Trump gave hints that he knew something about IBM that made it a 'buy'.

For at least a year, its blockchain services pages have been baffling. They are clearly written by somebody who has no familiarity whatsoever with digital currency. Is it really possible that IBM has nobody who is able to comprehend blockchain? Or is that part of some ruse?

Something either very negative or very positive is being obscured.

Last month an article tried to further push the image of IBM blockchain down. Was IBM itself behind the article?

https://www.coindesk.com/ibm-blockchain-revenue-misses-job-cuts-sources 

Would a major corporate entity which has been involved for some time in Hyper Ledger, an open source corporate/public blockchain project, really be gutting its blockchain business just as the crypto economy starts heating up?

~

The evidence seems to be

1) IBM is involved in some pending governmental aspect of blockchain technology

2) It does not take an economist to figure out that 99% of the digital currencies which exist now are trash and will not last long in an honest market. All currencies which exist now, including bitcoin, are 100% vulnerable to government whim, but the ultimate motive of the policy types with regard to coins is unknown.

3) IBM is currently buying ads on Google to promote Hyperledger, probably paying a lot per click. The use examples they give are silly. They are aimed at conservative people worried about a new technology, and are designed to repel the young crypto crowd.

4) Obviously something is going on behind the scenes at IBM.

5) Here is a blog post from October 21, 2021 on IBM's website which has flown under mainstream radar for a while.

It may be IBM will 'find' its Stellar stash soon.

https://www.ibm.com/blogs/blockchain/2021/10/fueling-the-financial-industry-with-open-source-cross-border-payments/ 

 In Progress

 ~

Devil's Advocate

 An alternate theory, and probably the prevailing view, is that executives at IBM were unhappy that their Blockchain people jumped into a scammy Ripple like project so they tossed the department's leaders overboard.

That does not explain the fact that World Wire was initially promoted by people familiar with blockchain possibilities, but the current web pages are not. The appearance is that IBM has deliberately dumbed down its blockchain section.

Nor does it clean up their investment in XLM. At some point they are going to have to say 'Oops, we just found several billion dollars'.

The two main possibilities then are a) they are sitting and waiting to see what path blockchain takes, or b) they know which way it will go, but are playing coy for corporate reasons.

Their web pages deliberately repel the current flock of coin speculators, but they have a marketing campaign which caters to people who don't know much and are on the conservative conventional side. The implication is that they are deliberately encouraging the flow of money from 'new bitcoin' people to more conventional investors, from stupid people to smart people in the conventional view. That seems to be the motive behind Donald Trump's IBM reference, as well as the motive behind the bureaucrat types who are guiding IBM's strategy.

 Hyperledger is corporate FOMO, not a step forward.

FOMO = Fear of Missing Out, an attempt to pretend they are ahead of the curve in this case.

A little history.

Lots of coins existed pre bitcoin.

When bitcoin appeared, a lot of people recognized that it was scammy, but would become popular. At that point there were three public camps.

a) Bitcoin is cool, let's get rich and disempower fiat,

b) Bitcoin is a scam, avoid it,

c) Bitcoin is a scam, its only a distributed ledger.

What a lot of people don't understand is that those who called it a ledger were just being polite. The rude detractors would say 'it's a scam', and the polite detractors would say 'it's just a distributed ledger'.

The supporters then had to choose which of the two negatives to jump aboard. Obviously they chose the 'it's a ledger'.

Is a distributed ledger anything significant?

Is it the next wave of anything?

It is not. It's like saying when the automobile was invented the big step was the invention of the sunroof.

When things like computing power are monetized they will mostly use a distributed ledger, but the 'distributed ledger' part is trivial.

So Hyperledger is an extension of the original bitcoin scam, but its a version backed by corporations and government.

A brief look at IBM's pages on the topic confirm that they have no real plans to do anything too significant with Hyperledger. They are marketing it as some sort of ruse. Would they really be throwing money into a pit? Unlikely. Which points to them biding their time until some unknown development. The context of Trump's comments last year points to some sort of government collaboration with IBM on something to do with digital currency.

The furthest foreseeable certain step in the development of digital currencies is network task coins, as described elsewhere on this site.

Whether there is going to be an intermediate step involving more idiot coins like bitcoin, for example cbdc's etc, who knows.

CBDCs could be simple precursors to ai coins, and, likely as that probably is, it is a tragedy. Another step towards corporate hell.

 

https://www.hyperledger.org/ 

https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/hyperledger 

https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/industries/financial-services