Apple CEO Tim Cook Attends Executive Tech Summit at Trump Tower

[ibookg409]

In the "real world" as you say, Russia hacked the DNC in an effort to influence the Presidential election. I suppose when Trump tells you to be concerned then you will, until then you won't. Quack quack "sweetie"

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...interference_from_russia_in_the_election.html

AG Lynch says that Russia wasn't involved.

What amazes me is how even though the crooked dealings of Hillary and the DNC were exposed you can only focus on how it was exposed. Where is the outrage over what the DNC was doing? Hillary was getting debate questions in advance meaning the debate moderators and news outlets were trying to influence the election. Where's the f***ing outrage over that? It's just "Russia Russia Russia".

Stop parroting what the DNC and the Feds want you to parrot and try engaging your own brain. Just try it. If you try and fail I won't make fun of you because at least you tried.

 

[shk718]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...interference_from_russia_in_the_election.html

AG Lynch says that Russia wasn't involved.

What amazes me is how even though the crooked dealings of Hillary and the DNC were exposed you can only focus on how it was exposed. Where is the outrage over what the DNC was doing? Hillary was getting debate questions in advance meaning the debate moderators and news outlets were trying to influence the election. Where's the f***ing outrage over that? It's just "Russia Russia Russia".

Stop parroting what the DNC and the Feds want you to parrot and try engaging your own brain. Just try it. If you try and fail I won't make fun of you because at least you tried.

Engage your own brain, read the article you linked to and re-read my statement.

 

[ibookg409]

Engage your own brain, read the article you linked to and re-read my statement.

Everyone is saying that Russia influenced the election. Lynch says they didn't. Despite the issue that they may or may not have hacked the DNC the election wasn't influenced.

 

[2010mini]

I might vote one way or another, and have a preference but if you followed my posts in PRSI you would know that I carry no allegiance to a candidate and/or a party. I am ready to dump Trump at the first sign of real issues.
[doublepost=1481816432][/doublepost]

Because it's not a government meeting.

Then If it's not a government meeting, why is the president elect there?

 

[yaxomoxay]

Then If it's not a government meeting, why is the president elect there?

Because until noon on January 20th, 2017 he's just a civilian with security clearance.

 

[2010mini]

Because until noon on January 20th, 2017 he's just a civilian with security clearance.

Please live in the real world with the rest of us. And stop making unintelligent excuses for the prez elect. The moment he won the election, he stopped being a civilian.

 

[shk718]

Everyone is saying that Russia influenced the election. Lynch says they didn't. Despite the issue that they may or may not have hacked the DNC the election wasn't influenced.

You had some nasty comment about me not "engaging my brain". Let me walk you slowly through what I said and what she said. I said Russian made an attempt to influence our election. I never made any claims about their success rate, because I don't know. I said they made an attempt. What Lynch said was: "Fortunately we didn’t see the sort of technical interference that I know people had concerns about, also, in terms of voting machines and the like." In case you don't understand she's referring to Russia's ability to change the election results using technology (hacks if you will) of voting machines. I never said they did. I've read very few articles that said they did. Whether they were able to influence people's decision is another question which she didn't address in her statement. No one knows. You'd have to do some kind of polling to see if people changed their minds based on the information that came out of Russia. What I and many others are concerned with is the fact that they were able to hack the dnc computers and used that information to try to interfere with our democratic election process by getting people to vote for one candidate over the other. That's not good, that's what I and many others have a problem with. I'm done responding to this stupid "conversation". If you still don't understand that's your issue. I don't care anymore.

 

[ibookg409]

You had some nasty comment about me not "engaging my brain". Let me walk you slowly through what I said and what she said. I said Russian made an attempt to influence our election. I never made any claims about their success rate, because I don't know. I said they made an attempt. What Lynch said was: "Fortunately we didn’t see the sort of technical interference that I know people had concerns about, also, in terms of voting machines and the like." In case you don't understand she's referring to Russia's ability to change the election results using technology (hacks if you will) of voting machines. I never said they did. I've read very few articles that said they did. Whether they were able to influence people's decision is another question which she didn't address in her statement. No one knows. You'd have to do some kind of polling to see if people changed their minds based on the information that came out of Russia. What I and many others are concerned with is the fact that they were able to hack the dnc computers and used that information to try to interfere with our democratic election process by getting people to vote for one candidate over the other. That's not good, that's what I and many others have a problem with. I'm done responding to this stupid "conversation". If you still don't understand that's your issue. I don't care anymore.

I didn't read this. We already know that everyone is saying Russia did it without any proof. During Obamas press conference on Friday we said that he told Putin face to face to "knock it off" (hacking) and that Putin did knock it off months ago. So what's the problem? You guys refuse to acknowledge any of the nasty things the hacks revealed about the DNC.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Please live in the real world with the rest of us. And stop making unintelligent excuses for the prez elect. The moment he won the election, he stopped being a civilian.

Nope. You can claim that he has (a lot) political weight (true), but he is not a government entity.

 

[2010mini]

Nope. You can claim that he has (a lot) political weight (true), but he is not a government entity.

Then if he is not a government entity. He should not be negotiating deals with private corps and the government that includes giving them tax payer money!

 

[dan110]

Wait wait wait ... you're saying that as if people have a balanced CHOICE. Of course people are going to sign up when they're being forced to under the threat of penalty of financial repercussions from the IRS. Plus, insurers are either going out of business or refusing to continue to participate in the program. Thus, forcing people to find new insurers that will cover them. Or suffer the consequences with a higher IRS Bill. Nice try attempting to boil down complex economics into one sound bite you heard on NPR to justify one of the worst socialist programs ever to happen in America.

I could go into all the data showing that the ACA is bad for business AND HEALTHCARE, doesn't and never has addressed the healthcare problem for the country, and never will. Insurers are running from the program as fast as they can. So much so, that the Federal Government is already talking about bailing them out. And that's called "success"? This is the same bankrupt mentality that causes places like California, Michigan, etc to spend beyond their means and then look for a bailout while crying "poor us"? But yeah, I'm blissfully ignorant. Ok. \:-/

Oh the irony of meeting with someone who called for the boycott of your products.



So, prior to being elected he had a history of corruption. Self dealing in Florida, illegally violating the embargo in Cuba, fake universities in which AGs are bribed to look the other way. And now he is in a position to being even more corrupt. The post office hotel is especially concerning. Huge conflict of interest with foreign governments giving him money to stay there and curry favor with him while they are in town meeting with him. Plus he cannot be his own landlord. It will be a breach of contract. The Trump towers in Turkey are also concerning leading to be used as bargaining chips by the Turkish government.



If by great you mean more divisive, and more cozy with dictators like Putin, sure.



Do you think he is some sort of king? He has very limited powers to change things for tech leaders without congress on board.



I fail to see what changes on Inauguration Day. Do people become suddenly trustworthy that day? If the need for his children exist now, then the need will still exist a mere four weeks from now.


He's all yours. You can have him! No returns though. All sales are final.



No. Normal people don't talk about dating their daughter or grabbing p.


So what? He still has existing properties out there that are still a conflict and source of leverage.



You must be blissfully unaware that Obamacare has been having record signup numbers:


http://www.latimes.com/nation/polit...hit-new-record-even-1481916101-htmlstory.html

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

Wait wait wait ... you're saying that as if people have a balanced CHOICE. Of course people are going to sign up when they're being forced to under the threat of penalty of financial repercussions from the IRS.

The IRS penalty is less than coverage. Additionally a mandate was not only a republican plan idea, but one that even Trump will have to maintain if his desire to continue to cover people with preexisting conditions is kept. That is the price to be paid for doing that. Cannot have one without the other. Not without even more astronomical cost.

Plus, insurers are either going out of business or refusing to continue to participate in the program.

What insurer has gone out of business?

Thus, forcing people to find new insurers that will cover them. Or suffer the consequences with a higher IRS Bill. Nice try attempting to boil down complex economics into one sound bite you heard on NPR to justify one of the worst socialist programs ever to happen in America.

Lol...socialist idea from a Republican think tank and implemented first by a Republican governor. Maybe the right wing isn't what right wingers think!

I could go into all the data showing that the ACA is bad for business AND HEALTHCARE, doesn't and never has addressed the healthcare problem for the country, and never will. Insurers are running from the program as fast as they can. So much so, that the Federal Government is already talking about bailing them out. And that's called "success"? This is the same bankrupt mentality that causes places like California, Michigan, etc to spend beyond their means and then look for a bailout while crying "poor us"? But yeah, I'm blissfully ignorant. Ok. \:-/

You are in fact blissfully ignorant it would appear. California is a larger economy with a higher gross product than not only other states, but even many other countries on the planet. We don't need a bailout.

 

[dysamoria]

If posting snark is the only action you've taken in response to the ascension of this "fascist overlord wannabe", then it's pretty obvious that you have no problem living under a fascist regime.

What actions do you expect?

 

[iphone X]

Tim to Donald: "let's make America thinner!"

don't forget "lets emojified America"

 

[Autrement]

When did he every say anything racist, homophobic etc. Quotes please.

Oh look, it's another Mike Pence at the debates. Just seriously shake your head and deny that any of the hundreds of things that have come out of Trump's mouth or Twitter account even exist.
I also love that you conveniently dropped "mysogynist" from the original list what you wanted to see.
[doublepost=1482123775][/doublepost]

When did he every say anything racist, homophobic etc. Quotes please.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...to_be_president_here_are_141_reasons_why.html

You can even filter by type, and then watch the video or see the tweet. Enjoy.

 

[AppleFan360]

Oh look, it's another Mike Pence at the debates. Just seriously shake your head and deny that any of the hundreds of things that have come out of Trump's mouth or Twitter account even exist.
I also love that you conveniently dropped "mysogynist" from the original list what you wanted to see.
[doublepost=1482123775][/doublepost]
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...to_be_president_here_are_141_reasons_why.html

You can even filter by type, and then watch the video or see the tweet. Enjoy.

Give it up. All taken out of context and can be argued at nauseum. Today he will officially be our President Elect. Deal with it.

 

[pacalis]

I can't be racist, I have a black friend. I can't be sexist, I'm married.

It's a bit more complex than that.

Ha, more complex? You mean you're married, but like-like your black friend?

Seriously though it is more complex. More than my original joke and your simple response. Trump personally promoted LGBTQ more than any republican in history, but still many pretend that he's hitler. MSM has thrown in that he's anti-semitic, despite half his family being jewish.

The reality is that he's an old playboy - he doesn't personally give a crap about these more trivial individual identity and taste matters. If the center of a population fails, which it has been for a while, all the minority interests go down the tubes too. His main interest is the majority middle America (quite literally if you see the district voting maps) - that's not racist or homophobic as much as it is the largest economic block.

 

[Kestrel452]

I can't help but bask in my own enjoyment watching Leftists get all bent out of shape over Rex Tillerson. Liberals were on the warpath over Trump's apparent proclivity for getting us into WWIII, but are now hammering on him for choosing the CEO of an international energy company that's an acquaintance on good terms with Russian leaders.

Only a moron would wonder why the CEO of the world's largest company would want to have a good relationship with Putin, or wonder why Trump would want that sort of person as SOS. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of bureaucratic war hawks that haven't traveled outside D.C. serving as SOS. IMHO, Trump picked one of the most pro-military people for Dept of Defense, and one of the most diplomatic people on Earth as SOS. This is exactly how it should be. No amount of fake news being spewed by CNN, MSNBC, or Huff Post which says otherwise can change that reality.

All aboard the Trump Train

 

[AppleFan360]

All aboard the Trump Train

Yeah baby! Honestly I was a bit nervous voting for him but you can't deny his work ethic and what he could potentially do for this country. We really needed a business man in there instead of another friggin lawyer.

 

[MadeTheSwitch]

Seriously though it is more complex. More than my original joke and your simple response. Trump personally promoted LGBTQ more than any republican in history, .

He barely mentioned gay people, so that isn't saying much. Also, Trump isn't a traditional Republican. He is a mix of both left and right policies.

I can't help but bask in my own enjoyment watching Leftists get all bent out of shape over Rex Tillerson.

You do realize that it's not only people on the left that have an issue with that pick, right?

 

[marmiteturkey]

Ha, more complex? You mean you're married, but like-like your black friend?

Seriously though it is more complex. More than my original joke and your simple response. Trump personally promoted LGBTQ more than any republican in history, but still many pretend that he's hitler. MSM has thrown in that he's anti-semitic, despite half his family being jewish.

The reality is that he's an old playboy - he doesn't personally give a crap about these more trivial individual identity and taste matters. If the center of a population fails, which it has been for a while, all the minority interests go down the tubes too. His main interest is the majority middle America (quite literally if you see the district voting maps) - that's not racist or homophobic as much as it is the largest economic block.

Trivial?

My response was just to prove a point that Trump can play nice with a couple of gay businessmen and still be prejudiced, in the same way that he can be photographed having a night out with his ex-wife and still have been dragging her around the bedroom by her hair hours before. One photo op that suits his interests does not mean he's not prejudiced.

Trump's interest isn't other people, beyond what they are saying about him or giving to him. You're right that he will do or say anything; including some pretty abhorrent things about minorities of pretty much every persuasion, when he can use it to appeal to the worst indulgences of his base. And let's not forget his choice of VP-elect, who is positively medieval in his views about LGBTQ people.

Also, characterising him as a playboy normalises some very unpleasant behaviour.

 

[ackmondual]

Me neither (I just hate Hillary). Trump wants to be the best president in history and MAGA. He knows businesses are the engine of the economy and want to help them create wealth. What scares me is all his talks about tariffs. Hopefully is bluff. Otherwise, its gonna make products more expensive for all americans. Again, he's a business man (a successful one) so thank god he's not a socialist.

He still hasn't released his tax forms, so there's no way to verify any of his claims. Plus, while doing your taxes in your favor from losing $900 million something dollars from business losses is a good loophole to exploit, it still doesn't speak favorably that he lost that much money to begin with.

 

[Autrement]

Give it up. All taken out of context and can be argued at nauseum. Today he will officially be our President Elect. Deal with it.

This is such an unbelievably perfect comment from someone who would support Trump. The videos and speeches and tweets are RIGHT THERE. The context IS RIGHT THERE. Are there a handful among hundreds that are harmless enough or honest slips of the tongue? Sure. But you can't argue "at nauseum" (sic) about these unless you have as casual a disregard for the truth as Trump.

He is our President Elect and everyone in America, for better or worse, has to deal with it. Opposition to unqualified appointments and harmful far-right policies is very much a way of dealing with it.
[doublepost=1482288473][/doublepost]

Yeah baby! Honestly I was a bit nervous voting for him but you can't deny his work ethic and what he could potentially do for this country. We really needed a business man in there instead of another friggin lawyer.

Repeat after me. Running a government is not like running a business. Running a government is not like running a business.
And even if it was like running a business, you wouldn't appoint department heads who are bent on destroying the goals of the department they run. See: Appointments to Secretary of Energy, Education, head of EPA, HUD, Labor....

 

[pacalis]

Trivial?

My response was just to prove a point that Trump can play nice with a couple of gay businessmen and still be prejudiced, in the same way that he can be photographed having a night out with his ex-wife and still have been dragging her around the bedroom by her hair hours before. One photo op that suits his interests does not mean he's not prejudiced.

Trump's interest isn't other people, beyond what they are saying about him or giving to him. You're right that he will do or say anything; including some pretty abhorrent things about minorities of pretty much every persuasion, when he can use it to appeal to the worst indulgences of his base. And let's not forget his choice of VP-elect, who is positively medieval in his views about LGBTQ people.

Also, characterising him as a playboy normalises some very unpleasant behaviour.

It didn't prove a point because you are projecting - just as you did earlier. Did you think he might also play nice with two gay businessmen because he really loves gay businessmen? Or because they're great businessmen, regardless of they're sexual orientation?

Donald says pretty abhorrent things about many people, white males included. To suggest that he says pretty abhorrent things about minorities is to suggest that this is the most salient characteristic of people and the reason why he might single someone out. While there are certainly prejudiced people out there that see his actions as prejudiced (and you seem to be one of these), I see little evidence that he is.

 

[AppleFan360]

Repeat after me. Running a government is not like running a business. Running a government is not like running a business.

That's just ignorant. The government is all about money and where it goes. That's their job. Everything else is fluff. Which is better, someone who knows how to handle money?... or a professional litigator who makes it a life quest to infringe on other's rights and create legislation to control people. No thanks.