I’m not sure Trump makes it look easy. More like he has learned that you can walk away from any disaster a winner, if you have enough lawyers and don’t care who you hurt.
Travis on the other hand seems to be making money the old fashioned way. Do your homework, invest, succeed. I doubt he is profiting by sticking somebody else with the losses, refusing to pay vendors, etc. More like buying a hamburger … you give them money, they give you a burger, everyone wins. Trump’s foray into casinos was an unmitigated failure (how can you lose money running a casino?), but he structured the deals so other people got hurt and he walked away with change in his pocket. With hotels, it’s hard to judge. Often the name on the door doesn’t tell you who built, owns, or operates the hotel. It may just be a brand licensing deal. No doubt he owns and operates some of them, but just licensed his name for many more. From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lewis Bergman Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 12:06 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Or: Sally Yates Real estate isn't add easy as Trump males it look. Travis could attest i am sure. On Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 11:24 AM Ken Hohhof <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Did you notice how many of the inauguration photos have all the adults looking at one thing (like Trump), and Barron looking at something completely different (like Ivanka’s baby)? I hope they are raising that little rascal to be a normal kid, not a real estate robot like his brothers. I’d like to think that’s what Melania is doing, but maybe she’s a robot, too. Trump probably thinks Slovenia is the 51st state. From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:00 AM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Or: Sally Yates Ignorance is the best argument against democracy, but the problem is every alternative is worse. ------ Original Message ------ From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: 1/31/2017 10:51:55 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Or: Sally Yates The problem with polling “the majority of the nation” is that’s defined as “me and my Twitter followers”. So if you’re Wayne, the poll would include you and Garth. If you want US policy to be guided by polls, first go to YouTube and watch some clips from Jaywalking with Jay Leno. The average citizen can’t answer questions like “where is the Panama Canal” or “name a country that borders the US”. We’d be better off consulting the Magic 8 Ball. From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] On Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 9:34 AM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Or: Sally Yates the insurance companies that participated in the "keep them calling in until they give up" claims management schemes are a perfect example of that. I think the protests that are violating other peoples civil liberties still in play follow suit. They havent been addressed because they maintain the necessary chaos to keep the ranks of the enemy spread thin and its beautiful. The majority of the nation supports the travel restrictions, its pissing off the poll mongers too because no matter how they skew the data they cant get it under 50 percent. Note the lack of polls, the stalwart of the left. keeping the "hes a puppet of <insert lackey>" mentality is great for maintaining chaos, And I would be there is a PR mechanism in play keeping that going On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Faisal Imtiaz < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> wrote: There are multiple theories about Chaos.... having said that.. there is also something called Orchestrated Chaos.. The most perfect Orchestrated Chaos would be one that can easily be explained by 'simple incompetence'. While I am not a subscriber to conspiracy theories...but having worked with the ILEC's and watched their behavior over a a couple of decades, it is very hard for me to deny that there isn't something which is best called Orchestrated Chaos, whose end results always somehow fall in favor of the Orchestrator while simple explanations allow for the Orchestrator to distance themselves from the responsibility .... Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:(305)%20663-5518> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <tel:(305)%20663-5518> Option 2 or Email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> _____ From: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 7:26:12 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Or: Sally Yates "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by simple incompetence." (or words to that effect) --attributed to a bunch of people Calling it a "shock event" assumes it was intentional. He gave an order without prepping anyone for it, but it's just as likely he just didn't think anybody would be confused or question whether it was legal. Just an opinion. ------ Original Message ------ From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: 1/30/2017 9:57:57 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Or: Sally Yates Thought provoking ! =========================== >From Heather Richardson, professor of History at Boston College: "I don't like to talk about politics on Facebook-- political history is my job, after all, and you are my friends-- but there is an important non-partisan point to make today. What Bannon is doing, most dramatically with last night's ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries-- is creating what is known as a "shock event." Such an event is unexpected and confusing and throws a society into chaos. People scramble to react to the event, usually along some fault line that those responsible for the event can widen by claiming that they alone know how to restore order. When opponents speak out, the authors of the shock event call them enemies. As society reels and tempers run high, those responsible for the shock event perform a sleight of hand to achieve their real goal, a goal they know to be hugely unpopular, but from which everyone has been distracted as they fight over the initial event. There is no longer concerted opposition to the real goal; opposition divides along the partisan lines established by the shock event. Last night's Executive Order has all the hallmarks of a shock event. It was not reviewed by any governmental agencies or lawyers before it was released, and counterterrorism experts insist they did not ask for it. People charged with enforcing it got no instructions about how to do so. Courts immediately have declared parts of it unconstitutional, but border police in some airports are refusing to stop enforcing it. Predictably, chaos has followed and tempers are hot. My point today is this: unless you are the person setting it up, it is in no one's interest to play the shock event game. It is designed explicitly to divide people who might otherwise come together so they cannot stand against something its authors think they won't like. I don't know what Bannon is up to-- although I have some guesses-- but because I know Bannon's ideas well, I am positive that there is not a single person whom I consider a friend on either side of the aisle-- and my friends range pretty widely-- who will benefit from whatever it is. If the shock event strategy works, though, many of you will blame each other, rather than Bannon, for the fallout. And the country will have been tricked into accepting their real goal. But because shock events destabilize a society, they can also be used positively. We do not have to respond along old fault lines. We could just as easily reorganize into a different pattern that threatens the people who sparked the event. A successful shock event depends on speed and chaos because it requires knee-jerk reactions so that people divide along established lines. This, for example, is how Confederate leaders railroaded the initial southern states out of the Union. If people realize they are being played, though, they can reach across old lines and reorganize to challenge the leaders who are pulling the strings. This was Lincoln's strategy when he joined together Whigs, Democrats, Free-Soilers, anti-Nebraska voters, and nativists into the new Republican Party to stand against the Slave Power. Five years before, such a coalition would have been unimaginable. Members of those groups agreed on very little other than that they wanted all Americans to have equal economic opportunity. Once they began to work together to promote a fair economic system, though, they found much common ground. They ended up rededicating the nation to a "government of the people, by the people, and for the people." Confederate leaders and Lincoln both knew about the political potential of a shock event. As we are in the midst of one, it seems worth noting that Lincoln seemed to have the better idea about how to use it." COPY AND PASTE. DON"T "SHARE" ========================= Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:(305)%20663-5518> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <tel:(305)%20663-5518> Option 2 or Email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> _____ From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 9:36:57 PM Subject: [AFMUG] Or: Sally Yates Commence the full stroke meltdown -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
