Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Hillary Clinton 2016 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (85)	10/21/2017 10:54:53 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 1464

HE SMOKED IT TOO!->Did Bill Clinton introduced a Cigar on Monica Lewinsky orifice? - Curb your enthusiasm Shlomo Shekelstein Published on Oct 13, 2016 All knowledge is derived from perception, and a judgment can be “validated” only by tracing it to its foundations at the perceptual level. Rationalist hold that we can deduce knowledge from concepts acquired without the help of perception, whereas empiricism holds that we can gain propositional knowledge from experience without the help of concepts. Neither is possible, while the senses provide the raw material of knowledge, conceptual processing is needed to establish knowable propositions. The acquisition of knowledge is a process of differentiation and integration of discriminating among objects of awareness on the basis of their differences, and then uniting the discriminated phenomena into a cognitively graspable whole. The process begins at the perceptual level as sensations, when entities are differentiated from their surroundings and integrated as unified wholes Attributes and actions are secondary; they make sense only as actions and attributes of entities. This does not mean, however, that entities are bare substrata underlying their attributes. There is no such thing as existence other than as some definite thing with a specific identity; identity is the form that existence takes. Hence an entity just is the totality of its attributes There are two senses of entity. In the narrow sense, an entity is an object whose unity is independent of our consciousness. The comparison of entities is similar to Aristotelian primary substances and can be regarded as the basic ontological constituents of reality. In the broader sense, an entity is anything we choose to consider apart from its surroundings, even if it has no more unity than what we give it in so considering it as when we attend either to parts of entities or to groups of entities. Entities in the narrow sense have their entity status metaphysically, and presumably intrinsically apart from their relationship to our consciousness. Entities in the broad sense may have their entity status only epistemologically, only in relation to consciousness. Their status as existent however, remains metaphysical. They really exist apart from our manner of considering them, even if they do not exist as entities apart from our manner of considering them. Our perceptual faculties place us in direct contact with reality. The objects of perception are extramental entities The validity of sense-perception is not susceptible of proof, because it is presupposed by all proof, since proof just is a matter of adducing sensory evidence. Nor can its validity be denied or questioned, since the very conceptual tools one would have to use to do this are derived from sensory data and so presuppose their validity. Hence perceptual error is not strictly possible though it is possible to misinterpret perceptual evidence and phenomena that many would regard as perceptual illusions or as correct perceptions misinterpreted like optical illusions) or as non-perceptions mistaken for perceptions like dreams

To: bentway who wrote (85)	10/25/2017 8:03:58 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 1464

The Political Retribution is here. Enjoy it->FEC complaint alleges Clinton campaign, DNC violated campaign law by funding 'Trump dossier' by Mandy Mayfield \| Oct 25, 2017, 6:37 PM The Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign committee violated campaign finance laws after they failed to disclose payments linked to the so-called "Trump dossier," alleged a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission by the Campaign Legal Center. The complaint obtained by the Washington Examiner comes one day after the Washington Post reported that Marc Elias, a lawyer who represented both the Clinton campaign and the DNC, funded Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm responsible for the dossier, which possesses a great deal of unverified information tying President Trump to Russia. "By filing misleading reports, the DNC and Clinton campaign undermined the vital public information role of campaign disclosures," Adav Noti, senior director of trial litigation and strategy at Campaign Legal Center, said in a press release. "Voters need campaign disclosure laws to be enforced so they can hold candidates accountable for how they raise and spend money. The FEC must investigate this apparent violation and take appropriate action." Clinton's campaign reportedly routed 37 payments to Fusion GPS through the law firm Perkins Coie, totaling over $5.5 million, and reported each as "legal services." The DNC reported 345 payments to Perkins Coie during the election cycle and marked the payments as "legal and compliance consulting, administrative fees, and data services subscription" among others, according to the complaint. "Payments by a campaign or party committee to an opposition research firm are legal, as long as those payments are accurately disclosed," Brendan Fischer, director of federal and FEC reform at Campaign Legal Center, said. "But describing payments for opposition research as ‘legal services' is entirely misleading and subverts the reporting requirements." According to Lawnewz, the DNC and the Clinton campaign could face fines. The DNC put out a statement Tuesday to say that its "new leadership" had nothing to do with funding the dossier, but made no mention of its leadership during the 2016 campaign. Mandy Mayfield DNC Elections Donald Trump FEC Campaigns 2016 Elections Campaign Finance Russia Hillary Clinton Washington Post Democratic Party White House News Politics

To: bentway who wrote (85)	10/29/2017 7:14:22 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 1464

Hi Bentway, do to plan To Scream At The Sky On Anniversary of Trump Winning The Election? The origins of the Democratic donkey can be traced to the 1828 presidential campaign of Andrew Jackson. During that race, opponents of Jackson called him a jackass. However, rather than rejecting the label, Jackson, a hero of the War of 1812 who later served in the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, was amused by it and included an image of the animal in his campaign posters. Jackson went on to defeat incumbent John Quincy Adams and serve as America’s first Democratic president. In the 1870s, influential political cartoonist Thomas Nast helped popularize the donkey as a symbol for the entire Democratic Party.