Tuesday, January 19, 2021

New Days?

THE ABSURD TIMES

 

 

 


 

 Above: Artist's perception of Trump leaving office after he failed the coup attempt. – Latuff

 

I thought this would be the least believed, least accepted, most boring, and most accurate article of the entire series. You see, it has to do with facts and a bit of elementary mathematics.  Let me start with a very counter-intuitive mathematical fact in this essay, just to give an example.  First, keep in mind that I am talking about a truly RANDOM sample, the biggest flaw in the process as no survey is truly random. Given that, the larger the population you are trying to generalize on accurately, the smaller the sample size needed. A smaller population, requires a great number of samples in order to achieve the same degree of accuracy.

 

Now, that is remarkedly absurd and preposterous, I grant you. Since I heard it twice, I then went through the process of trying to either prove or disprove such a ridiculous idea. Well, the idea is true. I've gone though the same damn mathematics again and I'm not about to do it one more time! It's true, and that's that. Another nugget of information that might be of value to you is that if you are anyayzing surveys or any statistical process, always take into account previous surverys of the same thing.

 

But that is not the point here. The point here is what seems to motivate so much animosity these days, I mean always, I think, is race. So let's look at it from a DNA and percentage angle. The first item is the fact that we differ from Chimpanzees by one percent. To put it another way, only one percent of our DNA seperates us from Chimps. So, already, 99% of our entire existence is exactly the same as the chimps. In some cases, I'm tempted to think that certain individuals are more like chimps than that 1%, but I'm not judging.

 

Now, the chance of anyone's DNA "matching" anyone elses (except an identical twin) is 1 in about 7 billion (or is it million or trillion? I don't remember). The point of all this? With all of these numbers, why is race such an issue with anyone except for political reasons? When I first saw Kamela Harris, I had absolutely no idea that she considered herself "black," or that anyone else did. The whole concept is puzzling to me.

 

More puzzling is the fact that those who are "white supremacists" Are also fundamentalist "christians". Somehow, that admits a belief in evolution and such changes take much more that 6,000 years and seem more related to climate than anything else. Still, the first sentence is probably an error. Anyhow, time to let that go as otherwise it would never finish.

 

****

So now, a few observations on other matters, just for the hell of it.

 

Did anyone else notice that Trump attempted the forcible overthrow of the Government? I thought it was illegal even to advcate that. In fact, I thought of a few times when such action would be in order, but I never did advocate it. I would merely point out, much as I am doing here, that the people, Trump followers all, attempted such an action and Trump himself, along with his "Attorney Rudy", called for such an activity. 

 

There are some other issues that perhaps someone could help out with. According to the Constitution (yes, I read it), the President has the power of the pardon except in impeachment. Well, that's not exactly an accurate quote, you can check it yourself, but my question is does that mean relevant to his impeachment or while he is being impeached, or after he is impeached, or what? People still talk as if he can still pardon anyone. What I read seems a bit open to interpretation. I'm sure there is a great deal of secondary material on that.

 

In addition, if he self-pardons, and a pardon is an admission of guilt as SCOTUS decided, is he still convicted, or did he confess? "Not guilty" is out of the question. Does it mean that he gets out of prosecution for his tax fraud? Any ideas?

 

Hey, I know I've got a lot of questions and I'm not giving any answers. Well, when I give answers, nobody accepts them anyway, so why bother. I have more questions anyway. So, onward!

 

It does seem as though shutting down his Twitter account has prevented further mass riots, but is that the real reason he sulks so much? Or is the reason that Ivanka told him she just wanted to be friends from now on? Anybody have any idea if she is Jewish now?

 

There are also rumors that he has ordered that Guiliani not be paid his $20,000/day salary.  It seems perfectly consistant with his past business practices, but there is also the question of whether Derschowitz will be defending him at the Senate trial. My own sense of this is that Derschowitz will require payment in advance (judging from his general behavior), but is this all bull as has been the course in the last few years, or rather, during Donald's entire life and Rudy's own view of things. Anybody have any definitive informatin on this?

 

Would Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz, as well as Lindsey Graham be censured? Certainly their behavior has been less than idea, and they are not as insane as Trump. By the way, that is a good new figure of speech: insane as Trump.

 

What would be in the traditional letter of advice one president leaves for a successor? Advice: ask yourself one question: what's in it for me?


The question remains: no one heard him explictly heard him order the attack on the capital.  Now, his ex-attorney, Cohen, pointed out that Trump indirectly gives such orders. I was reminded of Henry II of England in the 1100s who wanted Thomas Beckett removed and said "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?" Well, several of his devoted nobels rode all the way to Canturbury and killed Thomas Beckett." Well, did Henry order his killing or not? Well, the Pope decided he did and tht was that. [There was no Clarance Darrow in the 1100s in England.]  Shakespeare thought so as well, so that's that.

 

*****************

 

 

Well, that's it for now.

 

 

 

 

 

No comments: