stock here: The FC Does Not Let Me Take My Eye Off This. As is JUST> The drone looking civil “marchers” not effectively attacking the piles of mud is DULY NOTED. As if they have no real leader, and why march up like that, it appears so fake, it’s weird.
stock here: sent in by a common spirit:
The ramifications of this pole shift are enormous.
stock here: Juan give an aerial update.
stock here: I had thought the charges against Adams were to the effect of several thousand of gifts. AI thinks Adams did much more, but were those part of the actual charges?
Here is what I fixed
On review of the 5 indictments, it appears to come down one event with the Turkish gov to open an Embassy, and he got some free travel out of it. Feel free to deep dive and comment. MSM juices the story, alluding that Adams defrauded the City out of Tens of Millions, with no backup. Then this….”They accused him of pressuring the FDNY to fast track inspections on the Turkish House, a consular space near the United Nations.” Doesn’t sound that horrible to me…..hey get the damn inspection done….pressuring government officials to work fast. There is ZERO allegation that he asked them to overlook construction deficiencies. That part is from the NY Post….
Here are the 5 indictments
In September 2024, New York City Mayor Eric Adams was indicted on a five-count federal indictment, which included the following charges:
Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud, Federal Program Bribery, and to Receive Campaign Contributions by Foreign Nationals: This charge alleges that Mayor Adams conspired with others to engage in fraudulent activities, including accepting bribes and illegal campaign contributions from foreign nationals, specifically Turkish officials and businesspeople.
justice.gov
Wire Fraud: This count accuses Mayor Adams of using electronic communications to execute a scheme to defraud the public by accepting bribes and concealing the true source of campaign contributions.
justice.gov
Solicitation of a Contribution by a Foreign National (Count 1): This charge asserts that Mayor Adams unlawfully solicited campaign contributions from foreign nationals, violating federal election laws.
justice.gov
Solicitation of a Contribution by a Foreign National (Count 2): Similar to the previous count, this charge pertains to additional instances where Mayor Adams allegedly solicited illegal contributions from foreign nationals.
justice.gov
Bribery: This count alleges that Mayor Adams accepted bribes, including luxury travel and accommodations, in exchange for using his official position to benefit Turkish interests, such as expediting the opening of the Turkevi Center in New York City.
justice.govstock here: parasites are one thing…. Reptilians another, LOL
stock here: Most places put the Fed Gov at around 3 Million “Workers”. But “ourpublicservice.org” puts it at 2.04 Million, and “keeping pace with population”. Then below, we see just the DOD at 3.2M. I guess we need to wrap our head around what elements of the DOD should be considered Federal workers, as opposed to “Military”
A-Eye said the DOE was about 4200 workers, and then brings up a 2018 stat stating 14,382. My question is….how can they do that much damage with so little people?
Yes, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is one of the federal executive departments. As of 2018, the DOE employed approximately 14,382 federal civilian employees.
en.wikipedia.org
The U.S. federal government comprises numerous departments and agencies, employing a significant number of individuals across various sectors. Here’s a table summarizing some of the largest federal departments by the number of employees:
Department Number of Employees
Department of Defense ~3,200,000
Department of Veterans Affairs ~235,000
Department of Homeland Security ~250,000
Department of the Treasury ~100,000
Department of Justice ~113,543
Department of Agriculture ~100,000
Department of Health and Human Services ~65,000
Department of the Interior ~70,000
Department of Transportation ~55,000
Department of Commerce ~41,000
Department of Energy ~14,382
Department of Labor ~15,000
Department of State ~30,000
Department of Housing and Urban Development ~9,000
Department of Education ~4,200
stock here: AI left off the DOE, now why is that?
The U.S. federal government comprises a vast array of departments, agencies, and sub-agencies, totaling over 400 entities.
usa.gov
These organizations vary significantly in size and function. Below is a list of some of the largest federal agencies, ordered by the number of employees:
Department of Defense (DoD): Approximately 3.2 million employees, including active-duty military personnel and civilian staff.
en.wikipedia.org
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA): Around 337,683 employees as of September 2013.
opm.gov
Department of Homeland Security (DHS): Approximately 193,867 employees as of September 2013.
opm.gov
Department of the Treasury: Approximately 100,000 employees as of 2023.
en.wikipedia.org
Department of Justice (DOJ): Approximately 113,543 employees as of 2012.
en.wikipedia.org
Department of Agriculture (USDA): Approximately 100,000 employees as of 2023.
en.wikipedia.org
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): Approximately 65,000 employees as of 2023.
en.wikipedia.org
Department of the Interior: Approximately 70,000 employees as of 2023.
en.wikipedia.org
Department of Transportation (DOT): Approximately 55,000 employees as of 2023.
en.wikipedia.org
Department of Commerce: Approximately 41,000 employees as of 2023.
en.wikipedia.orgPlease note that these figures are approximate and may have changed over time. For a comprehensive and up-to-date list of federal agencies, you can refer to the A-Z index of U.S. government departments and agencies.
usa.gov
——————————- Oh my, when one goes to the A to Z listing, shit gets real. Here is a link to “B”
A-Z index of U.S. government departments and agencies | USAGov
stock here: they stated that all 67 bodies were recovered. With 2 powerful missiles exploding into a plane that the Helo was going to follow the missiles into at 140 MPH, the entire front of the Helo was shredded. I would say those 3 humans were shredded too. And below some commentary from a guy who flies.
8 days ago (edited)Please let me add some details. Once upon a time, visual separation used to be my job. Change of runway from 01 to 33 is no problem at all but daily practice several times, every day. And here in this particular case, the deal between tower and cockpit was made about 5 minutes from disaster. American Eagle pilots actually like it, because it adds a few seconds of flight time, but saves them quite a lot of taxi time on the ground. Their gates, also for this CRJ7, are just at the end of RWY 33. The Tower is asking these pilots for one single reason: It widens the gap between two arriving planes, and allows Tower to squeeze a departing plane between these two arrivals. And no one likes to sit on a plane which is standing but not departing. The helicopter ROUTE 4 there over the east bank of the river is just perfect. However, rules must be obeyed, and that was omitted by BOTH the helicopter pilot but mostly by the controllers. Visual separation like between the regional jet and the Army helicopter is usually safe … but only if safely done. And here we have the problem. Please keep in mind … The PRIORITY for every air traffic controller is to PREVENT COLLISIONS. Period. That’s what he’s paid for. Everything else comes thereafter. Even if the controller delegates the “visual separation” to the pilot, this does not relieve the controller from preventing collisions. In addition, there have been two controllers, a Local Controller, and a Controller Associate, just like in the cockpit of the airliner. BOTH have the duty to prevent collisions. Both didn’t do anything. The controller is required to apply his BEST judgement of the situation. He didn’t. The associate didn’t warn him either. The very best judgement in that fateful night would have been if the controller himself had applied visual separation. NOT delegating this to the pilot. Why? Because the night is dark and the sky is black. The pilot doesn’t see the aircraft, but lights. Flashing red and white lights, plus landing lights. And in a city, there are plenty of other red and white lights. And in addition, the helicopter itself is moving, at low altitude. The very moment when the controller issued an alleged traffic advisory, the helicopter was proceeding at 200 feet southeast bound and he was geographically over the Tidal Basin. The controller told them “Traffic is south of the Wilson Bridge, a CRJ at 1200 feet, setting up for runway 33”. Looking to the right to the south, the helicopter saw the lights of not less than FOUR American Airlines jets on approach over the Potomac River. Two of the four were identical CRJ, three of the four were south of the bridge. But the helicopter pilot said « PAT25 has the traffic in sight, request visual separation » Tower said « approved ». OMG. With all due respect, that is good for nothing. A severe safety flaw. We don’t know what the pilot actually has seen, neither knew Tower, and the pilots can’t tell us anymore. The ill fated CRJ was 7.5 statute miles away from the helicopter. An air traffic controller must never anticipate neither believe nor hope, but he has the duty to be in control of the situation and to prevent collisions. VFR Night is different from VFR. Conditions at night are demanding. The Local Controller did not make sure that the helicopter indeed had the relevant traffic in sight, but he anticipated. I personally would have waited with the traffic advisory, at least until the CRJ was breaking off to the right. Worse … The controller omitted one other important thing: It was his duty to also pass a traffic advisory to the CRJ pilots because the two aircraft were on converging courses. Following this, the helicopter has flown some potentially distracting maneuvers, was a training flight, and the collisions tells us that he had obviously lost sight of the traffic and the helicopter was also climbing from 200 to 300 feet, higher than allowed. But the worst thing … There were two controllers sitting and visually observing the traffic. About 30 seconds from disaster, a so-called Conflict Alert went off in the Tower. That doesn’t solve the problem, but it warns the controllers that there IS a conflict which the Local Controller MUST resolve. The controller knew that he had a problem. We hear it in his voice in a radio transmission to a very different MedEvac helicopter. But all he did was asking “You have the CRJ in sight? Pass behind the CRJ” And then he was praying to God “Stay Separate”, we can hear it. Did the controller know what exactly the helicopter pilot had in sight? No! Did the controller know that the helicopter is able to pass behind … which aircraft actually? No. This is NOT air traffic control, to put it mildly. Yes of course, the helicopter pilot acted irresponsibly. The helicopter didn’t proceed as safely as it was required. There’s no doubt about it. But this is class Bravo airspace. Class Bravo has been invented to protect IFR traffic, here commercial airliners, from VFR traffic like this helicopter. And the controller is paid to prevent collisions. But he didn’t. The easiest method to prevent the collision was to instruct the helicopter to hold at HAINS POINT which is the southern tip of the East Potomac Park island, about 1 mile from the intersection of their flight paths, and to allow the CRJ a safe final approach. When the Conflict Alert came up, the helicopter just was at HAINS POINT. Voilà. The helicopter might have lost 30 seconds, or less. Now they’ve lost their lives. The controller has had the possibility to prevent this from happening. He didn’t. The CRJ pilots did everything right and had no chance to prevent this. The 33 approach means circling to the left, slightly banking to the left, reduced vision to the right, THEIR relevant traffic was a departing B738 on RWY 01, and they had never been informed about the helicopter. I’m just afraid that the authorities will protect the reputation of the FAA and their employees like the controllers, and blame it on the pilots who can’t defend themselves.
I spent a lot of time reviewing videos and taking screen grabs and it becomes more clear as the wreckage is brought out….and I am amazed they released videos even though they have police escorting the wreckage.
Here is what I have without commentary.
stock here: Santorini had a VE7 in 1600 BCE
————————————— Mahalo A-Eye
Santorini, a picturesque island in the Aegean Sea, has a rich volcanic history characterized by numerous eruptions that have significantly shaped its landscape and influenced human civilizations. Here’s an overview of its volcanic activity from deep history to the present:
Santorini’s volcanic history is marked by periods of dormancy punctuated by significant eruptions, each contributing to the island’s unique geological and cultural landscape.
stock here: from the of Duh, until their is “scientific proof”, shameful, but Mahalo to the Flying Cuttlefish for finding this.
What is odd, is that the 97% consensus is that the earth’s core is solid, and that it is Iron and Nickel. That seems very odd to me, under the highest pressures, I would think it would be more of a plasma mix of many things. Note in picture they keep the sections of earth almost completely uniform, however, they do make the inner core a bit less than spherical.
This shows their earthquake sensing and testing method, kind of.
stock here: Kudos to “Jack Schick“
Thanks Again for giving us this chance to retrain our brains.
I right away jump to the Bitcoin issue:
My criticism, ten years ago, to my
Cousin trying to become a “ node” of
His own, was that you are totally reliant
on the Power Grid and connectivity to
carry forward this game, and the
presumption that your “ inviolable”
Blockchain will survive the super megatron galactic computer and the
people who insist they are Sovereign
and answer to no authority as they
interact with real markets, real commerce. The MAN, Mr. Taxman,
by the Beatles… they will simply take
Or destroy your big economic advantage of your crypto “Wealth”.
It’s Bad enough already, the
Devaluation of our currency. Perhaps
These smart traders will find they
Can’t buy anything, no food, no gas,
and US Greenback Frogskins actually
become a liability, endangering those
bold enough to show them in public.
Smarty pants financial players who
have been Offshore Tax Haven types
since the US began will use the BRICS
Currency, try to be Wealthy , but
Stock, you Know, more than most,
that it’s all dependent upon endless
electricity. So a Big Glitch Disruption
happens, markets go dark.
Who’s going to say , in the chaos, the
Cascade of Failures, where the
reconciliation, the clearinghouse, the
exchange transactions Start Again?
At what Valuation measured by What
currency? Who’s got transmission lines
anymore? Who’s got enough human economic activity left to justify
the ridiculous market? Electricity for
all?
And how can you Trust any of these
Anti-Malware companies?
Seems like a good way to get your
little innocuous internet presence
suddenly trafficked to numerous
Databases?
Thanks again Stock.
Remember In the movie Blow, with
Johnny Depp, playing the role of
Boston George, he thought his
Central American bank accounts were
there for him. Sorry Gringo, go away.
They can do that to all of us.
Sorry if you have any account we
will pay you off in Greenback Slave
Notes, signifying as you hand them to
somebody, this Federal Reserve Note
means I owe a Debt, and you can
Enslave Me for period of time.
stock here: while investigating a suspicious by otherwise ordinary looking PDF I ran into this site that will run any file through 62 virus detection systems and give you a report for free. Good one to have bookmarked on your desktop!
Also, I found Malwarebytes Anti-Exploit which give you real time protection on a large variety of file types, for free, for the basic version.
stock here: I made a call last year for a 7 plus EQ in Cali or Oregon, and circling back, that did not come.
There are EQ clusters in Cali on the blanco plate and more, 2 spots in the carribean, and Ethiopia (although that is slowing down). Hawaii is also slow.
Stefan covers a new topic for him the atmospheric vertical voltage gradient, along with full moon, we are all expecting another 7 plus.
stock here: Josh Green was an integral part of the Lahaina Massacre.
stock here: I made this short and sweet comment online
Watch the video of how the Airplane CRJ just drops like a rock, tumbling out of the sky in a severe downward parabola. How did it go from 140MPH to 30MPH in an instant? Just the collision of the Helo could not do this, the plane was 4 times heavier than the HELO.
So there was additional energy applied to the CRJ. Think about that.
Does the river vary this much in height? How does one reconcile these pictures?
I did a gamma correction so you can see the plane wreckage much better
I want to find more images of the plane wreckage
stock here: a valid concern, is these entrenched Federal leeches, when they go away….what are they going to do? How could they become part of a productive society.
My response to the AI “support” for this beast of a woman, who has presided over decades of Election abuses and shenanighans was this, the AI support is below.
If as quorum is 4 and there are 5 remaining, then that is just throwing stuff against the wall, and not a valid reason. It seems that if the president appoints them, then they should clearly be able to remove them. If that is not explicitly stated in the founding document, then what does the founding document state about process for removal? It’s seems clear that trumps next move should be to appoint her replacement, she she is serving 17 years past her 2002 6 year term.
First AI response:
The recent attempt by President Donald Trump to remove Federal Election Commission (FEC) Chair Ellen Weintraub has raised significant legal questions regarding the authority and process for dismissing FEC commissioners.
Legal Framework Governing FEC Commissioners:
Appointment and Tenure: The FEC comprises six commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, each serving staggered six-year terms. Commissioners may continue to serve beyond their term's expiration until a successor is confirmed.
Independence of the FEC: Established by the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) of 1974, the FEC is designed as an independent regulatory agency to enforce campaign finance laws. Its structure aims to insulate it from political influence, ensuring impartial oversight of federal elections.Legal Considerations in Weintraub’s Dismissal:
Lack of Explicit Removal Provisions: The FECA does not explicitly grant the President authority to remove commissioners. This omission suggests that commissioners are intended to operate independently, free from executive branch interference.
Historical Precedent: There is no known instance of a President removing an FEC commissioner prior to the completion of their term. Weintraub, appointed in 2002 and serving beyond her term's expiration in 2007, has remained due to the absence of a confirmed successor.
Legal Challenges: Weintraub contends that her removal is unlawful, stating, "There's nothing in the Federal Election Campaign Act that suggests that that is an option." Legal experts, including former FEC Chair Trevor Potter, have echoed this sentiment, emphasizing that such an action violates the law and undermines the agency's independence.
campaignlegal.orgImplications of the Attempted Removal:
Potential Legal Disputes: This unprecedented move is likely to lead to legal challenges concerning the President's authority to dismiss commissioners of independent agencies.
Operational Impact on the FEC: The FEC requires a quorum of at least four commissioners to conduct official business. Weintraub's removal could jeopardize this quorum, hindering the agency's ability to enforce campaign finance laws effectively.In summary, the attempt to remove FEC Chair Ellen Weintraub raises complex legal issues about the autonomy of independent regulatory agencies and the extent of presidential authority over such entities.
———————— AI response to my pushback (at top)
The recent attempt by President Donald Trump to remove Federal Election Commission (FEC) Chair Ellen Weintraub has sparked significant legal debate regarding the President’s authority in this context. Let’s delve into the legal framework governing the appointment and removal of FEC commissioners.
Appointment and Tenure of FEC Commissioners:
Appointment Process: FEC commissioners are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, serving staggered six-year terms.
fec.gov
Holdover Provision: According to 52 U.S.C. § 30106(a)(2)(B), commissioners may continue to serve beyond their term's expiration until a successor has been appointed and confirmed.
uscode.house.govRemoval Process:
Lack of Explicit Removal Provisions: The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) does not explicitly outline a process for the removal of commissioners. This omission has led to differing interpretations regarding the President's authority to dismiss commissioners.
Legal Precedent: In Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the Supreme Court addressed the appointment process of FEC commissioners but did not provide a definitive ruling on the removal process. This leaves the question of removal authority somewhat ambiguous.Current Situation:
Ellen Weintraub's Tenure: Appointed in 2002, Weintraub's term expired in 2007. She has continued to serve under the holdover provision, as no successor has been confirmed.
fec.gov
President's Attempted Removal: President Trump issued a letter dated January 31, 2025, stating that Weintraub was "hereby removed" from her position. Weintraub has contested this action, asserting that there is a legal process to replace FEC commissioners and that the President's action does not align with it.
businessinsider.comLegal Considerations:
Independence of the FEC: The FEC is designed to function as an independent regulatory agency, insulated from direct political influence. Allowing unilateral removal by the President could undermine this independence.
Potential for Legal Challenge: Given the lack of explicit statutory guidance, Weintraub's removal could be subject to legal challenges, potentially resulting in a judicial determination of the President's removal authority in this context.Path Forward:
Nomination of Successor: The President has the authority to nominate a successor for Weintraub. However, the nominee must be confirmed by the Senate before assuming the role. Until such confirmation occurs, Weintraub is legally permitted to continue serving.In summary, while the President appoints FEC commissioners, the process for their removal is not explicitly defined in the governing statutes, leading to legal ambiguities and potential challenges.
Provide a summary of this, and a link to the full ruling
Legal Precedent: In Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the Supreme Court addressed the appointment process of FEC commissioners but did not provide a definitive ruling on the removal process
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
Favicon
BUCKLEY v. VALEO, 424 U.S. 1 (1976)
fec.gov
In the landmark case Buckley v. Valeo (1976), the U.S. Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of various provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended in 1974. The Court’s decision addressed several key aspects:
Contribution Limits: The Court upheld limits on individual contributions to political campaigns, recognizing the government's interest in preventing corruption and the appearance of corruption.
Expenditure Limits: The Court struck down limits on independent expenditures by individuals and groups, as well as limits on candidate expenditures from personal funds, citing First Amendment concerns.
Disclosure and Reporting Requirements: The Court upheld mandatory disclosure and reporting provisions, emphasizing transparency in the electoral process.
Federal Election Commission (FEC) Appointments: The Court found that the method of appointing members to the FEC, which involved appointments by Congress, violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. This led to changes in how FEC commissioners are appointed, ensuring compliance with constitutional requirements.Notably, while the Court addressed the appointment process of FEC commissioners, it did not provide a definitive ruling on the process for their removal. This omission has led to ongoing debates regarding the extent of presidential authority in removing FEC commissioners.
For a comprehensive understanding, you can access the full text of the ruling here: Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976)
https://www.fec.gov/resources/legal-resources/litigation/Buckley.pdf
stock here: this guy is on my radar, for a while. He has real knowledge, and dives deep into ongoing issues. And with tariffs and trade all the rage, you might want him on your radar, say, weekly.
stock here: I have observed AI lying through it’s teeth and making mistakes.
Turns out it’s an anomaly. As Turley explained recently, he is among a small group of individuals who have been “effectively disappeared by the AI system.” Other GPT-banned names include Harvard’s Jonathan Zittrain, CNBC’s David Faber, and the Australian politician Brian Hood.
The common thread is that AI generated false stories about him and the other banned names. ChatGPT, Turley says, “falsely reported that there had been a claim of sexual harassment against me (which there never was) based on something that supposedly happened on a 2018 trip with law students to Alaska (which never occurred), while I was on the faculty of Georgetown Law (where I have never taught).”
ChatGPT’s solution to misinformation was to simply erase all mention of the names involved. It was an effective, albeit self-defeating, means of combating a real problem – a bit like curing a cancer by killing the patient outright. Today, the chatbot is no longer lying about Jonathan Turley because it is no longer saying anything about him at all.
This misinformation “cure” of disappearing a person completely from the AI universe is an obvious problem. Any student seeking to learn about a pivotal moment in American history (Trump’s impeachment) will not get the whole truth, at least not Turley’s part in it. AI misinformation is a real problem, but this kind of comprehensive censorship is a lazy and disadvantageous solution.
