Canadian: "I feel sorry for your folks - just embarrassing to have Trump fooling around, saying non-sense like inviting Russians intrusion in your own backyard and hit his opponents." (all below news)
Mexican: "Trump's Mexican Walls likely ban you Americans come out, instead of we Mexicans come to America. Why do people want to come to America as Trump said "everything is terrible!""
A UK Muslim: "Yes, Trump wants to ban your American Muslims out of America, as well as we outside Muslims. Not just Muslims, all of you guys are tied up in knots of not feeling secured - scared. Trump doesn't have sanity and competence."
Michael Bloomberg Calls Donald Trump “Dangerous Demagogue”, Questions His Sanity & Competency At DNC. nandreeva. by Nellie ...
~~
In movies and books, the phrases “not competent to stand trial” and “not guilty by reason of insanity” are thrown around quite frequently. But what are the differences between competency and sanity? Are they interchangeable?
The answer is no—the two concepts play significantly different roles in court. Competency determines whether a defendant will be able to appear at trial and understand the proceedings; sanity determines whether a defendant will be held responsible for his criminal actions. Therefore, a defendant who is competent to stand trial may nonetheless be found “not guilty by reason of insanity.” However, if a defendant is found not competent to stand trial, he will never be found guilty (or not guilty, for that matter) because no trial would be held in the first place. In other words, you can be declared legally competent and also legally insane. However, you cannot be declared legally insane unless you are also legally competent.
Here are the most basic differences between the two concepts:
Definition.
Competency is determined by whether the defendant can understand the nature and consequences of the criminal proceedings against him. Specifically, the Supreme Court has held that the defendant must (1) have the sufficient present ability to consult with his or her lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding; and (2) he or she must have a rational as well as a factual understanding of the proceeding against him or her.
Meanwhile, the definition of insanity varies between states, and concerns the criminal acts allegedly committed by the defendant. (Read this blog post to learn about the different definitions of insanity.) For example, some states determine insanity by whether the defendant understood the nature and quality of his acts or did not know that his acts were wrong. Other states have different definitions. Some states do not have an insanity defense at all.
Decision-Maker.
Competency is determined by the judge. Insanity is determined by the jury.
Timing of Determination.
Competency is determined before the beginning of trial. Insanity, on the other hand, is determined at the end of the trial with the verdict.
Raising the Issue.
Competency can be raised as an issue by a party, or based on the judge’s observations of the defendant. If there is a reasonable basis to believe competency is at issue, the court has an absolute duty to order an evaluation. Based on the outcome of the evaluation, the judge will determine whether the defendant is competent to stand trial. Insanity, on the other hand, is an affirmative defense that must be pled by the defendant.
Source of Law.
The competency requirement arises from United States federal law, as a guarantee under the due process clause of the Constitution. Meanwhile, the insanity defense is determined by state law, and varies between states. Some states do not have the insanity defense at all, but all states must consider competency because it is a matter of constitutionality.
Advertisement
Timeframe Considered.
When evaluating competency, the judge will consider the defendant’s mental state at the time of the legal proceeding and trial. When evaluating insanity, the jury will consider the defendant’s mental state at the time the alleged crime was committed.
Consequences.
When a defendant is found incompetent to stand trial, it merely causes a hiatus in the criminal proceedings. In general, the mentally ill defendant is expected to receive treatment until he is deemed “restored to competence,” at which point, the trial would proceed. In 1972, the Supreme Court held that a defendant deemed incompetent may not be held for a longer period than is reasonable to determine whether he will be able to attain competence in the foreseeable future.
If a defendant is found insane, he will most likely be committed to a psychiatric hospital. However, commitment procedures vary depending on the state. Some states require a commitment hearing, others do it automatically. The length of time of commitment also varies. Studies show that defendants found “not guilty by reason of insanity” are likely to spend as much or more time confined in a psychiatric hospital as they would have if they had gone to prison instead.
Application.
Let’s say that a husband is prone to violent psychotic episodes that last for a few hours, but that when he is not experiencing an episode, he thinks and acts fairly normally. He ends up killing his wife during one of these episodes. He would most likely be deemed competent to stand trial, but also be acquitted by reason of insanity.
Now let’s consider a different situation. Say that a wife has trouble understanding her surroundings because of a hallucinatory mental illness, and perpetually believes that she is still in middle school. One day, she finds out that her husband cheated on her, gets angry, and kills him. At the beginning of the criminal proceedings, she sincerely believes that the courtroom is her middle school auditorium, that the proceedings are a homecoming dance, that the lawyers are students, and that the judge is the principal. In this case, she would be deemed incompetent to stand trial.
Advertisement
As a side note—if the wife’s case were to go to trial, she would probably be found guilty because her killing had nothing to do with her mental illness. However, she would never go to trial unless, or until, she is deemed to have reached competency.
_______________________
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this blog or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between the author and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of any law firm or Psychology Today.
CrowdStrike had installed software on the [Democratic National Committee’s] computers so that it could analyze data that could indicate who had gained access, when and how.
The firm identified two separate hacker groups, both working for the Russian government, that had infiltrated the network, said Dmitri Alperovitch, CrowdStrike co-founder and chief technology officer. The firm had analyzed other breaches by both groups over the past two years.
One group, which CrowdStrike had dubbed Cozy Bear, had gained access last summer and was monitoring the DNC’s email and chat communications, Alperovitch said.
The other, which the firm had named Fancy Bear, broke into the network in late April and targeted the opposition research files. It was this breach that set off the alarm. The hackers stole two files . . . . And they had access to the computers of the entire research staff — an average of about several dozen on any given day.
Experts now reiterate that Russia and these two hackers in particular are responsible for a slew of cyber attacks of governments perceived as a threat to Russia. Cozy Bear, for example, has been tied to hack operations of the State Department, according to Patrik Maldre, managing partner of Retel Partners, an Estonia-based consulting firm focusing on cybersecurity, explained in a media call this morning hosted by the Foreign Policy Initiative (moderated by Jamie Kirchick). “Many security intelligencies follow [the two hackers]. They are well financed and sophisticated.” Fancy Bear, for example, is suspected of being connected to Russian military intelligence and has been tied to a hack of the German parliament in the 2000s. Moreover, Maldre indicates that there is additional technological evidence (including Cyrillic metadata) to confirm the Russia connection. “What is surprising [about the DNC hack] is what happened after,” Maldre said. To send the stolen emails, he said, shows “intent not to just know but to play an active role” in U.S. elections.
It’s important to understand that Vladimir Putin — whom Donald Trump wants to ally with and admires — has been attacking democratic elections in Europe for some time. In 2014, malware was discovered in Ukrainian election software that would have destroyed confidence in the vote, to the benefit of pro-Russian forces. The Wall Street Journal detailed Russia’s cyberwarfare against Ukraine:
In just 72 hours, Ukraine would head to the polls in an election crucial to cementing the legitimacy of a new pro-Western government, desperate for a mandate as war exploded in the country’s east. If the commission didn’t offer its usual real-time online results, doubts about the vote’s legitimacy would further fracture an already divided nation.
The attack ultimately failed to derail the vote. Ukrainian computer specialists mobilized to restore operations in time for the elections. But the intrusion heralded a new era in Ukraine that showed how geopolitical confrontation with Russia could give rise to a nebulous new cabal of cyber foes, bent on undermining and embarrassing authorities trying to break with the Kremlin.
In the last two years, cyberattacks have hit Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Defense and the presidential administration. Military communications lines and secure databases at times were compromised, according to Ukrainian presidential and security officials. A steady flow of hacked government documents have appeared on the Cerberus website.
David Kramer, the McCain Institute’s senior director for human rights and democracy, reiterated during this morning’s media call that Russia has an interest in disrupting U.S. alliances (as it did with a call involving assistant secretary of state Victoria Nuland and a 2007 cyberattack on Estonia). He cites other Russian-identified operations to influence Latvian, Greek, Italian and French elections. Russia is, he says, attempting to discredit the West’s democratic systems and to create a moral equivalence between the West and Russia’s own corrupt, authoritarian system.
We saw this clearly in elections in Georgia in 2012. As noted in Forbes:
Some ten days before the vote, television channels broadcast mysteriously leaked videos of prison abuse. Pre-incited crowds hit the streets blaming the pro-Western government, creating chaos and instability. Meanwhile, on Russian-language channels, Russian military officials talked darkly of preparing to intercede in Georgia to restore order. Ultimately, conclusive information emerged linking the leaked video to pro-Kremlin Georgian mafia abroad–but too late to save the election for President [Mikheil] Saakashvili’s anti-Kremlin party.
Both Kramer and Maldre stressed the seriousness of the issue. “The current operation demonstrates a new level of boldness and brazenness … a strike at the heart of American democracy,” says Maldre.
It may be that Putin is trying directly to give a leg up to Trump (the Republican National Committee was apparently not hacked, after all), who unaware of or indifferent to Russia’s interests in harming the West, would abandon criticism of human rights and allow Putin freer rein in Europe. Regardless, the evidence that Putin is trying to harm American democracy is undeniable. Trump’s obliviousness to the Russian threat to the United States and our allies should be deeply disquieting, if not disqualifying.
opinions
right-turn
Orlando Shooting Updates
News and analysis on the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.
post_newsletter348
follow-orlando
true
endOfArticle
false
Opinions newsletter
Thought-provoking opinions and commentary, in your inbox daily.
Here's why Trump's challenge to Russian hackers was a mistake
EmbedCopyShare
Play Video1:36
The Fix's Chris Cillizza explains why Donald Trump made a mistake when he called on Russia to find Hillary Clinton's missing emails.The Fix's Chris Cillizza explains why Donald Trump made a mistake when he called on Russia to find Hillary Clinton's missing emails. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)
The Fix's Chris Cillizza explains why Donald Trump made a mistake when he called on Russia to find Hillary Clinton's missing emails. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)
Trump’s rhetoric puts Republicans in a tricky situation. This latest cyberattack fits into a larger picture of Russian malicious action against the West. But supporters of Trump are now faced with defending Trump’s egregious statements and pro-Putin stance. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) has refused to denounce Trump’s remarks and instead puts out a statement criticizing Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) for suggesting that Trump not get a security briefing. He even had the nerve to compare Reid to Putin — when his own candidate is playing the role of Putin’s pet poodle. Remarkable.
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, in an extended phone interview with Right Turn conceded that there is “a high confidence” Russia hacked into the DNC computers. He underscored that lots of countries, including China, have been hacking the United States. “They’ve been playing a cat-and-mouse game,” he says of foreign cyber-espionage. He nevertheless conceded that he has no information that some country other than the Russia hacked the DNC’s computers. He insisted at one point that the release of material during a U.S. election was “nothing new” and denied there was evidence that Russian hackers gave the information to WikiLeaks to release and influence our election, although he he also acknowledged WikiLeaks has acted as a conduit for leaks beneficial to Russia in the past. (How else would WikiLeaks have gotten the emails if not from the Russians?)
Asked whether Trump should be denouncing Russia rather than inviting (even jokingly) it to interfere with our election, Nunes claimed, to my amazement, “I didn’t see Trump trying to shy away from being critical of Russia.” He nevertheless spoke critically of the Obama administration for what he sees as growing accommodation to Putin. “We need to get tough with the Russians,” he said, reminding me that Congress has overwhelmingly voted to give defensive arms to Ukraine. Unfortunately, Trump’s henchmen took that position out of the RNC platform.
Trump not only invited more Russian espionage and suggested Russia might get to keep Crimea but also demonstrated his utter unfamiliarity with the issue and his desire to buddy up to Putin as the latter seeks to damage the West. In doing so, Trump left Republicans once more tied up in knots, a result that inevitably flows from supporting a candidate like Trump. Republicans can have a get-tough policy with Russia (and defend U.S. and European democracies), or they can tout Trump, but they should be honest: These two things are contradictory.
Davenport, Iowa (CNN) Donald Trump, after hearing speeches at the Democratic convention this week, said Thursday he wanted to "hit a number of those speakers so hard, their heads would spin.
FLINT, Mich.—The Michigan attorney general's office on Friday charged six state employees with misconduct in office and other crimes stemming from the lead-contaminated water crisis in Flint.
Matt Damon hadn't played Jason Bourne since 2007's The Bourne Ultimatum, but he quickly makes up for lost time in his latest outing, kicking off the character's long-awaited return with an adrenaline-fueled chase set during an austerity riot in Athens.
PHILADELPHIA - Barack Obama's stirring address to the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday night, a long-winded peroration of Bill Clinton-esque proportions, full of rhetorical peaks and valleys, had the feeling of a farewell address.
Facing a torrent of criticism over his comments seeming to condone the hacking of Hillary Clinton's emails by Russian intelligence services, Donald J. Trump and his allies on Thursday sought to tamp down his remarks, with Mr. Trump saying he was simply ...
? You must be smoking something very expensive, definitely not for - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (22 bytes) (8 reads) 07/29/2016 10:39:19
? 電郵門關鍵人物意外死亡。二十多年來涉及克林頓夫婦犯罪的關鍵人物總是在關鍵時刻意外死亡,為什麽? - 老農民說兩句 - ♂ 給 老農民說兩句 發送悄悄話 老農民說兩句 的博客首頁 老農民說兩句 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (222 reads) 07/29/2016 10:21:45
? 瞧你連這常識都沒有:隻有死人才最讓人放心,活著的誰都不能信,包括老公! - Lucs - ♀ 給 Lucs 發送悄悄話 Lucs 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (9 reads) 07/29/2016 10:27:42
? +1 - happycow222 - ♂ 給 happycow222 發送悄悄話 happycow222 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 10:29:42
? 你的意思哪天比爾也會意外死亡? - 老農民說兩句 - ♂ 給 老農民說兩句 發送悄悄話 老農民說兩句 的博客首頁 老農民說兩句 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (5 reads) 07/29/2016 10:32:47
? 要是沒利用價值了,誰知道呢。你說希拉裏會有多信任她那偷腥高手老公? - Lucs - ♀ 給 Lucs 發送悄悄話 Lucs 的個人群組 (80 bytes) (5 reads) 07/29/2016 11:08:55
? 她光明正大的事沒啥像樣的records,陰險毒辣的事倒屢屢創紀錄。為了權力,錢,獨裁真瘋狂,還好意思全世界兜售人權,民主 - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (1 reads) 07/29/2016 10:38:21
? 現在的希拉裏好似漁夫和金魚的故事裏的老太婆 - 楷若 - ♀ 給 楷若 發送悄悄話 楷若 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 10:59:42
? 陰謀論有點不靠譜。如果要謀殺,直接幹掉床鋪,不是更簡單? - 薛成 - ♂ 給 薛成 發送悄悄話 薛成 的博客首頁 薛成 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (2 reads) 07/29/2016 11:07:46
? 床鋪冒出來才多久,幹掉床鋪隻能解決一件事,這是二十多年,牽扯的事多而廣 - Lucs - ♀ 給 Lucs 發送悄悄話 Lucs 的個人群組 (110 bytes) (12 reads) 07/29/2016 11:16:15
? 是啊,Benghazi 共和黨折騰這麽久也沒折騰出名堂來, - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (451 bytes) (15 reads) 07/29/2016 11:23:06
? 哪裏是你的信息來源?沒有信息來源,我們不能相信你。 - michigan007 - ♂ 給 michigan007 發送悄悄話 michigan007 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 11:27:31
? 'I feel sorry for you folks!' - TJKCB - ♀ 給 TJKCB 發送悄悄話 TJKCB 的博客首頁 TJKCB 的個人群組 (90335 bytes) (246 reads) 07/29/2016 10:13:51
? 看起來下任總統是床鋪了, - 嘚瑟一下 - ♂ 給 嘚瑟一下 發送悄悄話 嘚瑟一下 的個人群組 (128 bytes) (408 reads) 07/29/2016 10:10:35
? based on the electoral map (attached), Trump has little changce - Norcalfan0 - ♂ 給 Norcalfan0 發送悄悄話 Norcalfan0 的個人群組 (298 bytes) (70 reads) 07/29/2016 10:28:10
? Typo: Trump has little chance to win. - Norcalfan0 - ♂ 給 Norcalfan0 發送悄悄話 Norcalfan0 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (3 reads) 07/29/2016 10:29:12
? 今年會不同的, 今年會激發高投票率, - 楷若 - ♀ 給 楷若 發送悄悄話 楷若 的個人群組 (243 bytes) (28 reads) 07/29/2016 10:49:41
? 三德子幫了大忙,所以必須對三德子另眼看待。三德子的突然放棄,導致他的支持四分五裂,有的轉向了Trump。 - happycow222 - ♂ 給 happycow222 發送悄悄話 happycow222 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (3 reads) 07/29/2016 10:32:44
? 如果兩會期間的poll有意義的話, McCain 和 Romney早就當上總統了:-) - 鋼絲. - ♂ 給 鋼絲. 發送悄悄話 鋼絲. 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (6 reads) 07/29/2016 10:38:01
? 這次不一樣,1.希拉裏還有很多料沒引爆,2.她的口才也遠遠不如床鋪,電視辯論肯定占下風。 - 嘚瑟一下 - ♂ 給 嘚瑟一下 發送悄悄話 嘚瑟一下 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (3 reads) 07/29/2016 10:53:05
? 恩, McCain和Romney當時也一定是這樣想的:-) - 鋼絲. - ♂ 給 鋼絲. 發送悄悄話 鋼絲. 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (1 reads) 07/29/2016 11:09:05
? 就看川普有沒有本事得到以往不參加投票者中的多數支持,民主黨的鐵票倉多。 - 大西洋海底 - ♀ 給 大西洋海底 發送悄悄話 大西洋海底 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (2 reads) 07/29/2016 11:17:15
? 當前中國社會階層固化的危局 - Twinlight - ♂ 給 Twinlight 發送悄悄話 Twinlight 的博客首頁 Twinlight 的個人群組 (27645 bytes) (209 reads) 07/29/2016 09:53:30
? 孫沛東:青年“通婚圈”折射中國新一代階層固化 - Twinlight - ♂ 給 Twinlight 發送悄悄話 Twinlight 的博客首頁 Twinlight 的個人群組 (18332 bytes) (28 reads) 07/29/2016 09:54:50
? 江山代有人才出。那些創新的富豪年年有,自己無能就說階層固化。 - 相對強度 - ♂ 給 相對強度 發送悄悄話 相對強度 的博客首頁 相對強度 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 10:32:40
? 不是每個中國人都有往高處走的平等權利。隻有特權階層的人,不如紅二代。 - happycow222 - ♂ 給 happycow222 發送悄悄話 happycow222 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 10:34:09
? 讓人有希望,有努力的念頭最重要了,美國也有這問題 - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 10:55:17
? 特權階層的興起與蘇共的敗亡 - Twinlight - ♂ 給 Twinlight 發送悄悄話 Twinlight 的博客首頁 Twinlight 的個人群組 (22954 bytes) (173 reads) 07/29/2016 09:51:00
? Reddit論壇上當被美國網友問道準備如何減少金錢對政治的影響,特朗普給出的回答與4年前奧巴馬的回答比較:(圖) - 互聯網 - ♂ 給 互聯網 發送悄悄話 互聯網 的個人群組 (1829 bytes) (479 reads) 07/29/2016 09:42:50
? (轉載)47年來,《紐約時報》見證的希拉裏時刻 - 互聯網 - ♂ 給 互聯網 發送悄悄話 互聯網 的個人群組 (14374 bytes) (52 reads) 07/29/2016 09:45:16
? 那個回答的是川普嗎? - 30512 - ♂ 給 30512 發送悄悄話 30512 的博客首頁 30512 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (2 reads) 07/29/2016 09:45:29
? 就是真實的嗬。和你想象的川普不一樣嗎? - 互聯網 - ♂ 給 互聯網 發送悄悄話 互聯網 的個人群組 (409 bytes) (31 reads) 07/29/2016 09:49:57
? 這回答有毛問題? - smalleagle - ♂ 給 smalleagle 發送悄悄話 smalleagle 的博客首頁 smalleagle 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (2 reads) 07/29/2016 09:54:16
? 問的好。文明世界的敵人就生活在我們的身邊,在內部殺死我們。是時候了放棄政治正確了! - 互聯網 - ♂ 給 互聯網 發送悄悄話 互聯網 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (1 reads) 07/29/2016 10:11:34
? 高級黑啊,雖然厚皮厚不過民主黨的現況也打的奧巴臉都紫了吧。 - smalleagle - ♂ 給 smalleagle 發送悄悄話 smalleagle 的博客首頁 smalleagle 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (2 reads) 07/29/2016 09:53:29
? 這樣的語言暴力,真不知打的誰的臉。 - 互聯網 - ♂ 給 互聯網 發送悄悄話 互聯網 的個人群組 (2394 bytes) (13 reads) 07/29/2016 10:03:40
? 競選中互相罵,很異常麽?你喜歡的希拉裏和奧八馬,當年同室操戈罵得更過癮吧? - ecolio157h7 - ♂ 給 ecolio157h7 發送悄悄話 ecolio157h7 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (1 reads) 07/29/2016 10:09:34
? 你連放在眼前的事實都不肯承認,那些想當然的,又何必信誓旦旦呢。抱歉,我不再評論了。 - 互聯網 - ♂ 給 互聯網 發送悄悄話 互聯網 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 10:15:10
? 不知真假,但看出了特點,Obama在說操作,Trump在要求結果,給出的是vision(不滋養Hillary這類政客的體製) - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (11 reads) 07/29/2016 10:02:46
? 一個是執政的心態,一個是在野的,或者鍵盤俠的簡單化方式 - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (3 reads) 07/29/2016 10:09:54
? 說操作的不需要領袖,才沒精神壓力,不用擔當被監督實現目標的壓力,顯得在工作,隻help不犀利人群judge他 - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (8 reads) 07/29/2016 10:15:22
? You must be smoking something very expensive, definitely not for - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (22 bytes) (8 reads) 07/29/2016 10:39:19
? 開始personal了?討論道理,看看是不是這個理,現在老百姓好多都看出來了,時間問題 - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (9 reads) 07/29/2016 10:43:33
? 不讓希拉裏進白宮怎麽就變成防止金錢影響政治的vision 了? - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (471 bytes) (5 reads) 07/29/2016 10:58:12
? 是標誌事件,因為她可能是美國史上最腐敗的政客。至於那個破產,你想想500個企業失敗五個,... - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (1 reads) 07/29/2016 11:10:36
? 天哪,美國不是他的試驗品, 當然,你有你願意做試驗品的自由。 - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (208 bytes) (4 reads) 07/29/2016 11:14:58
? 哇你天真得沒看到美國已經試驗幾十年了?他撤了,改變了正說明他能調整change,難... - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 11:21:46
? 領導人給vision, 執行人講implementation. 沒學過leadership 課程?學過了就要用呀 - k467 - ♀ 給 k467 發送悄悄話 k467 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (5 reads) 07/29/2016 10:44:09
? 我要世界和平,讓手下操作,是不是最英明的領袖的 vision 了?:) - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (3 reads) 07/29/2016 10:52:08
? 英明的vision 就是釜底抽薪杜絕奸詐的賄選,執行還輪不到奧8 - k467 - ♀ 給 k467 發送悄悄話 k467 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (1 reads) 07/29/2016 10:59:07
? 釜底抽薪還真的就是奧巴馬提的關於funding finance reform. super-Pac - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (330 bytes) (2 reads) 07/29/2016 11:04:45
? 這個極端,難feasible,不過不擔當的人倒愛這樣,就像Obama那天激昂演講一樣,not a real world。他改變自 - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (3 reads) 07/29/2016 11:04:33
? 他馬上改變自己的支持腐爛製度,是可行的 - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 11:06:17
? 你看我說你經常同一頁,甚至於同一主貼裏自我矛盾吧? - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (259 bytes) (2 reads) 07/29/2016 11:08:53
? 嘿,vision可不一樣,分可行不可行吧。Obama先管管Hillary已暴露的腐爛,是可行的 - Narnar - ♀ 給 Narnar 發送悄悄話 Narnar 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (5 reads) 07/29/2016 11:18:16
? 哈哈哈, 昨天我在TT說什麽來著。。。琴要少彈:-) - 鋼絲. - ♂ 給 鋼絲. 發送悄悄話 鋼絲. 的個人群組 (240 bytes) (8 reads) 07/29/2016 11:18:33
? 謝謝鋼絲兄:) - Warsteiner - ♂ 給 Warsteiner 發送悄悄話 Warsteiner 的博客首頁 Warsteiner 的個人群組 (0 bytes) (0 reads) 07/29/2016 11:24:20