End of discussion.

The House investigation lacks a comprehensive focus and seeks only to investigate the former Secretary. There is nothing else to know. The former Secretary was a target of a vicious Republican smear campaign to gain political directives.

This is directly an ethics violation and in all honesty, for the monies spent it is a very impeachable offense for the Republicans, especially the chairman.

Given his profession, Bradley F. Podliska, needs a leave with full pay until this committee concludes it's work. I just don't see how he can function in his job with the pressure he faces. Every soldier has to be at his best, distraction is not an equation for success. The Democrats on the committee probably have power to be sure he is safe for the sake of his family. He is honest. He can give testimony unimpeded by anyone.

October 10, 2015
By Noam Scheiber, Eric Lipton and Michael S. Schmidt

Washington — The Republican leaders of a House (click here) committee who have been in a bitter partisan battle with Democrats are enmeshed in a new fight with one of the committee’s former staff members.

A former investigator for the Republicans on the House Select Committee on Benghazi plans to file a complaint in federal court next month alleging that he was fired unlawfully in part because his superiors opposed his efforts to conduct a comprehensive investigation into the 2012 attack on the American diplomatic mission in the Libyan city rather than focus primarily on the role of the State Department and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The former investigator, Bradley F. Podliska, a major in the Air Force Reserve who is on active duty in Germany, also claims that the committee’s majority staff retaliated against him for taking leave for several weeks to go on active duty. If true, the retaliation would violate the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994, which Major Podliska plans to invoke in his complaint, according to a draft that was made available to The New York Times.

The case is now in a confidential mediation phase, limiting what the Republican-led staff can publicly say about the matter....

Turkey needs to be on the side of the peace demonstrators.

The people need to have confidence in the government and future demonstrations should be secure. Their voices were silenced today. That should be alarming to the Turkish government. Who could do such a thing to people who were not a threat to anyone?

The USA has experienced such horrible realities, but, we dug in and found the murders. We secured our democracy for free expression and personal life of enjoyment. That security is an intricate part of the USA economy. Now, if we can only find a better way to secure our children and their hopes and dreams.

October 10, 2015

Twin bomb blasts (click here) in the Turkish capital Ankara that killed at least 86 people and injured 186 on Saturday were apparently the result of a suicide bombing, Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said.
An official, who declined to be identified, noted no vehicle was destroyed in the explosions. The official also said a ban had been imposed in Turkey on broadcasting images which directly showed the bomb blasts.
A government spokesperson said the blackout covered images showing the moment of the blast , gruesome or bloody images or “images that create a feeling of panic.” He warned media organisations they could face a “full blackout” if they did not comply....

Understand the US House is completely dysfunctional because of politics and NOT THE TRUTH.

October 7, 2015
By the Editorial Board (of the New York Times)

House Republicans (click here) may be disinclined to disband the Select Committee on Benghazi with the presidential race heating up. But at the very least they should rename their laughable crusade, which has cost taxpayers $4.6 million, “the Inquisition of Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

$4.6 million US is a lot of money. What right does The Freedom Caucus have to spend taxpayer monies over and over and over again simply because it wants to defame a former Secretary of State? 
 

Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, a leading candidate to become the next speaker of the House, acknowledged last week that was the point of burrowing into the details of the 2012 attacks on government facilities in eastern Libya that killed the American ambassador and three colleagues.

“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?” Mr. McCarthy said in an astonishing moment of candor that was clearly a gaffe, rather than a principled admission. “But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today?”

“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?” That is the premise of the rest of his statement. Beating Hillary Clinton is not a function of government.

Beating Hillary Clinton is the function of multiple committee demands at the cost of the American people. What?

That is politics plain and simple. Rep. McCarthy, who seems like a nice guy, had to relinquish his election for Speaker of the House because of this statement. That is ridiculous. The FBI is conducting an investigation. Why does the US House have to convene a select committee when the FBI was the proper authority to TASK regarding any aspect of the Benghazi deaths? The FBI couldn't find the truth? Then what does the USA have the FBI for?

Lawmakers have long abused their investigative authority for political purposes. But the effort to find Mrs. Clinton, who was secretary of state at the time of the Libya attacks, was personally responsible for the deaths has lost any semblance of credibility. It’s become an insult to the memory of four slain Americans....

The Republican Select Committee is a political entity, it is unethical to say the least, but, it is also one of the best SuperPACS in the country.

Productivity and profits are not interchangeable. 

There is no fraud in the EPA ruling about the mine in Alaska. This is ridiculous. Hate speech exists surrounding the EPA because the possibility for Wall Street profits at the expense of the country's interest in clean air and water in Alaska. 

I WROTE A PAPER TO THE EPA and so did many of my peers regarding the mine in Alaska. The EPA calls for public comment. It is not simply handing down a verdict like a judge. The EPA accepts public comment and includes it in it's decisions. The EPA decision making is very, very democratic. The mine owners had every chance to enter public comment as well. LIES don't work when FACTS are imperative to such decisions. The political wrangling around it is completely false. It is political rhetoric and carries no brevity today, in the past or in the future. Politics needs to be based in fact to understand the function of a democratic government. Parties that don't want truth and facts in their politics cause the the country  to end up with corruption.

Are the members of The Freedom Caucus "rageaholics?"

Good question.

They aren't interested in a House Speaker that speaks the truth. There was no lie by Rep. McCarthy. He stated the facts. Yes? 

Did they criticize his delivery? Is that the issue? 

There are websites that embrace the idea of "Rageaholic." (click here) That is just one. There are others.  

rageaholic (click here)

noun

a person who gets excited by expressing rage; a person prone to extreme anger with little or no provocation

I think the observation about "Sequestration" is accurate. There was suppose to be an out from it. The Supercommittee was suppose to find cuts equivalent to it in the country's budget. Basically, the way I saw Sequestration and the Supercommittee was to cut obsolete programs which the country had no use for anymore. You can call it pork, but, there are some budgeted parts of the federal government that needs to be looked at again. The problem is that these are ten to fifteen year if not more more appropriations so there will be an impact in congressional district economies. But, obsolete is obsolete.

There are real linchpins in appropriations as well. If a program seems obsolete does it in fact support other interests benevolent to the USA? The government is a beast and it reacts in ways no one expects simply because it is so burdened by ideologies rather than effectiveness. Ideologies should be 'tested' when passing legislation to eliminate stagnant and unproductive spending.

I realize ideologies are what campaigns run on in some instances. But, and this is where The Freedom Caucus losses legitimacy. Campaigning is one thing, but, governing is different.

There is this actual priority of the elected official and goes like this, "He ran on ideologies, but, walked it back in governing." Today, that reality is viewed as disloyalty to the electorate. Ideologies can be very bizarre and they need to be reduced to a reasonable level of noise when governing in Washington.

So, where does this rageaholic come from with The Freedom Caucus? Is it legitimate? Are their priorities bizarre? DOES THE PUBLIC understand there is a group of people in the US House that is responsible for all the obstruction and dysfunction in the government. It has gotten to be ridiculous. There should never be an anarchy within the government that can call up a committee for every issue that doesn't fit into The Freedom Caucus politics. That is abuse of the taxpayer. 

The deaths in Benghazi were horrible. Obviously, there were issues unseen by the USA. No one would tell the late ambassador to put his life in danger, however, there is a known component to the foreign service called "The State Department," that is dangerous. September 11th is one of them. Does everyone realize the ambassador was in a safe room when he was overcome with smoke inhalation? The late ambassador was not killed, he succumbed to the lousy smoke outside the consulate. 

The committee assembled after the incident filed a report. That report cost money as the committee has a budget to carry out their investigation. The budget has to be sufficient enough for a thorough investigation so as to not inhibit the best outcome for the American people and THEIR government.

The committee submitted a report and it was transparent. It outlined changes that had to be carried out to prevent such tragedy ever again. The further priorities of the Republicans to continue to hold committee after committee is a political priority. It just is. It is a waste of money. Somehow, it is suppose cause the fall of Hillary Clinton. Why?

Her enthusiasm is due to his tax plan.

She is not blindly favoring Donald Trump. Her socioeconomic predicament would receive unbelievable help from the Trump Tax Plan.

I always criticize people not voting their own interests in elections. She took her self interests very seriously. Don't expect the people needing financial relief to understand or EVEN CARE ABOUT the tax benefits for the wealthy. All she wants to know is that her life is going to be better and she has a real shot at the promise of the United States of America. She will have more money in her pocket and might even save for her first home.

She doesn't understand Carried Interest. The public in general will understand it is something that robs the USA treasury to benefit the wealthy. The public will react to the end of Carried Interest. But, will they understand or care about the fact there may be tax breaks for the wealthy in the Trump Tax Plan?

No.

The fact of the situation is that Donald Trump's tax plan was well received by most of the Republicans. There is something there for everyone and it even closes a few of the loop holes. Donald Trump garnered an interest by people when it hit their purchase power.

Oh, one other thing. She believes he means it. He is running on his own steam and has been the victim of powerful companies and people to carry out his campaign. She believes he means every word of his promises. Establishment politicians can't be trusted.

The Fantasy about AI is very seductive.

If AI goes forward the image it should be studied as is a soldier. Caution rather than seduction would be a far better model. It should first be the monster some believe it is. Then it can go on to be more.

9 October 2015
By Andrew Griffith

AI (click here) is likely to be ‘either the best or worst thing ever to happen to humanity,’ Hawking said, ‘so there's huge value in getting it right’ 

Stephen Hawking has warned that artificially intelligent machines could kill us because they are too clever.

Such computers could become so competent that they kill us by accident, Hawking has warned in his first Ask Me Anything session on Reddit.

A questioner noted that Professor Hawking’s ideas about artificial intelligence are seen as “a belief in Terminator-style ‘Evil AI’”, and asked how he would present his own beliefs.

“The real risk with AI isn't malice but competence,” Professor Hawking said. “A super intelligent AI will be extremely good at accomplishing its goals, and if those goals aren't aligned with ours, we're in trouble....

Stanford University Online Artificial Intelligence (click here for the lab)

8 October 2015
By Andrew Griffin

Scientists (click here) have built an artificial intelligence system that has performed as well as in intelligence tests as a young child....

Why would Miller have used lightning to initiate the production of amino acids, the building blocks of life?

March 21, 2011
By Ed Yong

...Miller conducted (click here) his original 1953 experiment as a graduate student, working with his mentor Harold Urey. It was one of the first to tackle the seemingly insurmountable question of how life began. In their laboratory, the pair tried to recreate the conditions on early lifeless Earth, with an atmosphere full of simple gases and laced with lightning storms. They filled a flask with water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen and sent sparks of electricity through them.

The result, both literally and figuratively, was lightning in a bottle. When Miller looked at the samples from the flask, he found five different amino acids – the building blocks of proteins and essential components of life....

Lightning, besides existing during Earth's earliest years, would bring about movement of electrons between the compounds that facilitated the new bonding to form amino acids.

When pondering the beginning of life as Earth knows it; the question is not how did DNA occur, but, what brought about the sheer existence of hydrogen? Hydrogen the first element in the periodic table. (click here) 

Producing hydrogen is very different than creating it. 

water (H₂O), methane (CH₄), ammonia (NH₃), hydrogen (H₂) (click here for video)