Presidential Election 2020

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Regardless of what one thinks of Trump how could a vote for a mentally diminished and incapable Biden possibly be in our country's better interest? If one answers please do so based on Biden positives and not by bashing Trump as that would be no answer.

Dang more foreign illegal money going to Biden. Yep probably America hating Russia, China or some Muslim country sending $millions to socialist and fascist loving Biden/Harris.

Published 13 hours ago

Exclusive: Data shows that half of 2019 donations to ActBlue came from untraceable 'unemployed' donors.
A Take Back Action Fund analysis of $400M in donations to liberal causes raises red flags of possible foreign involvement


EXCLUSIVE: Less than two months ahead of the presidential election – with concerns of foreign interference again at the forefront – a conservative political group is raising "serious concerns" about millions of donations reported by a major Democratic fundraising platform.


A preliminary computer analysis by the Take Back Action Fund, obtained exclusively by Fox News, has found that nearly half of all 2019 donations to ActBlue were made by people claiming to be unemployed.

Action Fund President John Pudner questioned the veracity of those donations and called it a loophole that must be closed for the sake of election integrity.

"After downloading hundreds of millions of [dollars in] donations to the Take Back Action Fund servers, we were shocked to see that almost half of the donations to ActBlue in 2019 claimed to be unemployed individuals," he said. "The name of employers must be disclosed when making political donations, but more than 4.7 million donations came from people who claimed they did not have an employer. Those 4.7 million donations totaled $346 million ActBlue raised and sent to liberal causes."

Pudner said the large number is a red flag that some donations may be illicit contributions from foreign interests attempting to impact U.S. elections.

"It is hard to believe that at a time when the U.S. unemployment rate was less than 4 percent, that unemployed people had $346 million dollars to send to ActBlue for liberal causes," Pudner said, adding that "4.7 million donations from people without a job ... raised serious concerns."


More

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/exc...mployed-donors

[TYLERTECHSAS]

I never said that there wouldn't be forest fires, the problem is how bad they are.. and that is due to the lack of forest management.

100% correct imho.


Donald Trump Responds to Western Wildfires: ‘It’s About Forest Management

President Donald Trump spoke about the wildfires savaging Western states on Saturday, urging Democrat states to properly manage their forests.

“You know it is about forest management. Please remember the words, very simple: forest management. Please remember that,” he said at a campaign rally in Minden, Nevada on Saturday night.

“Tonight our hearts are with all of the communities in the West battling devastating wildfires,” Trump said.

The massive wildfires have burned millions of acres of land in California, Oregon, and Washington, as hundreds of thousands of residents have been forced to evacuate.

The president praised the over 28,000 firefighters and first responders fighting the fires.

“They are fighting, and it’s dangerous,” he said.

President Trump has frequently blamed poor forest management for the fires that keep ravaging the West, while the left blames climate change.

“You got to clean your forests … they have many, many years of leaves and broken trees. And they’re like, so flammable. You touch them and it goes up,” Trump said in August at a rally in Pennsylvania. “I’ve been telling them this now for three years, but they don’t want to listen.”

More

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...st-management/

[dawg80]

Yet now you expect California to manage forests on federal lands. You must have slept through your forestry classes.

It is NOT just USFS lands involved. In fact, the recent fires, and the ones last year or two years ago that destroyed that town, started on private land, state land...oh! imagine that, and, most importantly, gathered momentum on lands other than USFS lands. BUT! and this why you are just so effing stupid! And BTW...don't you ever question my knowledge of forestry you sorry piece of shit...I have forgotten more than you will ever know. There is NOT a federal policy against practicing sound forest management on USFS land. They do hazard reduction burns in Kisatchie all the time, and other national forests across the country. Nope! this is just a stupid lefty west coast policy.

[PawDawg]

Under California Penal Code Section 384a a person shall not willfully or negligently cut, destroy, mutilate, or remove plant material that is growing upon state or county highway rights-of-way. In addition, a person shall not willfully or negligently cut, destroy, mutilate, or remove plant material that is growing upon public land or upon land that is not his or hers without a written permit from the owner of the land, signed by the owner of the land or the owner’s authorized agent. In addition, removing or damaging plants from property that a person does not own without permission may constitute trespass and/or petty theft.

[PawDawg]

To biologists, vulnerable plants are canaries in the coal mine of climate change. Limited to certain soils or weather conditions, few in number because they have specialized habitat requirements or have been uprooted by California’s large human population, these rarities will be among the most challenging to preserve over the long run.

[PawDawg]

The complications of climate change

“The concern is with climate change, plants with more restricted ranges have narrower climatic tolerances and therefore may be more prone to habitat loss or local extinctions,” says lead author Erin Riordan. Riordan conducted the research as a postdoctoral scholar at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Some 5,300 plant species are native to California—more than any other state. About a third are considered rare, threatened, or endangered by the California Native Plant Society.
Sensitive plants “make up so much of our biodiversity, that if they’re not doing well, we’ll be losing a lot,” Riordan says.
Riordan used sophisticated climate models to determine whether sensitive plants currently found at NRS reserves are likely to survive there in the future. She came to this work after completing her PhD at UC Los Angeles. For her dissertation, she modeled how climate change will affect the plants of southern California’s coastal sage scrub.

[PawDawg]

Johnson grass and thistle deem protection in California.

[dawg80]

I never said that there wouldn't be forest fires, the problem is how bad they are.. and that is due to the lack of forest management.

Yep! it is so simple too. Practice good forest management and the risks of large fires is greatly reduced. The science is known as silvics and the art is silviculture. In higher risk regions, like the arid west, it is even MORE important to manage fire risk, yet they do the exact opposite.

We have the perfect lab setting to study and compare good forest management vs. no management right here in Louisiana. That sector of the Kisatchie National Forest in Natchitoches Parish which contains the Red Dirt National Wilderness Area, some stupid concept of doing nothing to the forest. About 5 years ago or so a fire started in that sector and the contrasts between the different areas was stark. In the managed areas of the NF, the fire moved slowly, flames never getting above knee-high, and was easily contained by fire crews. But in the Wilderness Area, which was allowed to just remain wild, the fire roared, crowned-out and gathered so much momentum it created a firestorm and the fire jumped onto private property, and it hit some of the managed areas of the NF which had not had its routine hazard reduction controlled burns yet in the rotation cycle and caused some damage, although 90% of the trees survived. The smoke was so bad from the inferno raging in the wilderness area that I-49 had to be closed for period of time.

I have been on the fire line of major "project" fires. One was near Klamath Falls in southern Oregon. Our crew was out there for 10 days, sleeping on the ground between 16-hour shifts on the line. Enjoying MREs supplied by the national guard most of the time, and on occasion being able to rotate back to base camp to get a shower and some real food courtesy of the guard which had a kitchen set up. I was also "fire boss" for a spell on a project fire in Louisiana, Grant Parish, the Black Creek Fire, which started on private property above Iatt Lake and roared through unmanaged forests. We were able to contain it by establishing our defensive lines on company lands, like International Paper's land, and using Black Creek itself as a barrier.

Like everything else in the universe, the forest does just fine when sound, conservative principles are applied, and it suffers mightily when subjected to libtard policies.

[FriscoDog]

Yep! it is so simple too. Practice good forest management and the risks of large fires is greatly reduced. The science is known as silvics and the art is silviculture. In higher risk regions, like the arid west, it is even MORE important to manage fire risk, yet they do the exact opposite.

We have the perfect lab setting to study and compare good forest management vs. no management right here in Louisiana. That sector of the Kisatchie National Forest in Natchitoches Parish which contains the Red Dirt National Wilderness Area, some stupid concept of doing nothing to the forest. About 5 years ago or so a fire started in that sector and the contrasts between the different areas was stark. In the managed areas of the NF, the fire moved slowly, flames never getting above knee-high, and was easily contained by fire crews. But in the Wilderness Area, which was allowed to just remain wild, the fire roared, crowned-out and gathered so much momentum it created a firestorm and the fire jumped onto private property, and it hit some of the managed areas of the NF which had not had its routine hazard reduction controlled burns yet in the rotation cycle and caused some damage, although 90% of the trees survived. The smoke was so bad from the inferno raging in the wilderness area that I-49 had to be closed for period of time.

I have been on the fire line of major "project" fires. One was near Klamath Falls in southern Oregon. Our crew was out there for 10 days, sleeping on the ground between 16-hour shifts on the line. Enjoying MREs supplied by the national guard most of the time, and on occasion being able to rotate back to base camp to get a shower and some real food courtesy of the guard which had a kitchen set up. I was also "fire boss" for a spell on a project fire in Louisiana, Grant Parish, the Black Creek Fire, which started on private property above Iatt Lake and roared through unmanaged forests. We were able to contain it by establishing our defensive lines on company lands, like International Paper's land, and using Black Creek itself as a barrier.

Like everything else in the universe, the forest does just fine when sound, conservative principles are applied, and it suffers mightily when subjected to libtard policies.

Completely agree...

[Guisslapp]

Under California Penal Code Section 384a a person shall not willfully or negligently cut, destroy, mutilate, or remove plant material that is growing upon state or county highway rights-of-way. In addition, a person shall not willfully or negligently cut, destroy, mutilate, or remove plant material that is growing upon public land or upon land that is not his or hers without a written permit from the owner of the land, signed by the owner of the land or the owner’s authorized agent. In addition, removing or damaging plants from property that a person does not own without permission may constitute trespass and/or petty theft.

Doesn’t apply to federal lands. Federal preemption.

[Guisslapp]

It is NOT just USFS lands involved. In fact, the recent fires, and the ones last year or two years ago that destroyed that town, started on private land, state land...oh! imagine that, and, most importantly, gathered momentum on lands other than USFS lands. BUT! and this why you are just so effing stupid! And BTW...don't you ever question my knowledge of forestry you sorry piece of shit...I have forgotten more than you will ever know. There is NOT a federal policy against practicing sound forest management on USFS land. They do hazard reduction burns in Kisatchie all the time, and other national forests across the country. Nope! this is just a stupid lefty west coast policy.

The ones last year started on federal lands (the Camp Fire that was started by PG&E transmission equipment originated near the Poe Dam at the at the Tahoe National Forest). At least one of this years started in the Angeles National Forest.

You should get your facts straight.

If you knew anything about forestry you would know that national forests are not managed by the state. They are managed by the US forest service of the US Department of Agriculture.

No reason to call me names just because you are slipping.

[Guisslapp]

Yep! it is so simple too. Practice good forest management and the risks of large fires is greatly reduced. The science is known as silvics and the art is silviculture. In higher risk regions, like the arid west, it is even MORE important to manage fire risk, yet they do the exact opposite.

We have the perfect lab setting to study and compare good forest management vs. no management right here in Louisiana. That sector of the Kisatchie National Forest in Natchitoches Parish which contains the Red Dirt National Wilderness Area, some stupid concept of doing nothing to the forest. About 5 years ago or so a fire started in that sector and the contrasts between the different areas was stark. In the managed areas of the NF, the fire moved slowly, flames never getting above knee-high, and was easily contained by fire crews. But in the Wilderness Area, which was allowed to just remain wild, the fire roared, crowned-out and gathered so much momentum it created a firestorm and the fire jumped onto private property, and it hit some of the managed areas of the NF which had not had its routine hazard reduction controlled burns yet in the rotation cycle and caused some damage, although 90% of the trees survived. The smoke was so bad from the inferno raging in the wilderness area that I-49 had to be closed for period of time.

I have been on the fire line of major "project" fires. One was near Klamath Falls in southern Oregon. Our crew was out there for 10 days, sleeping on the ground between 16-hour shifts on the line. Enjoying MREs supplied by the national guard most of the time, and on occasion being able to rotate back to base camp to get a shower and some real food courtesy of the guard which had a kitchen set up. I was also "fire boss" for a spell on a project fire in Louisiana, Grant Parish, the Black Creek Fire, which started on private property above Iatt Lake and roared through unmanaged forests. We were able to contain it by establishing our defensive lines on company lands, like International Paper's land, and using Black Creek itself as a barrier.

Like everything else in the universe, the forest does just fine when sound, conservative principles are applied, and it suffers mightily when subjected to libtard policies.

Kisatchie doesn’t have to deal with 35 mph winds that have been dried going over desert.

Apples and oranges.

[dawg80]

The ones last year started on federal lands (the Camp Fire that was started by PG&E transmission equipment originated near the Poe Dam at the at the Tahoe National Forest). At least one of this years started in the Angeles National Forest.

You should get your facts straight.

If you knew anything about forestry you would know that national forests are not managed by the state. They are managed by the US forest service of the US Department of Agriculture.

No reason to call me names just because you are slipping.

Exactly my point, which I clearly said. There is no reason, except....[drum roll please]....for the lefty politicians of the Left Coast. IF...and try to pay attention this time...it was FEDERAL policy on USFS lands to NOT practice sound forest management it would apply to all NFs including Kisatchie. But, that is not true, now is it? FEDERAL POLICY would apply to ALL FEDERAL lands, right? Wouldn't it? That would mean we'd be seeing out-of-control wildfire sweeping across the South...but, we don't, oh, except for Red Dirt as I mentioned because it has the same restrictions as ALL NFs on the Left Coast. So...why do you think we see different policies in the different regions? Hmmm? Anyone? Buehler?

[dawg80]

Kisatchie doesn’t have to deal with 35 mph winds that have been dried going over desert.

Apples and oranges.

BINGO!!!!!!!! which is why I said it is even MORE important to practice preventive forest management, i.e. hazard reduction, in the arid west. It can be done. As...need another drum roll....private companies have demonstrated, even though they have to fight the stupid-azz bureaucracy of California et al out there. Oh, they say, you can't burn off very dangerous debris...you need a permit. Okay, how do we secure a permit? Well, just fill out this 100-page application and mail it in...someone will get back to you. When? When someone gets to it...

When I worked for the USFS in Oregon the difference between the NF and lands owned by private entities, the largest of which where I was was Weyerhaeuser, in south-central Oregon, was stark. Amazing they could conduct HR burns safely, on exactly the same types of lands...mostly Ponderosa and Lodgepole Pine stands, very hilly and just as dry. Also amazing to see...the 35 mph winds didn't know to stop when they reached a property line, just blew right across from USFS to private land, back to USFS, back to private land...silly wind.

[Guisslapp]

Exactly my point, which I clearly said. There is no reason, except....[drum roll please]....for the lefty politicians of the Left Coast. IF...and try to pay attention this time...it was FEDERAL policy on USFS lands to NOT practice sound forest management it would apply to all NFs including Kisatchie. But, that is not true, now is it? FEDERAL POLICY would apply to ALL FEDERAL lands, right? Wouldn't it? That would mean we'd be seeing out-of-control wildfire sweeping across the South...but, we don't, oh, except for Red Dirt as I mentioned because it has the same restrictions as ALL NFs on the Left Coast. So...why do you think we see different policies in the different regions? Hmmm? Anyone? Buehler?

The South doesn’t have deserts. Are you saying California can manage the National Forests in its state? It is the same forest service that manages Kisatche and the ones in California.