Total posts: 5,890
-->
@yachilviveyachali
This seems to be what the American people voted for. Trump won the popular vote.
Yes, many people voted for him. And when we told them Trump was a fascist authoritarian they told us we had Trump derangement syndrome.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
So in just the past week Trump has deployed the US military onto US streetsThat is a generalized statement that fails to comprehend the constitutional powers of the President to deploy both the US Military, a general arm of the Defense Department, and the National Guard, a specific arm of the Defense Department, both potentially under the exclusive control of the U.S. President. First of all, The Posse Comitatus Act generally limits...
I've seen the laws granting the president the power to federalize the national guard and utilize the military on American soil, I find any argument claiming his actions to be legal under these circumstances to be nonsense but I'm far less interested in the legal debate. The fact is that those laws were written for a reason so not only is Trump most certainly in violation of the spirit of the law, he is also violating one of the core ideas of America which is that our government and by extension it's military exists to serve the people. Trump can pretend all day that 105 protesters warrants bringing in 4,000 national guard troops and calling in the US military but to anyone who lives in reality that is utterly ridiculous.
It is irresponsible to accuse the President of arresting Gov. Newsom of CA.
I never accused him of that. I said he endorsed [the idea of] it. Now I did fail to specify that I was talking about the mere idea of it and take responsibility for some of the confusion there but I think that should have been obvious.
No arrest of the Gov has been made to date; you are misidentifying what the President said.
I'm very aware of exactly what he said, and the fact that the political right has said nothing about this but to come to his defense exposes breathtaking hypocrisy.
He said "I think it would be great" and as if that wasn't bad enough, went on to clarity that the reason he thought it would be "great" to arrest the sitting governor is not because he allegedly committed a crime (remember when Trump used to feel like he at least had to pretend?) but because Newsom in his opinion has "done such a bad job".
So let's recap; the president of the United States believes it would be great for his administration to arrest a sitting governor of the opposite party because he believes that governor has done a bad job.
Read that last paragraph as many times as needed to make it stick.
Tell me, since when would you have ever come to the defense of any president who would ever say something like that? Ever?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes, that was literally all he did.And he did it with wings and a halo while the federal agents wore helmets with demon horns.
Yep, the usual mindless childish dodging response I've come to expect. Why do you bother? Is it really that hard to just say "ok I got that one wrong"? I did yesterday. You can too. I believe in you.
You shove a federal officer, it's game over. Period.
He didn't. You know there's video of this incident right?
Created:
-->
@Mall
Why is the Republican gang moving forward in doing things opposed to the Democrats?Well I suppose they wouldn't be a political party without acting in conservative policies which would not agree with colorful rainbow liberals.
Not one thing I mentioned in the op is a liberal vs conservative issue. Every example I gave is a democracy vs anti-democracy issue.
This is the problem with being in a cult; you lose your ability to tell the difference between a mouse and an elephant. Whatever the cult tells you, that's what it is.
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
All great points, and you're right - we both know who and what they really are. The question though is whether they are pretending, obviously it's not one answer for everyone. That's why I'm asking it here, curious to know if any of our resident maga cultists will admit it. If not, they are pretending by definition.
Created:
-->
@AdaptableRatman
If this is America's Fascism then as far as Fascism goes it is a degenerate joke.
My op is in regards to the MAGA movement. I'm referring to their ideology (or probably more accurately started as their lack thereof), not the current state of the US.
You seem to have a deep understanding of the concept of fascism so you understand that it's not a simple black or white, as in it's here or it's not here and that's all we need to know.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
and arrested a sitting US senator for the crime of asking a question at a press conference.Yes, clearly that was the only thing he did.
Yes, that was literally all he did.
At best, and this is generous, you can argue they were right to remove him for disrupting the press conference. You cannot argue they were right to throw him down on the floor and hand cuff him.
So in just the past week Trump has deployed the US military onto US streets...Remember when people were mad that Trump prevented Pelosi from deploying the national guard on Jan 6?Both times he was a fascist dictator. Obviously.
First off all, Nancy Pelosi did not have any say over the deployment of the national guard, so whatever you're talking about is already nonsense.
Second, you're equivocating a mob riot that overtook the United States capitol forcing Congress and the vice president to be evacuated for their lives, a riot that lead to 140 Capitol police sustaining serious injuries and multiple deaths, and where the certification of a presidential election had to be stopped...
to a local protest estimated to have been attended by about 105 people and where estimates were about a dozen or less got violent, where no serious injuries were reported, where no one had to be evacuated for anything and where no government function was haulted.
Is it that you really think such a stupid comparison actually makes sense, or do you just get off on the long rebuke to your bullshit that you know is coming?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Here's something Trump had to say yesterday:
"Our farmers are being hurt badly," Trump said during an event in the White House East Room when asked about his position. "You know, they have very good workers. They've worked for them for 20 years. They're not citizens, but they've turned out to be, you know, great."
Trump said he plans to sign an executive order to address the situation, adding that it will take a "common sense" approach. "We can't take farmers, take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have, maybe not," Trump said."
Looks like he just figured out what everyone has been telling him for years.
I know you're not exactly a Trump fan so I don't say this as an attack on your position, but how can anyone not see that this is the stupidest president we've ever had?
Created:
-->
@Mall
Of course the Republican administration is going to be moving forward with all that is opposed to the democratic gang.
Why? Tell me more about this Democratic gang you probably learned all about on Fox News.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
If you focus on purging criminals you would allow churches and schools around vulnerable populations to be safe havens for them?
Yeah, there it is again - conflating criminals and undocumented immigrants. Bigotry is not an argument.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I follow accounts such as DHS or ICE spokespeople who will detail the violent crimes many of the people they detain, and its just murderer after murderer, rapist after rapist, extortionist after extortionist. In many cases they’re intentionally seeking out criminals but it’s still shocking to see.
I'm sure I don't have to explain to you what anecdotal evidence is and why out is not an acceptable basis for a rational conclusion.
This is the same exact thing BLM does by posting the story of every unarmed black man who is killed by a police officer. Their conclusion is that there is an epidemic in this country of police killing black men, but I suspect you don't share that conclusion despite using the exact same argument.
Everyone who lives in an area with lots of illegal immigrants knows they’re constantly arrested for drunk driving
If that were accurate we wouldn't need to live in an area with lots of illegal immigrants, the arrest records would shows this and this would be wall to wall coverage on Fox news. Yet we don't see that anywhere.
The idea that illegal immigrants are less criminal or better to live around than say legal Asian immigrants or native born white people doesn’t pass the smell test at all.
I'm not about to get into a studies debate, I think we both know that would be pointless. But if we want to just step back and ask ourselves in the abstract which narrative makes more sense, it's absurd to claim illegal immigrants would commit more crimes than US born citizens. If you get arrested for shoplifting or assault, what's your punishment? Probation? A few months or possibly even years in jail? Illegal immigrants face all of that with the added risk of being thrown out of the country they have settled in as their home. Most of which were fleeing poverty and far worse violence and gave up their entire lives to be here. Why would these people en masse risk all of that? It defies common sense.
If you are in a country illegally the last thing you would want to do is draw attention to yourself. Breaking the law is the opposite of that.
That is my belief. They all need to go back regardless of their behavior after choosing to illegally immigrate to our country.
Ok, appreciate the straightforwardness. But why? Why do you put being here illegally on par with anything we would normally think of when we hear the word crime? And why do you think we should be focusing on this issue over the multitude of other problems we have?
My issue is not that I think you're wrong, it's that I can't find any other justification for the focus and drive on this issue other than bigotry. If someone is living here for years, working, paying taxes, and not committing crimes... Why not leave them alone? How is your life getting better by rounding these people up at home depot's and deporting them?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
There is. We have sovereignty. meaning we have border-crosdsiong restrictions, so just by crossing the border improperly is, its;f, a criminal behavior without doing another bloody thing. This president is on favor of correcting criminal behavior because that is his job as chief executive.
So your argument is that we need to remove every illegal alien we can find because they're criminals. And why are they criminals? Because we criminalized the means by which they got here.
Sure, that works logically, it's just utterly meaningless.
Not to mention dishonest. The reason the word criminal carries weight is because of what kind of offenders it typically refers to; bank robbers, assaulters, human traffickers, etc. So when you throw that word around to describe these people you are smuggling in that negative emotional connotation even though it is not at all warranted. If you had a better argument I suspect you would not resort to this.
In the case of illegal entry into the country, you remove them from the cu try to do it correctly, you do not use tax revenue to keep them here.
As a whole, illegal immigrants are a net positive on the economy and Treasury. They pay taxes and yet do not get the benefits that citizens are entitled to. Removing them from the country will cost us, and that's before we consider the actual cost of conducting ice raids all over the country.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
The overwhelming majority of drugs being brought into this country get in through legal ports of entry. If we really cared about solving the problem we would be passing legislation to address that issue, not arresting abuelitas.So because we also need to stop drugs over legal ports of industry we should stop trying to stop them over the border?
Not what I said. Feel free to try again after you actually read what I wrote.
Created:
So in just the past week Trump has deployed the US military onto US streets, endorsed his administration arresting the governor of California, and said anyone who protests his birthday parade will be met with force, publicly pressured a news organization to fire a journalist for saying mean things about Trump, and arrested a sitting US senator for the crime of asking a question at a press conference.
Are we seriously still pretending this isn't everything the left said about Trump during the campaign that you all claimed was just TDS?
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
The overwhelming majority of drugs being brought into this country get in through legal ports of entry. If we really cared about solving the problem we would be passing legislation to address that issue, not arresting abuelitas.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
The administration never made that commitment and why would they? As I understood it, violent criminals will be prioritized first (of which there’s a truly shocking amount, thank you democrats), then people who already have a final order of removal but nobody here illegally is “off the table”
First off, a shocking amount of illegal violent criminals? Do you have any data on that? It's kind of an odd thing to claim given that undocumented immigrants are statistically the most law abiding group in the United States.
Second, I'm not claiming there was some explicit commitment by the US to lay off of non criminal immigrants. I'm pointing to the fact that the Trump campaign made it explicitly clear that the reason why we need to focus so heavily on illegal immigration is because of the violent drug dealers laced all the throughout our society. And if that's what you really care about, and that's what's driving your focus on this, you wouldn't be raiding home depot's.
If you don't care about whether they're criminals and just want them all out that's fine, make that case. Stop pretending that this is about crime and drugs and tell us what you believe with your chest. That's the point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
If there's a point of mine you were attempting to refute please let me know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
And you made this point by citing a recent ruling that allows ICE to enter a school to arrest a criminal so.......
If your focus is on purging criminals you wouldn't be setting yourself up to raid schools and churches. Whether that has happened yet is irrelevant. The whole point of these restrictions is to give all Americans a sense of peace that they can worship and send their kids to school without worrying about them or their children getting caught up in an ice raid. Getting rid of that rule comes at that cost, and you don't pay for something you have no intention of using.
In the early days of this administration there were reports of a school being raided and it caused an uproar. This is a game Trump knows how to play, he knows as long as he keeps ratcheting up the pressure the Overton window will shift and people will lose their outrage. If and when that happens, he will try again. The fact that he got rid of that rules tells us that loud and clear.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
So what is your claim? That Ice being able to enter a school to catch a murderer so he doesn't Dylan Kleibold the place is bad?
Why respond with such a ridiculous hypothetical and suggestion?
You cited a ruling allowing ICE to save lives and clearly insinuated there was about to be raids of Mexican churches or something. Refer to post 1
The central point made in the op is that the Trump administration and it's supporters are dishonest when they pretend all of this immigration theater is about deporting criminals. If that's your goal you don't need to go searching for people to deport at Home Depot. You don't need to reverse rules that say ICE cannot go raid a church or school.
The fundamental selling point of Trump's signature issue is complete nonsense. That's the point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
America still thinks it's a good idea to have millions of babies with no path to real assimilation.
Brown people can fool themselves all day long into thinking they're "real Americans", but it's pure fantasy.
Oh and I'm not a bigot either, how dare you suggest such a thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
Glad to hear the site will continue.
Not sure what you all had in mind with regards to a redesign and rebrand of the site. Just wanted to say that I really like the way this site is designed as well as it's functionality for whatever it's worth. Hoping the changes are not drastic.
Like most of the other ideas.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Teachers are not God, neither is a painter hired for the day.
Never said anything remotely like this.
Do you ever get tired of arguing with your own imagination?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
The only civil infraction is if you overstay a visa. Every other infraction is a crime.
You are correct, it is a criminal violation to cross the border illegally. Got me there.
Still irrelevant to the point of this thread. I think that this often gets confused has a lot to do with the fact that the vast majority of people in this country illegally are not here because they crossed the border but because they overstayed their visa's, and to those who did cross malt of them were minors at the time being brought over with their families. Also a massive block of these individuals being deported came here as migrants seeking asylum, which, whatever you think about that is irrelevant to the fact that that is legal.
This is exactly why we have been telling you for years to stop listening to highly paid experts and think for yourself.
Ok, this is just stupid. And it's always the most unserious and easily manipulable people who insists on saying this to everyone else.
this isn't how you would go about it.This is exactly how you go about it. You follow the law, not your bank statement.
You typed words but said absolutely nothing. What I just said has nothing to do with bank statements.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
So exactly what I said. Going in to arrest a president identified suspect and merely overriding sanctuary laws where formally criminals could be safe from arrest should they refuse to leave the churchNot random or targeted raids like op insinuated
The idea that criminals are hiding in schools and churches is just stupid. The point of removing this limitation has nothing to do with removing barriers to catch criminals, this is about ensuring that all undocumented people in this country live in fear.
The point of this thread is that when the Trump administration and it's defenders claim that their passionate focus on immigration is about getting rid of the criminals they're all full of shit. If that's what you all really cared about this isn't how you would go about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Remember when the experts assured us that crossing the border illegally was not a crime?
It's a civil violation genius, not a criminal violation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
This is all disinformation to be honest.
"US immigration authorities will be able to arrest migrants at schools, churches and hospitals after the Trump administration overturned policies banning immigration enforcement from so-called “sensitive areas”.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) and Customs and Border Protection had been restricted from doing so for more than a decade. The US Department of Homeland Security, which oversees both agencies, said in a statement: “Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest."
do, you should be extremely well behaved as a guest in another person's country
Clearly that doesn't matter to this administration
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
"We're Going After Criminals"Right now the National Guard is being deployed to confront the rioters, so they'll go after at least some criminals. You might not approve of how, but the statement is true.
We're not assessing "We're going after criminals" as a factual statement, is a mission statement which is to say this is what they claimed would be the focus of their operation. The fact that they're going after "some criminals" is irrelevant to the fact that this is yet another example off this administration's dishonesty.
Sure, illegal immigration is a civil violation, so not everyone who enters illegally is a criminal. But this is just stupid. Why wouldn't criminals go to schools, churches, or Home Depot? If police typically avoided those places under previous administrations, that would be the safest place for them to go, right? By your logic, Trump isn't a criminal, because he's been to at least two of those places.
Strawman arguments usually are stupid, that's the point of using them.
No one's claiming criminals don't go to Home Depot. But if you're mission is to find them, this isn't where you camp out. Home Depot is a place where these people go to find work so they can make an honest living. That's the opposite of committing crimes.
Created:
Posted in:
Anyone remember that? I didn't know the place to find them was in schools, churches or at the Home Depot.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Experts dont exist.
Curious, what do you do for a living?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Trump was prosecuted for committing obvious and serious crimes. Why is that concept so difficult for you?Like an accounting error made by his attorney? Did you ever see the legal loop holes they had to jump through to define that as illegal?
I am well aware of the case, it was not an accounting error. The whole point of the trial is to prove that Trump was in fact guilty of the crime alleged, and they did.
The thread is here. Feel free to chime in if you actually care about something beyond surface level talking points.
It starts there with post 245 when Thett chimed in, IMHO he was the best challenger I dealt with in that thread.
But all that aside, let's not forget what we're actually talking about. I would be perfectly fine reviving that thread because people like you are just plain wrong there and I'll prove that ten times over. But the claim here is that the Biden administration weaponized the justice department. This is not the Biden DOJ, this is a state prosector prosecuting a state crime, which is totally irrelevant to that.
Or because somebody thinks he inflated the value of Mar-A-Largo and believes it's only worth 500k in real life or something?
He did, that's a fact. Investors are given a certain amount of leeway on determinations of value, this went way beyond that. Taking a 5 mile drive and calling it ten is understandable. Calling it a 75 mile drive, when you drive for a living, is just lying.
And again btw... State charges filled by state officials. Still nothing to do with the DOJ.
Not only are these not real crimes but we don't even go after presidents when they do commit real crimes like when Bill Clinton raped multiple women. There's no mug shot of Bill Clinton.
Trump has 26 accusers. Still no mug shot for that either.
You know damn well he wouldn't be prosecuted if he never ran for president
Well first of all, the one crime he was convicted for was about influencing his own election, the rest of his criminal charges are all directly related to his actions as president. So saying he would have never gotten convicted had he not run is tautology, aka meaningless.
But with regards to the rest, yeah you're probably right. As I have pointed out to you before and gotten nothing but crickets back, some people do commit crimes and get away with it. But when you run for president, people pay attention to what you've done with your life. Kind of hard for a prosector to look the other way when your crimes are detailed on the front page of the NY Times.
That's common sense, no conspiracy theory needed.
When you see a black man getting arrested, does that qualify to you as evidence to you if racism?Let's say we basically have a policy where we are not arresting black men and then one black men becomes very unpopular with the liberal elite and he randomly gets arrested for...
First off all, you ignored the question. Is a black man getting arrested evidence of racism? Yes or No?
Second, there is no policy that says we're not arresting black men (president's). There is apprehension about it because that's basic human nature, but that doesn't mean we let them do whatever they want.
Third, it wasn't random. Like I said before, the best criminal charge you can argue against is the one where his attorney did three years in jail for a crime he committed "in coordination with and at the direction of" Donald Trump. You cannot seriously tell me you think it's ok for someone to go to jail for committing a crime but not the guy who told him to do it and worked with him to carry it out, all because that guy is a former president.
Do you not see what is happening in Romania
Not really. I don't pay that close attention to international affairs, I've learned that with people like you it's rarely if ever what you say it is, and most importantly whatever left wing politicians in other countries are doing has no relevance to the fact that Trump is weaponizing the DOJ while Joe Biden did not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
you already agreed most of America is smarter than you for never wasting a minute thinking about Trump during an average day.
Show me where I agreed to this. I'll wait.
Saying “the entire nation is dumber" because of one guy is pure emotional hyperbolic overreach, and ironically, it proves to everyone a lack of critical thinking [...]Trust me bro, there are plenty of people smarter than you and they got even smarter after Trump got elected.
I'm not assessing "the entire nation" as a statement of every individual American genius. It's a broad overview that focuses on our national dialog, that should have been obvious because it's common sense.
Before Trump we were debating what the top marginal tax rate should be or how far the government should go to ensure its citizens have healthcare. Now we're debating what tariff is or whether we should be listening to experts. That's what devolution into stupidity looks like.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
The Biden administration did not weaponize the justice system. The Trump administration did.This is where I have to stop you. Trump was the one prosecuted something unheard of for future presidents
Trump was prosecuted for committing obvious and serious crimes. Why is that concept so difficult for you?
When you see a black man getting arrested, does that qualify to you as evidence to you if racism?
Created:
Posted in:
Trump just had to send in the national guard to suppress an insurrection in LA.
You can't be this stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Fun fact, the vast majority of Americans never think about Trump the entire day. That makes them loads smarter than the people who do.
The test has absolutely nothing to do with how often you think about Trump. It's about whether you practice basic critical thinking and can recognize when someone is so obviously bullshitting you. MAGA only exists because of the shockingly large number of Americans who fail this test.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Why do you struggle with the simple concept of "just don't be evil"?
I don't. It is you who struggles with recognizing when you are being sold propaganda.
The Biden administration did not weaponize the justice system. The Trump administration did. The latter is the only example of evil in this conversation, and yet you pathetically excuse it. It is you who needs to align yourself with your own stated value.
If you care about not weaponizing the justice department then your response to someone doing just that would, now that you're back in power, be to figure out how to ensure it never happens again,Umm no, because once they get back in power they will be evil again. You can't make a perfect system so people have to know that if they do evil they will be punished to discourage evil things.
So democrats are evil, and the way to get them to stop being evil is to be even more evil to them. Because that's how evil works.
You can't be serious.
This is such an obvious cop out. You don't care about the weaponization of the justice system. You are only bothered that (in your propagandisticly implanted reality) someone did it to your side first.
If you really cared about this, you would advocate for those who weaponized it to be held to account for the crimes they committed during said weaponization. You wouldn't be ok with Trump ordering investigations into things that have nothing to do with that, like signing an EO to investigate Miles Taylor or Chris Krebs, who weren't even part of the DOJ. Or ordering investigations into Biden's use of autopen. These are nothing more than examples vindictive payback that has nothing to do with the stated precedent you claim the prior administration set. In other words, it's a pretext (aka fake excuse) for Trump to do what he always wanted to do and you are latching onto it as an excuse to support him in it.
There is a reason the fraud/crime exception in attorney-client privilege exists.Yes the reason it exists is so the government can twist the definition of these things and do whatever the fuck they want so long as it's what lib tards want
Wow, tell me you have absolutely no interest in understanding the topic you so passionately argue about without telling me.
It exists to ensure there is no loophole in the law that would effectively allow attorneys from using their law licence as a sheild from being prosecuted if they commit crimes.
If John robs a bank, then gets caught and arrested, he has a right to a lawyer to help him fight the charges.
If John decides to rob a bank, then sits down with his lawyer so he can get advice on the best way to rob the bank without getting charged, his lawyer is now an accessory to grand larceny.
This is common sense dude.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Pick a stance dude, lol. The public is tired of the "if we do it, it's good, when they do the same thing it is evil"
I have picked a stance, it's called logic.
If you commit crimes, that's bad. If you weaponize the justice system, that's bad.
There are also degrees of bad, so the scale at which one should be condemned is equal to the scale of their wrongdoings.
Donald Trump has committed serious crimes and is blatantly weaponizing the justice system. That deserves serious condemnation.
There is no equivalent example on the political left. If there were, it would be equally bad.
You are right that the standard of "if we do it, it's good, when they do the same thing it is evil" is deplorable. The problem is that this is overwhelmingly being practiced on the political right, because broadly speaking, you are all too stupid or too dishonest to recognize that just because someone claims to be the victim, that doesn't mean they are. A former president getting arrested is not evidence of weaponization. To make that assessment you would have to understand the case against him, you guys seem incapable or totally disinterested in that.
This is the single biggest reason why I so fervently despise Trump - because he quite literally makes the entire nation dumber. We used to be able to see right through this nonsense, now half the country really thinks this is how it works. That's what being in a cult looks like, not this stupid "I know you are not what am I?" Thing you have going on here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@LucyStarfire
Occam's Razor is retarded theory. I dont see why people take as true something which is so retarded.
Occam's razor is one of the most basic tests of whether someone is applying logic and critical thinking. What are you talking about, do you even know what it is?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Even if you think Trump’s 2020 legal efforts were bad or baseless, criminalizing the legal strategies of his defense team set a dangerous and evil precedent.
There is a reason the fraud/crime exception in attorney-client privilege exists.
If this became the new standard, every losing political campaign would end with prison time for lawyers.
Slippery slope nonsense. The standard is that you don't get to pretend you're practicing law when what you're really doing is conspiring to try and steal an election.
Disgraced and disbarred evil Fani Willis literally brought RICO charges against Trump lawyers.
Because they committed crimes against the state of Georgia. That's how the justice system works.
Your comment reminds me of the arguments that constantly come out of MAGA world. You guys really don't seem to care about any of the details, you just think because charges were brought, that in and of itself proves wrongdoing on the part of the prosecutors which is amazingly stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Tell me your thoughts about the President of the United States signing executive orders telling the DOJ to investigate his political opponents.Once the left opens that up you are allowed one term for revenge to let them know it is never okay to cross that line before returning to normal.
This is where you show your true colors by demonstrating that you do not care at all about the very thing you are pretending to be passionately against.
If you care about not weaponizing the justice department then your response to someone doing just that would, now that you're back in power, be to figure out how to ensure it never happens again, not to use it as an excuse to weaponize it yourself and then pretend that your escalation of it's weaponization will somehow scare the other side into never doing it again.
This isn't a serious argument.
It's also complete and total nonsense because it's based on a made up premise, which also shows that you really don't care about this. The democrats did not weaponize the justice department. Again, this is nothing more than a convenient excuse to do what you guys always wanted to do.
Are politicians subject to American laws? Yes or No?We have to give them an extremely long rope because if there is even a one in a million chance that it's politically motivated to prosecute them than your actions are evil.
That's not how it has ever worked. Politicians get indicted and convicted all the time and for much less than what Trump did, and no one has ever had a problem with it. The only thing that's different now is that we have a man baby in the White House who plays the victim card louder and better than any other politician we've ever seen and has cultivated a cult like base whose common trait is a disdain for critical thinking.
The idea that politicians should be given "an extremely long rope" is totally anithetical to the concept of the rule of law and our entire reason for being; that we don't have kings here. Our political leaders are supposed to be setting the example, not abusing the system because they can get away with it. The latter goes against the very concept of the great America you guys all say you want.
And even if I accepted your long rope ethos, Trump was already given that. The man incited a mob to attack the US Capitol. There isn't enough rope on earth to let that one slide, and the thing if it is if he had in real time realized what he did and taken real steps to make it right we could have chucked it all up to "well, he fucked up but he learned his lesson" and moved on. What did he do instead? He sat there in the oval office dining room for 3 hours watching the attack on TV and wondering why no one else around him was as gitty as he was. Any argument you have that Trump didn't intend what would eventually happen goes out the window at that point.
Then there's the Mara-Lago documents case where the national archives and FBI had to ask for months to pretty please please give them back before they finally had to get a judge to sign off on a search warrant. That's absurd.
The only case you have at least a halfway sort of decent case on is the NY case (which is not the justice department). Which means your best example of Trump being unjustly attacked by the justice system is a case where Trump's own lawyer went to jail for 3 years for something he did "in coordination with and at the direction of" Donald Trump but you're saying it's lawfare when Trump is held to account for that same exact action. Great case.
My philosophy is don't be evil
Then stop defending it
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
you do understand the cooling effect of the government right?
Yes, and I'm really glad you do so I don't need to explain it to you. Keep that in mind...
punishing law firms for defending clients the president doesn't like, locking up students for writing op eds the president finds unfavorable, andHaven't heard about this
Then you live in a bubble and it's no wonder you think the real threats to American freedom is on the left as opposed to the current administration.
So tell me more about that government cooling effect.
Giving funding for special views is unethical but pulling funding is not.
Nonsense. This is one of the most basic concepts in law and is frankly common sense; the reason why you do something matters more than what you actually did. If you pull funding because you decided to make budget cuts to balance the budget, that's perfectly fine. If you pull funding because you don't want black people being admitted, that's overt racism and a blatant violation of civil liberties.
You don't get to pretend these actions are being taken in isolation. They're all part of a very clear and established pattern and Trump is barely trying to hide it. To not see it is a choice.
News organizations should be completely unbiased and give the news in a dispassionate non partisan way. That is if they are being put on public airwaves.
First of all, there is no such thing as an unbiased human being, so you're purported expectation is already outside the realm of planet earth.
Second, of any news network is objectively biased, that would be the network that had to pay. Almost a billion dollar defamation settlement for systemic lying about a presidential election.
Third and more importantly, are you really arguing that it is up to the government to decide which news networks are "unbiased" enough to be handed the privilege of the public airwaves?
It is never ever okay to try and arrest a president or a senator etc.
Are politicians subject to American laws? Yes or No?
And yes we know of times where Bill Clinton actually did rape women and the right had control of the Senate and they did the right thing. They let him get away with it.
They literally impeached him for lying about ablow job.
You shouldn't even have the appearance of being politically motivated.
Tell me your thoughts about the President of the United States signing executive orders telling the DOJ to investigate his political opponents.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Censoring things like songs and tv shows that included terrorists wasn't the government telling the people what they were allowed to watch or hear, that was the result of people deciding for themselves what they wanted to watch and hear.Nope it was top down from the stations no polling had time to be done.
Stations are not the government.
And you're right, no polling had to be done because it was common sense. At that time we all felt the same way, and because we all had the freedom to feel that way and the freedom to ensure we all pushed for what we wanted, the stations took that into account and used their freedom to meet the needs of it's listeners and viewers. That's called freedom.
It was a cooling effect of George Bush seeming like he would enact authoritarian policies and the left later stole his playbook much to the dismay of those of us who voted for Obama hoping for an extreme and radical change
If you're talking about the Patriot act and all that yes, there was certainly government encroachment and it is already becoming clear that history will not look kindly on it. But that is a far cry from anything you or the political right are talking about today when you all talk about encroachment into our freedoms.
And since you care so much about stopping government encroachment into our freedoms, I'm wondering what you think about the current administration using the power and apparatus of the state to tell colleges who they can admit and what they are allowed to teach, punishing law firms for defending clients the president doesn't like, locking up students for writing op eds the president finds unfavorable, and using the FTC to go after news outlets that criticize him.
Kind of odd that you really seem to care about the cup of water spilled in the living room and not the flood in the kitchen.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Yeah in a way Trumps shamelessness and the cult of personality is a political benefit.
I would say for him it is the political benefit and sole reason he remains viable. Sam Harris put it best when he said "if Trump were half as bad, he would have seemed worse. Cause at least then it would be recognizable".
Trump is such a cartoonishly absurd figure that people just brush off anything he does as Trump being Trump. The other day he reposted a conspiracy theory that Biden died in 2020 and was replaced by a clone. If Biden had ever done anything so ridiculous we would have all been screaming 25th amendment. But with Trump it's just Tuesday.
This works the other way also. You mentioned tariffs, everyone can see how self destructive they are. But with Trump because he's a cartoon, therefore so are his policies, so even educated and intelligent people will defend them saying they trust Trump. Why? We all know what a tariff is. We all know how they work and what they will do. But Trump is a cartoon, and in the cartoon world the rules of physics don't apply so somehow, someway, this will all work out. Just believe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
My fellow Americans,It is with great pleasure that I announce Pride Month has been officially cancelled.
Woo hoo. I can't wait to see how my life will get better now that the government has stopped acknowledging the historical struggles of gay people. This is exactly what I voted for my government to be focused on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
and what felt like attacks on free speech with radio stations and what not refusing to play songs with words like bomb, tv shows being pulled that had terrorists in them etc.In recent years it has been the left making all the attacks on freedom so the right won over those voters.
Censoring things like songs and tv shows that included terrorists wasn't the government telling the people what they were allowed to watch or hear, that was the result of people deciding for themselves what they wanted to watch and hear.
It never ceases to amaze me how self contradictory right wing views of freedom are. You all seem to think you have a right to a platform, the right to force your views down everyone else's throats. You don't. You get to say whatever you want, and I get to criticize it. And if enough people agree with me than you won't have an audience, and if enough of us use our freedom to boycott whoever is providing your platform that person or entity has the right to stop providing it to you. That's how freedom works.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
This is becoming increasingly common, with ex-leftists joining and identifying as right-wing. Destiny claims it is because the right plays the game politically while the left doesn’t.
I agree with him for the most part. The purity testing on the left is worse than on the right, but a big part of that is because today's political right isn't about ideas, it's a cult of personality. Make no mistake about it, if you offend the dear leader you no longer belong.
I definitely think all these claims of America swerving to the right are deeply over exaggerated. The popular vote in this election is the closest margin since 2000 and you'd have to go back to 1964 to find the next closest. We're too deeply divided to see the kind of movement the Trump base would have us believe. Plus, politics is a pendulum so the significance of any movement is likely to be overblown. What people want is change, so until politicians take our ever growing wealth gap seriously the party in power will always be to blame for people's ills. Watch how it'll swing back in 2026.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@yachilviveyachali
Trump may tell lies and have the wrong policies to you, but this has nothing to do with his fitness.
That depends on what you are using to gauge fitness. What I use, and what the entire nation used to use for over 200 years as tests were things like basic human decency, a connection to reality, a rudimentary level of knowledge of world and national affairs, etc. Trump has none of this, he is in my estimation the most unfit individual we've ever seriously considered for this job.
All politicians lie. Why are Biden's lies any better than Trump's lies? A lie is a lie.
The difference is the scale at which they lie, which is the about the same difference inn size as a mouse is to an elephant.
With Trump his lying is in a level that is unlike anything we've ever seen in public life. The man will lie about things so pretty and insignificant like how many stories his building has or whether it rained at his inauguration, to whether his administration has a healthcare plan to soon be released or whether he won a presidential election. What separates Trump from anyone else is that with Trump reality just doesn't matter at all. He will just say whatever he needs to say to get whatever he wants, full stop. And he thinks anyone who isn't willing to stoop to that level is a sucker.
At least with Biden or anyone else they recognize the importance of a shared reality, so when they tell lies they expose themselves to getting caught. With Trump getting caught is irrelevant because it's not about truth or intellectual honesty, it's about power.
This is a really good video on the subject. It's old but still as relevant as ever.
I think it is unfair to call Trump voters “uneducated.” No one wants to be disparaged, ridiculed, and talked down to by elitist figures and those who seem to revere the elitist figures. It is old; try something new.
Broadly speaking, Trump voters are uneducated, that's just a fact. The statistical correlation is predictable, the less educated one is the more likely they are to be a trump voter.
But where Trump voters lack the most is in basic critical thinking. That's why his tactics tend to work with them. For example notice how everytime he gets a tough question he just attacks the reporter. People who care about reality and understand critical thinking recognize that to be a cop out. Trump voters love it cause they think he's owning the libs. It's just pathetic.
If you don't want to be disparaged, stop supporting nonsense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@yachilviveyachali
The problem with that is that this is an obvious and blatant lie on an official report about something objective and easily measurable. Do I really need to explain to you why that matters?Yes, please explain?
That was a rhetorical question. Sorry, if you really need this explained you are beyond help.
With regard to his presentation, he seemed confused and did not appear to be very sharp. He was pressured to exit the presidential race, and did so reluctantly. Neither of these things would have occurred if he had been capable of a second term. Does this not speak for itself? Donald Trump is in better shape. It does not mean he is wonderful, but that he is fitter than Biden.
It doesn't show that Trump is fitter than Biden, it shows the egregious and indefensible double standard being applied to these two men.
I agree Biden's cognitive state is an issue, it would matter in any other election. But the guy he was running against is orders of magnitude worse, however he gets a pass because somehow he's been branded as some kind of genius playing 4D chess when in reality he's just an imbecile who fools people with his unwavering confidence, confidence he's only able to display because he's insanely dishonest so he isn't ashamed to get caught in a lie.
A perfect example of how this plays out is in what you just pointed out, Biden seems confused. Yeah, that's what happens when one realizes there's something off about what they just said or when realizing there's something they don't understand. Trump doesn't ever show that because he isn't capable of it. If Trump says something and it makes no sense, he just doubles down on it and now we're all stuck with it. He said other countries pay tariffs. They don't, but now that he said it, it's true and anyone who questions him about it is a fake news deep state plant.
So no, it's not that Biden was worse, it's that Biden isn't a con man who made his way by taking advantage of gullible and uneducated people. Biden played by the rules of decency imposed on every other politician, Trump just threw those rules out the window. Shame on all of us for being dumb enough to not know the difference.
According to you, professionalism is supposed to be serious. I guess it is, but that does not mean every professional is good or serious.
You're having a whole conversation with yourself.
I haven't argued anything close to this. I argued that the traits associated with professionalism are good. That's it, that's all. You have completely sidestepped that point by focusing on cherry picked individuals who you then tried to falsely tie to professionalism by saying they're professionals, all to conclude that because some professionals are bad professionalism doesn't matter. That is wrong on so many levels.
So when you criticize professionalism what you're really doing is arguing that taking ones work seriously is not something we should value when it comes to the people doing the most important work in the country.They take money and power seriously.
Let me know when you'd care to have a real conversation instead of these silly and irrelevant one liners.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@yachilviveyachali
What have they lied about? What is Trump's weight? They say it is 224 pounds. What's the problem?
The problem with that is that this is an obvious and blatant lie on an official report about something objective and easily measurable. Do I really need to explain to you why that matters?
Personality characteristics have subjective appeal, and every person working with a politician, unless they are seeking to stab him in the back, is going to say they are great.
Then there is no scandal with Joe Biden. Guess we can end the thread now.
The principals of professionalism are what apply to professionals, who practice their professions, in a sometimes unprofessional manner. Your “I'm talking about professionalism, not professionals” is akin to saying you are talking about gardening, but not the gardeners who do the gardening.
Just. Wow.
A professional is anyone who does something for a living. So if you are criticizing "professionals" you are talking about literally every human being that has ever had a job, at that point everything you are criticizing becomes utterly meaningles in any practical sense.
The topic of professionalism has absolutely nothing to do with any subset of individuals you want to cherry pick just so you can attack them as a way of ignoring the actual topic.
If professionalism could be boiled down to one word I would say the best word which embodies it is seriousness. What does professionalism look like in a corporate meeting? It looks like a bunch of adults taking the problems identified and potential solutions offered seriously. What does it not look like? A bunch of overgrown children talking about how many drinks they had at the bar last night.
So when you criticize professionalism what you're really doing is arguing that taking ones work seriously is not something we should value when it comes to the people doing the most important work in the country. That's absurd.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@yachilviveyachali
What is his doctor to say if he is not in bad shape? The MAGAS are going to say Trump is fit if he appears to be fit. Perhaps, if he were showing signs of not being fit, they would question the doctor's assessment of Trump being in “excellent health.”They can use their eyes to see what state he is in. We did the same with Biden.
This again, has nothing to do with my point.
I used Trump's listed weight as an example of how brazen liars he and his inner circle are. That's it. That's all.
The scandal getting all the attention right now is that Biden's people lied about his abilities. Trump's people are provably worse. Conclusion: if you cannot admit that Trump and his people are worse you have no ground to stand on.
I have seen and heard about too many professionals who disappoint. Some are atrocious. The traits matter, but being a so-called professional doesn't mean you have them. The humanity tends to be knocked out of these people. Open a newspaper and read about the professionals who get themselves into trouble. It is not uncommon. Sin follows us all, and what really makes one become a professional is ambition. You don't need integrity and a good heart to hold these positions.
Again, has nothing to do with the subject. I'm talking about professionalism, not professionals. Do you understand the difference and how that difference relates to this conversation?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@yachilviveyachali
Everyone is a hypocrite in matters of politics.
This is a lazy attempt to hand waive away a legitimate criticism. A guy who stole a candy bar and a guy who robs banks are both thieves, that doesn't make them the same.
What about his state? Being fat does not make a man incapable. They aren't sending him to lead men in battle.
Second post in a row that you've done this, I just finished explaining to you that obesity had absolutely nothing to do with my previous point. Please scroll up, reread my post and try again.
I don't think we care about professionalism anymore. We have come to understand that professionals have problems too, and that they sometimes do horrible things. Do you not remember covid?
Again - what are you talking about?
A professional is a person who gets paid to do whatever it is they are credited the term for. Professionalism is a set of behavioral traits that mirror what we expect from someone in that position - integrity, knowledge, maturity, etc. If you are claiming you do not care about professionalism then you are saying you don't care about any of those traits.
Is that what you are saying, and if so, please explain why you don't think any of that stuff matters.
Created: