oromagi

 You're still here aren't you. 

- You don't believe democrats & republicans are becoming more polarized?

- Reality says otherwise. Regardless, tell me honestly then, would you be OK with a DeSantis-Trump ideal 'Murica?

How far will you go to prevent a US with no hate speech laws, no gay marriage, no affirmative action, no immigration, no abortion, no unemployment benefits...etc? 

'Kick ass' implies violence;

It's funny how you call this "diverse" when you're not even willing to consider a legally pluralist nation. 

Would you rather have a legally egalitarian nation even it means violence & force to have your point of view imposed

The child porn comment is unacceptable. I was banned from the site because I requested help to identify a potential pedophile to the police. 

Joint Decision

After reviewing their history, the moderation team has decided that Singularity, AKA Wylted, [AKA Incel-Chud, AKA Victoria, AKA wyited] will be indefinitely banned from the site.  This is an unusual course of action for the moderation team to take. A few key points that went in to our decision includes: 

1. Repeatedly glorifying rape and sexual assault;
   
2. Repeatedly glorifying hate groups
   
3. Repeatedly glorifying sexual abuse towards minors, and most disturbingly, 
   
4. Portraying himself as a 13-year-old-girl towards a 14-year-old boy; and 
   
5. Multi-accounting to circumvent his ban. 
   

Let me make this clear: The moderation team will not tolerate any glorification of Nazis, rape, pedophilia, and sexual assault. 

Bro I used to read

• As you know, I only debate 1500+ 
  
• besides my time is pretty cranked these day
  

- Every time I come back to this Forum the schism Republicans/Democrats gets more polarized, 

• Infantilized is the word I think you are looking for.  Most of the regulars are gone and the average age on this site has dropped twenty years over the past 12 months.
  

The States are increasingly becoming different countries & history is repeating itself. –

• False.  Conservatives are always saying this and decade after decade it is increasingly less true.  Texas is more like California today than any point in Texas' history.
  

If push comes to shove, would you, as a Republican or Democrat, prefer a civil war where winner takes all or a one country two-systems solution? Would you want a legally pluralist US where each municipality or state (or confederate of states) has its own constitution & legal system?

• Nonsense question.  History has already taught that the modern, diverse, industrialized, scientific, democratic majority of the nation will always prefer union and will always kick the ass of the low information, low energy, violent rump.
  

I think it's fair to take people on their word and liberal hiveminds include reddit, Twitter and TikTok.

It is how I do my research to see what liberals believe.

To find out what conservatives believe I usually read economics text books, listen to philosophy lectures and consult with conservative think tanks. 

I don't watch Tucker Carlson, though I respect him for telling the truth.

That is not what I am seeing on Twitter or TikTok.

This is your typical liberal.

-->@Greyparrot

Honestly, I thought the discussion was about to turn full speed in the direction of lizards when I read that.

He lied about his experience working for big banks and being gay? That’s incredibly based

• Let's notice how Republicans simply ignore the whole "stealing from sick people while your mother nurses them and running from the law" thing.
  
• Fucking over the weak and despising the law are two primary qualification for running for Republican office these days, apparently.

That can't be true.

Liberals are even cancelling Bill Maher now 

Nobody is allowed to question anything outside of the official ideology in that regards with liberals.

You see the same thing with the attacks on Jordan Peterson who is quite obviously a liberal. 

Would you as a Democrat running against that guy, do at least one attack and attacking his heterosexuality or any of that other stuff you brought up? 

• I would certainly research my opponent and question whether his address disqualifies him.  I would also certainly point out to voters the disadvantages of electing a fugitive from Brazilian law.  The Nazi associations would make good debate fodder in a very Jewish/immigrant district.
  
• Ultimately, however, the fault is the corrupt, adrift, conflicted Republican Party.  Lying like a Republican requires an increasing surrender to mental illness, an increasing uncertainty about reality. Normal Republican ideology is such doublethink that attracting and encouraging compulsive lying should be an anticipated hazard that the GOP must monitor for.   Further, the GOP has far less tolerance for independent thought or action.  Since the main quality the GOP seeks in a candidate is useful idiocy, the GOP is more responsible for making sure their idiots  roughly commit to legal conduct and pro-American ideology.
  

You can blame the voters or the party,, but how was this not brought up by other people trying to win that seat? 

I can see how you may have misconstrued what I said. But I was not claiming that the current indictments are 2020 related.

I was saying that, regardless of how someone feels about 2020, this year, multiple people have been indicted on fraud. This, if anything, proves the point that our elections are not the most secure in the world... which was my point lol.

There's plenty who also work for Democrats,

They weren't pro-trump PACs. They were wire fraud operations:

That isn't pro-trump. That is a conman making money by defrauding people.

My point is that our elections are far from secure.

They decided to indict a whole slew of people for election fraud RIGHT AFTER AN ELECTION and right when Trump began campaigning for President for 2024.

This will both embolden his base who believe there was fraud in the 2020 election and get more independents to be on board.  Like it or not, many people did believe Trump was fighting the swamp.

If you think election fraud happens on only one side, you are as naive as you claim I supposedly am.

I don't know when I said they were all for the 2020 election, lol.

Pro-Trump robocallers convicted of keeping money raised for 2 PACs in 2016 election

False... The DOJ states:

He was pro nobody. He just stole people's money. Which goes to prove the point that there is fraud out there.

You really need to get your facts straight, man.

-->@oromagi

You don't understand what the metaphorical phrase "catches wind" means. There are no indictments at present but Trump has definitely caught wind of these unprecedented Congressional findings of fact.

All that to say, I don't see Biden winning in 2024 unless it is fraudulent like in 2020. I know we both don't see eye to eye on that, but, at least this year, at least 3 election officials have been indicted by the DOJ. The press has been silent about it, but the DOJ has not.

The point is, fraudulent actions have been found, and the fraud is not all just random assholes but people in positions of influence, like police chiefs, current state senators, and others. 

The point is there is more than enough here to go on to argue that there isn't enough security in our elections process, meaning bad actors abound and governments launder money to certain candidates, that Trump could EASILY argue he will reform it.

-->@oromagi

No ex-president has ever been charged with a crime.

False. Trump's company has already been convicted of tax fraud:

https://news.yahoo.com/new-york-jury-finds-trump-org-guilty-on-17-counts-of-tax-fraud-215144622.html

-->@oromagi

All that to say, I don't see Biden winning in 2024 unless it is fraudulent like in 2020. I know we both don't see eye to eye on that, but, at least this year, at least 3 election officials have been indicted by the DOJ. The press has been silent about it, but the DOJ has not.

If Trump catches wind of the indictments, it will be VERY easy for him to run on a "secure the elections and remove corruption" platform without much difficulty,

since he spent 4 years waging war on Washington, the people will be extremely likely to believe he'll do that again. I'm just saying, Trump has a much better shot than people think he does.

• Waging war on Americans is never popular with Americans.  Your political acumen and historical literacy are overdue for a rational deprogramming.
  

If it was as you said, the DOJ would have indicted him already. Seeing as they haven't and they have not said Trump is involved as of yet, I don't see how the J6 committee had anything the FBI and DOJ did not.

1. Beginning election night and continuing through January 6th and thereafter, Donald Trump purposely disseminated false allegations of fraud related to the 2020 Presidential election in order to aid his effort to overturn the election and for purposes of soliciting contributions. These false claims provoked his supporters to violence on January 6th.
   
2. Knowing that he and his supporters had lost dozens of election lawsuits, and despite his own senior advisors refuting his election fraud claims and urging him to concede his election loss, Donald Trump refused to accept the lawful result of the 2020 election. Rather than honor his constitutional obligation to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” President Trump instead plotted to overturn the election outcome.
   
3. Despite knowing that such an action would be illegal, and that no State had or would submit an altered electoral slate, Donald Trump corruptly pressured Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to count electoral votes during Congress’s joint session on January 6th.
   
4. Donald Trump sought to corrupt the U.S. Department of Justice by attempting to enlist Department officials to make purposely false statements and thereby aid his effort to overturn the Presidential election. After that effort failed, Donald Trump offered the position of Acting Attorney General to Jeff Clark knowing that Clark intended to disseminate false information aimed at overturning the election.
   
5. Without any evidentiary basis and contrary to State and Federal law, Donald Trump unlawfully pressured State officials and legislators to change the results of the election in their States.
   
6. Donald Trump oversaw an effort to obtain and transmit false electoral certificates to Congress and the National Archives.
   
7. Donald Trump pressured Members of Congress to object to valid slates of electors from several States.
   
8. Donald Trump purposely verified false information filed in Federal court.
   
9. Based on false allegations that the election was stolen, Donald Trump summoned tens of thousands of supporters to Washington for January 6th. Although these supporters were angry and some were armed, Donald Trump instructed them to march to the Capitol on January 6th to “take back” their country.
   
10. Knowing that a violent attack on the Capitol was underway and knowing that his words would incite further violence, Donald Trump purposely sent a social media message publicly condemning Vice President Pence at 2:24 p.m. on January 6th.
    
11. Knowing that violence was underway at the Capitol, and despite his duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed, Donald Trump refused repeated requests over a multiple hour period that he instruct his violent supporters to disperse and leave the Capitol, and instead watched the violent attack unfold on television. This failure to act perpetuated the violence at the Capitol and obstructed Congress’s proceeding to count electoral votes.
    
12. Each of these actions by Donald Trump was taken in support of a multi-part conspiracy to overturn the lawful results of the 2020 Presidential election.
    
13. The intelligence community and law enforcement agencies did successfully detect the planning for potential violence on January 6th, including planning specifically by the Proud Boys and Oath Keeper militia groups who ultimately led the attack on the Capitol. As January 6th approached, the intelligence specifically identified the potential for violence at the U.S. Capitol. This intelligence was shared within the executive branch, including with the Secret Service and the President’s National Security Council.
    
14. Intelligence gathered in advance of January 6th did not support a conclusion that Antifa or other left-wing groups would likely engage in a violent counter- demonstration, or attack Trump supporters on January 6th. Indeed, intelligence from January 5th indicated that some left-wing groups were instructing their members to “stay at home” and not attend on January 6th.   Ultimately, none of these groups was involved to any material extent with the attack on the Capitol on January 6th.
    
15. Neither the intelligence community nor law enforcement obtained intelligence in advance of January 6th on the full extent of the ongoing planning by President Trump, John Eastman, Rudolph Giuliani and their associates to overturn the certified election results. Such agencies apparently did not (and potentially could not) anticipate the provocation President Trump would offer the crowd in his Ellipse speech, that President Trump would “spontaneously” instruct the crowd to march to the Capitol, that President Trump would exacerbate the violent riot by sending his 2:24 p.m. tweet condemning Vice President Pence, or the full scale of the violence and lawlessness that would ensue. Nor did law enforcement anticipate that President Trump would refuse to direct his supporters to leave the Capitol once violence began. No intelligence community advance analysis predicted exactly how President Trump would behave; no such analysis recognized the full scale and extent of the threat to the Capitol on January 6th.
    
16. Hundreds of Capitol and DC Metropolitan police officers performed their duties bravely on January 6th, and America owes those individual immense gratitude for their courage in the defense of Congress and our Constitution. Without their bravery, January 6th would have been far worse. Although certain members of the Capitol Police leadership regarded their approach to January 6th as “all hands on deck,” the Capitol Police leadership did not have sufficient assets in place to address the violent and lawless crowd.  Capitol Police leadership did not anticipate the scale of the violence that would ensue after President Trump instructed tens of thousands of his supporters in the Ellipse crowd to march to the Capitol, and then tweeted at 2:24 p.m. Although Chief Steven Sund raised the idea of National Guard support, the Capitol Police Board did not request Guard assistance prior to January 6th. The Metropolitan Police took an even more proactive approach to January 6th, and deployed roughly 800 officers, including responding to the emergency calls for help at the Capitol. Rioters still managed to break their line in certain locations, when the crowd surged forward in the immediate aftermath of Donald Trump’s 2:24 p.m. tweet. The Department of Justice readied a group of Federal agents at Quantico and in the District of Columbia, anticipating that January 6th could become violent, and then deployed those agents once it became clear that police at the Capitol were overwhelmed. Agents from the Department of Homeland Security were also deployed to assist.
    
17. President Trump had authority and responsibility to direct deployment of the National Guard in the District of Columbia, but never gave any order to deploy the National Guard on January 6th or on any other day. Nor did he instruct any Federal law enforcement agency to assist. Because the authority to deploy the National Guard had been delegated to the Department of Defense, the Secretary of Defense could, and ultimately did deploy the Guard. Although evidence identifies a likely miscommunication between members of the civilian leadership in the Department of Defense impacting the timing of deployment, the Committee has found no evidence that the Department of Defense intentionally delayed deployment of the National Guard. The Select Committee recognizes that some at the Department had genuine concerns, counseling caution, that President Trump might give an illegal order to use the military in support of his efforts to overturn the election.
    

• Reimler: “And I’m sorry to the people of this country for threatening the democracy that makes this country so great…My participation in the events that day were part of an attack on the rule of law.”
  
• Pert: “I know that the peaceful transition of power is to ensure the common good for our nation and that it is critical in protecting our country’s security needs. I am truly sorry for my part and accept full responsibility for my actions.”
  
• Markofski: “My actions put me on the other side of the line from my brothers in the Army. The wrong side. Had I lived in the area, I would have been called up to defend the Capitol and restore order…My actions brought dishonor to my beloved U.S. Army National Guard.”
  
• Witcher: “Every member—every male member of my family has served in the military, in the Marine Corps, and most have saw combat. And I cast a shadow and cast embarrassment upon my family name and that legacy.”
  
• Edwards: “I am ashamed to be for the first time in my 68 years, standing before a judge, having pleaded guilty to committing a crime, ashamed to be associated with an attack on the United States Capitol, a symbol of American democracy and greatness that means a great deal to me.”
  

• Ronald Sandlin, who threatened police officers in the Capitol saying, “[y]ou’re going to die,” posted on December 23, 2020: “I’m going to be there to show support for our president and to do my part to stop the steal and stand behind Trump when he decides to cross the rubicon. If you are a patriot I believe it’s your duty to be there. I see it as my civic responsibility.”
  
• Garret Miller, who brought a gun to the Capitol on January 6th, explained: “I was in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021, because I believed I was following the instructions of former President Trump and he was my president and the commander-in-chief. His statements also had me believing the election was stolen from him.”
  
• John Douglas Wright explained that he brought busloads of people to Washington, DC, on January 6th “because [Trump] called me there, and he laid out what is happening in our government.”
  
• Lewis Cantwell testified: If “the President of the United States … [is] out on TV telling the world that it was stolen, what else would I believe, as a patriotic American who voted for him and wants to continue to see the country thrive as I thought it was?”
  
• Likewise, Stephen Ayres testified that “with everything the President was putting out” ahead of January 6th that “the election was rigged … the votes were wrong and stuff… it just got into my head.” “The President [was] calling on us to come” to Washington, DC.   Ayres “was hanging on every word he [President Trump] was saying” Ayres posted that “Civil War will ensue” if President Trump did not stay in power after January 6th. 
  

1. conspiracy to defraud the United States,
   
2. obstruction of an official proceeding of Congress,
   
3. conspiracy to make a false statement and
   
4. aiding an insurrection.
   

There’s a reason you make less than 20,000/year. It’s that you’re an idiot.

No, it's because I'm 15. 

• Well, that explains it.  You aren't old enough to understand that a politician calling for the end of fossil fuel consumption is not the same thing as President actually enforcing prohibitions on fossil fuel consumption.  Big difference, kid.

Do you have any evidence that the laptop was handed to Giuliani while he was in Kyiv?

As far as I understand it's not being disputed that Hunter left his laptop in a repair shop in Delaware which is where Giuliani got it.

• It is a lie to say that Biden's plan is to cut all fossil fuels.  Please check your problems with honesty.
  
• It is the truth to say that Biden signed a bill last summer that hopes to reduce the US's greenhouse gas emissions by 30-40% by 2030.  Even if all that reduction came from fossil fuel consumption (it doesn't) that comes nowhere 
  
• It is truth Biden announced last week his plan to pull eliminate all Federal buildings dependencies on fossil fuel by 2045 realizing substantial cost savings.
  
• It is dishonest and 100% fake news to say "Biden's Idea to cut all fossil fuels"
  
• Biden has supported a number of new fossil fuels initiatives over the past year, including new oil pipelines and cleaner coal initiatives.
  
• Just today, Biden threw his support behind Joe Manchin's plan to regulate energy providers, which includes building a new natural gas pipeline across West Virginia.
  
• What is the motivation for lying about Biden's energy policy?  What advantage is gained by arguing against a policy that nobody is actually proprosing?

-->@oromagi

Elon Musk has censored more accounts on Twitter since he took over in October then the US Government has censored on Twitter throughout Twitter's entire history.

First off, that's completely false. Twitter has censored way more accounts before Elon took over. 

Elon Musk literally said his goal was to bring back free speech to Twitter, because of all of the censorship.

He has the right to do that, because he doesn't disagree with the person, he literally is tracking his stuff.

->@oromagi

You're not grasping the news; you're just directing this topic back to 2020. Look at the facts of right now.

• The only new fact is that Musk is putting on a show.  There is no content from that show that was not well-established in October 2020 as the author of the show has repeatedly clarified.

Twitter working with the FBI and Government, to cencor certain political opponents.

• A lie repeated over and over is not made more true, although stupid people do tend to eventually believe  an oft repeated lie.
  
• WIKIPEDIA:
  

• During the 2020 American presidential election, the New York Post published a story about the laptop of Hunter Biden. Twitter, along with Facebook, implemented measures to block the sharing of the story, and Twitter further imposed a temporary lock on the accounts of the New York Post and White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany, citing violations of its rules against posting hacked content.  The decision to take action on the content came in the wake of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and generated an outcry from then-President Trump and conservatives who saw it as politically motivated.
  
• On December 2, 2022, Taibbi published a Twitter thread on the subject, with internal Twitter emails interspersed with his own reporting.  Some documents described Twitter's internal deliberations regarding the decision to censor the reporting of the story, while others contained information on how Twitter treated tweets that were flagged for removal at the request of the 2020 Biden campaign team and the Trump White House.  He also shared communications between California Democrat Ro Khanna and then-Twitter head of legal Vijaya Gadde, in which Khanna warned about the free-speech implications and possible political backlash that would result from censorship.  Taibbi's thread generated considerable interest but did not contain any significant new revelations. 
  
• The thread shed light on an internal debate on whether Twitter should prevent the story from being shared, with leadership arguing that it fell under the company's prohibition on hacked materials.   According to Taibbi, then-CEO Jack Dorsey was unaware of the decision to suppress the content when it was made; days later, he reversed the decision, calling it a "mistake,"  and Twitter updated its hacked materials policy to state that news stories about hacked materials would be permitted, but with a contextual warning.
  
• Taibbi reported Twitter had "received and honored" deletion requests from both the Biden campaign and the Trump White House; he presented examples of the former but not of the latter. The Biden campaign asked Twitter to review five tweets, which were later deleted. Taibbi did not disclose the content of the tweets, but four were later found from internet archives to contain nude photos and videos of Hunter Biden, which violate Twitter policy and California law as revenge porn; the content of the fifth deleted tweet is unknown.
  
• Elon Musk tweeted that Twitter had acted "under orders from the government," though Taibbi reported no government involvement in the laptop story, tweeting, "Although several sources recalled hearing about a 'general' warning from federal law enforcement that summer about possible foreign hacks, there’s no evidence - that I've seen - of any government involvement in the laptop story."  His reporting undermined a key narrative promoted by Musk and Republicans that the FBI pressured social media companies to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop stories.
  
• Musk further claimed that this content moderation violated the First Amendment. However, legal experts refuted the idea that content moderation by a private company violates the First Amendment, as it only restricts government actors.  David Loy, legal director for the First Amendment Coalition, said that Twitter is legally able to choose what speech is allowed on their site, noting that both the Biden campaign, which was not part of government, and the Trump White House could request specific content moderation actions.
  

• Elon Musk claims government interference citing Taibbi.  Taibbi repeatedly states that Elon Musk is lying and there is no evidence to Musk's claim.  Musk is not relying on any other source, he is just counting on the easily convinced conspiracy theorist who will believe any lie, in full contempt for rational thought, no matter how easily disproved unto death just so long as it reinforces their paranoid world view.  QAnon is a cult and an enemy of American Democracy that Musk hopes to exploit (amoungst other suckers) to boost ratings.  

It's a huge breakthrough, but fusion power plants are still many years in the future. Reproducing these results, scaling them up, and making them commercially viable will take time.

But if they can do it, it will be a huge step forward.

• twenty years, they say
  
• But the moment mankind developed a processs that creates more energy than it uses deserves marking.