Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[Driver125]

That was Hillary’s plan.  It didn’t work.

Could anyone say anything stupider? Let’s review….Republican Party is shrinking due to their lack of appeal to the very groups which are the engine behind the changing demographics in this country (in other words, white people are becoming the minority in the United States while brown and black people are on their way to becoming the majority). Your own so-called 'autopsy report' reported these facts in black and white (so to speak). So you’re claiming Hillary studied these facts and decided that it would be a winning policy not to try to appeal to this majority but instead try to win by appealing to the minority? Only from the mind of Cement-Head Red.

[barton]

"Red" is actually an impartial panel of experts on Hillary Clinton. 


In other news,

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/aclu-devos-title-ix/576142/

Interesting critique of the ACLU - have they violated their own standards in this matter? 

[REDSTATEWARD]

"Red" is actually an impartial panel of experts on Hillary Clinton. 

No, the voters are.  Escpecially the ones who she either ignored or insulted.

In other news,

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/aclu-devos-title-ix/576142/

Interesting critique of the ACLU - have they violated their own standards in this matter?

“ Since when does the ACLU believe a process that favors the accused is inappropriate or unfair?“
Good question.
It is only a cement block in the foundation of our legal system.
Aparrently the ACLU prefers guilty till proven innocent with no chance to cross-examine.
Props  to Secretary DeVos for being the adult on campus.

[facilitatorn]

She and Wilber Ross bring the money laundering and treason experience that trump requires in his cabinet. An educated populace is the greatest threat to trump and the republicans. Betsy’s attacks on education are the lynchpin of their long term strategy.

Trump’s top floor scam economy is going nowhere so the dismantling of our institutions by the termite cabinet might be too little to late to save the self defeating fascists Red slavishly supports.

[NeedsAdjustments]

To the GOP and its supporters:

When your party’s electoral strategy depends on fewer people voting it means you know your policies suck for most people.

That was Hillary’s plan.  It didn’t work.
It never does.

This is funny, not only because it makes zero sense, but because RESTATEWARD insists Democrats are obsessed with Hillary, when he can't resist typing her name at every opportunity.  Its like a tick.

As for it "never" working...

Seems to have worked well in Georgia.

Adding this to the above:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/11/brian-kemps-win-in-georgia-tainted-by-voter-suppression-stacey-abrams/

[NeedsAdjustments]

“ Since when does the ACLU believe a process that favors the accused is inappropriate or unfair?“
Good question.

Not really. 

Its not a criminal matter.  And the process, forcing a victim of sexual assault to lawyer up and go before a student tribunal, discourages reporting when under reporting is already a problem.

Some better questions:

- How would a victim provide "clear and convincing evidence" of being sexually assaulted if there were no witnesses?  Are you proposing dorm rooms be outfitted with CCTVs?

- How often do we think a young woman would claim to have been sexually assaulted when she hasn't been?

You believe the victim because thats just common sense.  If you don't, that means you really just don't care that much.  As with Kavanaugh...ultimately he was seen as a "victim" by the right (despite absolutely convincing testimony to the contrary) because they think its fine to have a perpetrator of sexual assault on the courts so long as he rules against abortion and regulations on businesses.

[NeedsAdjustments]

As evidence piles up pointing to the Saudi crown prince’s responsibility in the brutal killing of the dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, President Trump has only hardened his refusal to concede any possibility that the prince had a hand in the crime.

Mr. Trump, who had once condemned the Saudi leaders for perpetrating “the worst cover-up in history,” praised Saudi Arabia this weekend as a “truly spectacular ally,” even after the C.I.A. concluded that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the kingdom’s de facto leader, ordered the murder.

Mr. Trump said he would wait for a report on Mr. Khashoggi’s death produced by his administration, due Tuesday, before deciding how to assign blame. But he seemed to play down the importance of the report even before it was issued, suggesting that it would not establish definitively who was ultimately responsible and risking a clash with his own intelligence agencies.

“Will anybody really know?” Mr. Trump said in an interview aired on “Fox News Sunday.” “All right, will anybody really know?”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/18/us/politics/trump-khashoggi-saudis.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

I have many thoughts on this, all not generous to Mr. Trump's indifference to the brutal murder of a journalist taking refuge in the US, and working for an American newspaper. 

But it says something about the potential of corruption...

The Saudi's are known palm-greasers.  They have used their money to gain influence, legal and otherwise, all over the globe.  Given that, and our knowledge that Trump's professional career banked on his taking advantage of the opportunities presented to him by palm-greasers, how can we be sure that his position on this matter (which is vital, btw, to maintaining our credibility on human rights globally) is not coming from his personally, directly or indirectly through his businesses, making millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia?   

Of course we can't.  We can say, in fact, that he probably is.

So what possible justification can Republicans have for a hands-off approach to monitoring Trump's connections to those businesses, and investigating where necessary? 

Just as with Sexual Assault, ultimately the only possible explanation for the Republican position on this is that they don't care if the President of the United States is a grifter.  So long as they are in on the con.

[facilitatorn]

For Red’s crowd, a man’s license for repercussion free sexual adventurism is the payoff for falling in line behind stupid terrible leaders. Otherwise, what’s the point?

This core belief covers assaulting and assaulters all up and down the chain of the power structure, from the Supreme Court to the student union, from the news desk to the prison cell, from the reservation to the sorority house.

[NeedsAdjustments]

For Red’s crowd, a man’s license for repercussion free sexual adventurism is the payoff for falling in line behind stupid terrible leaders. Otherwise, what’s the point?

Its amazing how beholden they are to Trump.

You wouldn't think being pro sexual assault would be a look a political party would more or less openly wear.  But then, the leader they worship has confessed to sexually assaulting women, so...here we are.

...and, sidenote, we see how well thats working for them with Women.

[NeedsAdjustments]

For Red’s crowd, a man’s license for repercussion free sexual adventurism is the payoff for falling in line behind stupid terrible leaders. Otherwise, what’s the point?

Its amazing how beholden they are to Trump.

You wouldn't think being pro sexual assault would be a look a political party would more or less openly wear.  But then, the leader they worship has confessed to sexually assaulting women, so...here we are.

...and, sidenote, we see how well thats working for them with Women.

Love how the REDSTATEWARD's author proudly quotes this idiot:

"The ACLU cannot love constitutional rights only when it serves to further a cause on behalf of their favored marginalized group, then hate it when it doesn’t, and still be given credit as a voice for civil liberties ...

What "marginalized group"...women?  As if protecting victims of sexual assault is about identity politics?

Disgusting.

[whiskeypriest]

For Red’s crowd, a man’s license for repercussion free sexual adventurism is the payoff for falling in line behind stupid terrible leaders. Otherwise, what’s the point?

Its amazing how beholden they are to Trump.

You wouldn't think being pro sexual assault would be a look a political party would more or less openly wear.  But then, the leader they worship has confessed to sexually assaulting women, so...here we are.

...and, sidenote, we see how well thats working for them with Women.

Love how the REDSTATEWARD's author proudly quotes this idiot:

"The ACLU cannot love constitutional rights only when it serves to further a cause on behalf of their favored marginalized group, then hate it when it doesn’t, and still be given credit as a voice for civil liberties ...

What "marginalized group"...women?  As if protecting victims of sexual assault is about identity politics?

Disgusting.

In fairness, Barton posted the link. Red simply does not know how to format.

[NeedsAdjustments]

In fairness, Barton posted the link. Red simply does not know how to format.

ok.

[facilitatorn]

The GOP is also dying hard among all those younger than 44. I’m less concerned with the GOP emerging with some kind of future than with the damage it inflicts through its thrashing as it is finally run to ground.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Checked out that lawyer's twitter, btw, and didn't need to scroll past twenty posts to find an example of his misogyny.

How surprising.

[NeedsAdjustments]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiJ9-et9d7eAhWT3lQKHR6RARYQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fstory%2F2018%2F11%2F18%2Ftrump-adam-schiff-schitt-twitter-1002708&psig=AOvVaw3CF2oLfOvwAb7KRKmUvTNn&ust=1542663997440608

Acting Presidential. Maybe Barron hacked his twitter.

Not Presidential, no.  Trump, who needs to have "policy time" assigned to him on his schedule so that he doesn't watch FOX all day, is not a President in any meaningful way.

But can we also talk about how profoundly stupid his "Mueller wasn't confirmed by the senate so Whitaker doesn't have to be either" talking point is?

Note:  On first pass writing this I accidentally typed Whitaker as "Shitaker."   But I read what I wrote and quickly fixed the mistake.  So...