Political Thread XX

[Malcador]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-agent-peter-strzok-fired-over-anti-trump-texts/2018/08/13/be98f84c-8e8b-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html

 

Peter Strzok got fired, not that big a shock

[SonicMage117]

I'm not sure you need to invent dirt on a guy who's on record gloating how he can grab women "by the ****" and get away with it thanks to his celebrity status, but that's just me.But hey, I agree, integrity and credibility are a thing of the past.

In all fairness, that's not anti-women or being a misogynist. It's being a filthy minded man who's like you said "Gloating about celebrity status". How he said it was careless and indeed came out disrespectful but yet President's bragging was never meant to disrespect towards women nor the fact he could get away woth something so atrocious. It was only meant to boost his ego which is the ego of a 20 foot gorilla really and it was only twisted into him intentionally disrespecting women later by the media. This is due to poor wording more than anything and poor wording is often manipulated far too easy. This is equally the President's fault (Pride comes before a stumble) as well as ever-paranoid lefty's (gotta do anything to make Trump the boogeyman!)

 

It's really no different than Mileena (President's wife) not smiling at congressional meetings somehow means "She's not happy, she's trying to tell us she's going to leave the President soon". If only Mileena smiled a bit more, the left might not make up stories about how she gets abused and so forth.

 

Point being there's so much exagerration and manipulation by the medial representation of a quote or event, at this point if a celebrity said "I've had intercourse with hundreds of drunk women at parties" it probably wouldn't be a bad/negative thing unless it was said by our President - only then would it be turned into something bad like rape/sexual assault and so on by the hard left journalists and youtubers as per usual, otherwise the hard left will view it as the women's fault for putting themselves in such a situation.

 

So there isn't any need for press to make things up or invent things, they just take whatever is there and twist/manipulate things any so how they see fit and people will believe it. Anyway, I recall Charlie Sheen saying much worse but the man gets worshipped by liberals and the hard left. What does that tell ya? More importantly, I doubt that women would want to work with/for either of them if they really cared either way.

 

If we want to look at "proof of the pudding" the President always gave equal opportunity to women even before he was in office and I've yet to see someone credible claim sexual harrasment that wasn't some type of escort and/or trying to make the buck

Edited August 13, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Malcador]

Charlie Sheen is worshipped by the hard left ? Huh, ok.

[SonicMage117]

Ehhh... probably only because he's a liberal who wished death upon the President. Once you do that, the left will accept and embrace you no matter your history. Since Sheen is a Hollywood celebrity, he gets dealt the hero card. It's the double standard in Lefty politics

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4073106/Fury-Charlie-Sheen-says-Trump-celebrity-die-prompting-backlash-web-users-calling-scumbag-useless-****roach.html

Edited August 13, 2018 by SonicMage117

[HoonDing]

Release the N-word tape.

[Malcador]

Ehhh... probably only because he's a liberal who wished death upon the President. Once you do that, the left will accept and embrace you no matter your history. Since Sheen is a Hollywood celebrity, he gets dealt the hero card. It's the double standard in Lefty politics

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4073106/Fury-Charlie-Sheen-says-Trump-celebrity-die-prompting-backlash-web-users-calling-scumbag-useless-****roach.html

Well given the hard leftists outrage over misogyny perceived or actual, I find that hard to believe. The Daily Mail really was ahead of the curve with outrage farming.

[Tagaziel]

It is already the law to abate dangerous products (asbestos, lead, etc.) when you come across them during any building renovation.

 

Here you go Tagziel: What is Asbestos?

I'm actually aware of what asbestos is and how dangerous it can be.

 

As an aside, Eternit is a genericized trademark here in Poland that refers to any kind of material made by mixing cement and asbestos... Which is why it's not uncommon for us Poles to mangle "Pillars of Eternity" into "Filary Eternitu" (Eternit Pillars).

 

In all fairness, that's not anti-women or being a misogynist. It's being a filthy minded man who's like you said "Gloating about celebrity status". How he said it was careless and indeed came out disrespectful but yet President's bragging was never meant to disrespect towards women nor the fact he could get away woth something so atrocious. It was only meant to boost his ego which is the ego of a 20 foot gorilla really and it was only twisted into him intentionally disrespecting women later by the media. This is due to poor wording more than anything and poor wording is often manipulated far too easy. This is equally the President's fault (Pride comes before a stumble) as well as ever-paranoid lefty's (gotta do anything to make Trump the boogeyman!)

I'm not sure it's ever-paranoid lefties who consider bragging about sexual assault to be disrespectful towards women (well, the act of grabbing their crotch is bad enough, bragging about it is just the icing on the cake).

 

Point being there's so much exagerration and manipulation by the medial representation of a quote or event, at this point if a celebrity said "I've had intercourse with hundreds of drunk women at parties" it probably wouldn't be a bad/negative thing unless it was said by our President - only then would it be turned into something bad like rape/sexual assault and so on by the hard left journalists and youtubers as per usual, otherwise the hard left will view it as the women's fault for putting themselves in such a situation.

What?

 

If anything, admitting to several hundred counts of rape in public would destroy that person.

 

I'm seriously perplexed by your claim that it's the "hard left" who tries to dilute the definitionof rape, when it's a pretty specific American right-wing talking point.

If we want to look at "proof of the pudding" the President always gave equal opportunity to women even before he was in office and I've yet to see someone credible claim sexual harrasment that wasn't some type of escort and/or trying to make the buck

...did you just seriously go down the victim blaming route.

[Volourn]

"I'm not sure you need to invent dirt on a guy who's on record gloating how he can grab women "by the ****" and get away with it thanks to his celebrity status, but that's just me."

 

What? So famous  rich men get 'all the ladies'? That isn't shocking at all. Everyone says that. Because it is basically true. That doesn't mean Trump has never sexually harassed or assaulted someone but the Triggering line above has nothing to do with it. Nowhere does he say in it that he forces people to do it. The women he is talking about  are agreeable. Thyat is his point.

 

 

"did you just seriously go down the victim blaming route."

 

Accuser blaming. There is a difference.  Just because someone accuses someone doesn't mean they are a victim. Maybe maybe not. Prove it. then again, Libs only believe they 'should believe the victim' when the accused is someone they dislike. Otherwise they 'wait and see' or  'attack the accuser'. Just ask Hillary Clinton how she handled her husband's accusers even after it was proven that he had cheated on her. She called the accusers nasty names. talk about blaming the victim. Even in situations where they go all in like that one senator they come to 'regret' it and then say 'we need him even if he is guilty'. L0L, Of course, the 'right' is just as guilty. they also talk about ethic, and morals, and what have you but only when  it suits them.

 

Both sides are scum. Plain and simple.   

[majestic]

It's really no different than Mileena (President's wife)

 

Lay off the Mortal Kombat. Or are you going to pretend that's the arabic spelling?

[213374U]

"did you just seriously go down the victim blaming route."

 

Accuser blaming. There is a difference.  Just because someone accuses someone doesn't mean they are a victim. Maybe maybe not. Prove it. then again, Libs only believe they 'should believe the victim' when the accused is someone they dislike. Otherwise they 'wait and see' or  'attack the accuser'. Just ask Hillary Clinton how she handled her husband's accusers even after it was proven that he had cheated on her. She called the accusers nasty names. talk about blaming the victim. Even in situations where they go all in like that one senator they come to 'regret' it and then say 'we need him even if he is guilty'. L0L, Of course, the 'right' is just as guilty. they also talk about ethic, and morals, and what have you but only when  it suits them.

Semantics. SM made it sound like the accuser/victim has no credibility because they are prostitutes (because it is impossible to sexually assault a sex worker, right?) which is the point Tagaziel was making. You took it an ran with it to rant about Hillary in a bizarre show of irrelevant whataboutism.

[majestic]

 

"did you just seriously go down the victim blaming route."

 

Accuser blaming. There is a difference.  Just because someone accuses someone doesn't mean they are a victim. Maybe maybe not. Prove it. then again, Libs only believe they 'should believe the victim' when the accused is someone they dislike. Otherwise they 'wait and see' or  'attack the accuser'. Just ask Hillary Clinton how she handled her husband's accusers even after it was proven that he had cheated on her. She called the accusers nasty names. talk about blaming the victim. Even in situations where they go all in like that one senator they come to 'regret' it and then say 'we need him even if he is guilty'. L0L, Of course, the 'right' is just as guilty. they also talk about ethic, and morals, and what have you but only when  it suits them.

Semantics. SM made it sound like the accuser/victim has no credibility because they are prostitutes (because it is impossible to sexually assault a sex worker, right?) which is the point Tagaziel was making. You took it an ran with it to rant about Hillary in a bizarre show of irrelevant whataboutism.

 

The entire debate is a fun excursion in false balance and false equivalence, and suddenly we're at a point where sex workes aren't allowed to be sexually assaulted because they give it up for cash, Stormy Daniels wants to make a quick buck that she apparently already got and paying 130 grand in hush money is the same as lying about getting a blowie from an intern.

 

But it's the left that's triggered and hypocritical while the same evangelicals that were morally outraged by Clinton's affair now give The Donald a carte blanche because he's about to usher in the biblical apocalypse.

 

I'd laugh my ass off if all that weren't actually happening right now. Played completely straight and taken seriously.

 

Who knows, maybe the apocalypse is nigh and by the looks of it most of mankind actually deserves it.

[SonicMage117]

...did you just seriously go down the victim blaming route.

All I'm saying is both that strong independent and feminists work under or for our President. For whatever reason, people tend to downplay or cover/deny this as much as they can - probably to keep their initial point valid in such a pivitol and touchy topic, discarding evidence and deeming it forgetful/irrelevant has always been key in these sorts of topics if it doesn't benefit one side. It's even more likely that other feminists are paying feminists who work for our president to stay silent rather than no feminist working for our president at all.

 

This isn't about anyone being a victim really, I'm afraid it's just a simple fact that actions speak louder than words and that's what we're seeing when women who work in or leave the white house hace respect for the president and have no need for his money vs the women who leave the white house and are desperate for the 15 minutes of fame.

 

As a male, I don't like or care for Donald Trump but seeing that smart, strong & independent women still seem to love the president, it's rather strange, don't you think? And it's probably due to him being more outspken than not - women like that sort of thing regardless of if it's taken negatively.... I've even learned this from my wife hehe

 

And yes, I know, I know... There are some gullible people out there who may think "If you're a woman and you like the president, you can't be a feminist plain and simple" that's the "absolute" mindset of the extremist kicking in and isn't reality but rather the "If you're not with us, then we don't want to hear anything you have to say". Repressing realism is key to building a better world for tomorrow, or something.

Semantics. SM made it sound like the accuser/victim has no credibility because they are prostitutes (because it is impossible to sexually assault a sex worker, right?) which is the point Tagaziel was making.

I don't know, I didn't see what happened behind doors, did you? But it's highly unlikely that she was "sexually assaulted", the fact that she is in the adult industry and porn stars operate much like a prostitute in the way of "You pay for what you get" just proves my point that much more, thank you. What I do know is that if any such ordeal could happen, she should have a written/spoken contract stating limits/tos before hand anyway. That is how things differ in the workspace between customer relations within the sexual conductive industry in comparison of professional porn star vs prostitution, there is more to it than you know. Though, it's quite puzzling when people think it's sexual assault when a man smacks a girl on the behind when the gshe didn't it, but yet the man just paid the woman to have sex with her and treat her as nothing more than an object? Hmmm...

 

I'll be more direct, this has nothing to do with moralism or disrespecting women, it's about Stormy milking money. We all know that Stormy isn't getting any younger, her ratings have dropped in adult videos catagory and as a personality, new hotter, younger women are coming in by the bucket loads (no pun intended). Stormy is desperate, just as the extremists are. This is a poorly executed blackmail built on the leftist motivation to publicitize more negative overhead for Trump and Stormy to monetize every moment. Nothing more, nothing less. Then again, anything these days is believable, valid and acceptable if it agrees with the goal to bring down President Donald Trump ad Mileena. To me it's all just middle school drama, I'm sure it is viewed the same by the right as well

Edited August 13, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Gfted1]

But it's the left that's triggered and hypocritical while the same evangelicals that were morally outraged by Clinton's affair now give The Donald a carte blanche because he's about to usher in the biblical apocalypse.

 

I'd laugh my ass off if all that weren't actually happening right now. Played completely straight and taken seriously.

 

Link?

[Elerond]

 

But it's the left that's triggered and hypocritical while the same evangelicals that were morally outraged by Clinton's affair now give The Donald a carte blanche because he's about to usher in the biblical apocalypse.

 

I'd laugh my ass off if all that weren't actually happening right now. Played completely straight and taken seriously.

 

Link?

 

 

https://www.news.com.au/world/middle-eastern-prophecy-is-trump-a-reincarnated-king-cyrus-destined-to-herald-the-end-of-days/news-story/8fce69eacebd929b482ee00c895f37dc

 

Middle Eastern prophecy: Is Trump a reincarnated King Cyrus, destined to herald the end of days?

 

PROPHECY is unfolding in the Middle East. Riots. Killings. War. At its centre is President Donald Trump. And his evangelical supporters are hoping he will bring on Armageddon.

The move of the US embassy to Jerusalem was bold.

Its outcome was predictable.

The territorial dispute between the Palestinians and the recently recreated (after some 1875 years) Israel has been erupting sporadically ever since 1948.

Any change to the delicate power balance was sure to topple into violence.

It has shattered hopes of fresh peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine.

It has also damaged the credibility of the US as a Middle East peace broker.

How this has been allowed to happen doesn’t make much sense — unless you look at it through the evangelical eyes of some of Trump’s top advisers and closest confidantes.

The move was about domestic politics.

Not international diplomacy.

The decision to move the embassy fulfilled a key Trump election campaign promise. It also represented a victory for hard-line pro-Israeli interest groups.

But Trump’s most prominent electoral support group — conservative evangelicals — see it all as a biblical drama. At last, their great nation has an embassy in God’s own capital city — Jerusalem. And it means cataclysmic events proclaimed by prophecy are about to take place.

Trump himself is at the heart of this prophecy.

His fate is seen as intrinsically tied to that of an ancient Persian king.

The President of the United States is God’s right-hand man, many evangelicals believe. Trump is an imperfect tool God is using to create perfect works. This means nothing less than the end of days. And a one-way ticket to heaven.

[Malcador]

I don't know, I didn't see what happened behind doors, did you? But it's highly unlikely that she was "sexually assaulted", the fact that she is in the adult industry and porn stars operate much like a prostitute in the way of "You pay for what you get" just proves my point that much more, thank you.

 

Why is it highly unlikely just due to the job, exactly ?

[Gfted1]

Oh wow, the LITERAL apocalypse. K, good to know.

[SonicMage117]

Pretty much as I said, there are contracts. That is also why it's very rare that you hear of a porn star getting sexually assaulted by a customer. Not only does it not make sense but when it hapoens there is more often a motive than not. I'm still waiting for Stormy to show that contract of submission, doubt it will ever surface because it's more likely that she got lazy and just took the money anyway.

[Malcador]

Don't think contracts are all that much security, but ok

Edited August 13, 2018 by Malcador

[Volourn]

"Semantics. SM made it sound like the accuser/victim has no credibility because they are prostitutes (because it is impossible to sexually assault a sex worker, right?) which is the point Tagaziel was making. You took it an ran with it to rant about Hillary in a bizarre show of irrelevant whataboutism."

 

Your spam is irrelevant. I never claimed that 'sex workers' can't be sexually assaulted so your response is meaninglkess.

 

I was responding to the whole 'blame the victim' nonsense.   Not all accusers are 'victims'. That's a fact. So, by saying you don't bel;eive an accuser or you ask for proof that is not 'blaming the victim' that is asking for proof. HUGE DIFFERENCE.

[HoonDing]

Blame their pheromones.

[213374U]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-agent-peter-strzok-fired-over-anti-trump-texts/2018/08/13/be98f84c-8e8b-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html

 

Peter Strzok got fired, not that big a shock

 

Not shocking in the current political climate, I guess. But is being an idiot about one's political opinions an offense that warrants firing in the FBI Code of Conduct?

 

@ volo: cool story bro. Here's another FACT that is as relevant as the tangent you went off on: rope is good for pulling but not for pushing. FACT.

Edited August 13, 2018 by 213374U

[Elerond]

Pretty much as I said, there are contracts. That is also why it's very rare that you hear of a porn star getting sexually assaulted by a customer. Not only does it not make sense but when it hapoens there is more often a motive than not. I'm still waiting for Stormy to show that contract of submission, doubt it will ever surface because it's more likely that she got lazy and just took the money anyway.

 

Porn stars don't have customers, as their job is act explixcit sexual acts for film (although there are quite lot rape scandals in porn industry where actresses say they were raped on the set). It is quite common that prostitutes get raped by people prententing to hire them (studies says that about 50% of prostitutes in US say that they have raped at least once during their life time and over 70% says that they have faced other forms of physical violence), which is why prostitutes have invented lots of ways to protect themselves. Porn stars sometimes also work as prostitutes/escorts. Stormy Daniel don't accuse Trump of sexual assault or claim that Trump paid her for sex, in her case scandal is that Trump paid her sush money before election in order to prevent Stormy to tell press about her affair with Trump. There is also accusations of Trump breaking agreement between them, which is why Stormy claims that she has now right to talk about mentioned affair.

[Tagaziel]

All I'm saying is both that strong independent and feminists work under or for our President. For whatever reason, people tend to downplay or cover/deny this as much as they can - probably to keep their initial point valid in such a pivitol and touchy topic, discarding evidence and deeming it forgetful/irrelevant has always been key in these sorts of topics if it doesn't benefit one side. It's even more likely that other feminists are paying feminists who work for our president to stay silent rather than no feminist working for our president at all.

OK, so you're piling conspiracy theories on top of presenting women who don't like Trump as... You know, I have no idea what you're talking about. The only thing I can clearly identify is that you seem to espouse a system where someone's moral standing is determined on a simple linear scale. As such, it's perfectly fine for Trump to brag about sexual assault because he has a couple women on staff... I guess?

 

For reference:

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/03/the-very-male-trump-administration/556568/

 

I was responding to the whole 'blame the victim' nonsense.   Not all accusers are 'victims'. That's a fact. So, by saying you don't bel;eive an accuser or you ask for proof that is not 'blaming the victim' that is asking for proof. HUGE DIFFERENCE.

 

It seems most people got the point and you didn't.

 

As for the idea that you shouldn't believe accusers... Yeah, in a culture that stigmatizes rape victims, we should stigmatize them more by assuming they're full of crap until proven otherwise.

[Gfted1]

Well that's the whole point of the Presumption of Innocence. Is it exactly opposite in Poland?

[SonicMage117]

 

Pretty much as I said, there are contracts. That is also why it's very rare that you hear of a porn star getting sexually assaulted by a customer. Not only does it not make sense but when it hapoens there is more often a motive than not. I'm still waiting for Stormy to show that contract of submission, doubt it will ever surface because it's more likely that she got lazy and just took the money anyway.

 

Porn stars don't have customers, as their job is act explixcit sexual acts for film (although there are quite lot rape scandals in porn industry where actresses say they were raped on the set). It is quite common that prostitutes get raped by people prententing to hire them (studies says that about 50% of prostitutes in US say that they have raped at least once during their life time and over 70% says that they have faced other forms of physical violence), which is why prostitutes have invented lots of ways to protect themselves. Porn stars sometimes also work as prostitutes/escorts. Stormy Daniel don't accuse Trump of sexual assault or claim that Trump paid her for sex, in her case scandal is that Trump paid her sush money before election in order to prevent Stormy to tell press about her affair with Trump. There is also accusations of Trump breaking agreement between them, which is why Stormy claims that she has now right to talk about mentioned affair.

Porn Stars do have customers, same as prostitutes or strippers. I'm not sure where you get the idea that they don't, Is it because they call their customers "clients" instead? Moreover, all porn stars (professional ones) have contracts, whether with a company brand or people who hire them for discreet meetings. This is only an exception because it's the President.

 

And no, it's not really possible for a prostitute or porn star to get raped "on the job" - excluding child sex trafficking of course, Do you have any evidence of this in a case (something not by word of mouth or a youtuber with a nonchalant opinion perhaps) that an adult industry porn star or prostitute gets raped on the job? Although I do agree that most prostitutes do get raped in their lifetime but that doesn't count for their actions or choices on the job, that's common sense but keep in mind that after being forced into submission, it becomes accepted and they get used to it, therefore it becomes the only thing they know, thus thereby it's normal for them. Do you think any prostitute wants to... ya know, prostitute? It's also common sense that most prostitutes suffer physical abuse, pimps or madames usually beat their prostitutes when they don't meet quota. Even so, those statistics have nothing to do with what they experience with on the job.

 

And lastly, I wasn't the one who said Stormy Daniels accused Dinald Trump of sexual harassment or anything of the sort, I replied to someone who said she did but my comments make valid points all the same. A contract between Stormy and the President would have been more than enough to verify the accounts on both ends. In the event of the rare cases that something like this happens, a contract is usually brought before a judge for appeal.

OK, so you're piling conspiracy theories on top of presenting women who don't like Trump as... You know, I have no idea what you're talking about. The only thing I can clearly identify is that you seem to espouse a system where someone's moral standing is determined on a simple linear scale. As such, it's perfectly fine for Trump to brag about sexual assault because he has a couple women on staff... I guess?

You're right, you just don't understand. My superiority is just too comvoluted it seems. You see, I'm not "judging anyone's morale" here, but the chances are that if you haven't got it yet, you may not. Still, I'll care to elaborate further for your benefit - at ease.

 

It's not much hard to understand that after the #MeToo movement, everything from a slight whistle could be exaggerated into a full on sexual harrasment issue. Feminists, liberals and the leftest extremists are able to use this tactic of exaggeration in order to further agenda. While you and others may see this as a serious problem, I see it as a serious matter I see it as a joke.

 

In other words, there's likely more conspiracy and co-conspirators in the people you are putting your trust in (local media news?) than in my comments, without you realizing it. Who's to say that it's not organized in such way that people such as yourself are not manipulated? It certainly would not be the first time... I prefer to look at facts and proof rather than word of mouth, which is why someone else said on the thread recently "The left are more to gather while the right are not". Same could be said for this matter. Behind the scenes is a scary world, I understand why people refuse to look that way. Hell, I wouldn't either of I was a Republican or democratic.

Edited August 13, 2018 by SonicMage117