Lets Get Political

[Mamoulian War]

1 hour ago, Pidesco said:

Are you talking about Shapiro, dog whistler extraordinaire?

Nomclue what is his name, but IMO nazi and a jew does not belong into a one sentence, just saying. I do not know any background about US personas, just I am puzzled by the possible misuse by Googles higher ups, which is hinted at the video from UEG, if this is indeed real case.

[Zoraptor]

6 hours ago, Skarpen said:

..if the bumblebee is physically able to fly. Which the latter was by experts deemed impossible regardless of the clear evidence that they do fly.

I prefer the "A Kangaroo cannot get enough energy from its food to move by hopping!" example personally.

(Neither can happen based on rigid mechanics, but both work if you take elasticity into account. There was also 'proof' that thrips couldn't fly either, because fluid dynamics/ Bernouilli's Principle was ignored but they are small enough to 'swim' through air rather than fly so get a lot more lift than calculated without taking it into account. And as noted- and this is why it's taught in some curricula- no scientist believed that they actually couldn't fly or hop based on the equations, they thought the equations/ assumptions made when using them were wrong and needed revision)

Edited June 26, 2019 by Zoraptor

[Elerond]

45 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Nomclue what is his name, but IMO nazi and a jew does not belong into a one sentence, just saying. I do not know any background about US personas, just I am puzzled by the possible misuse by Googles higher ups, which is hinted at the video from UEG, if this is indeed real case.

Some of real nazis were jews and jews aren't immune of discriminating and persecuting people and being xenophobic especially orthodox jews aren't known for their open mindedness in case that you accept using term nazis when speaking people who don't tolerate people different of them living in same space/country

But people call each other nazis often when they don't like each other's opinions and people charge of big corporation doesn't make you immune of using such hyperpoles.

If Google (Alphabet) would actually like to censor Project Veritas or some other party you would have very hard time to hear about it or find any information about it and you would not get project veritas home page as result when you google project veritas.

[Gromnir]

7 hours ago, 213374U said:

The bumblebee thing is actually the other way around -- just one guy (an entomologist at that, rather than an engineer or biophysicist) claiming it was "impossible" rather than any kind of broad scientific consensus. You know, similar to how Einstein rejected the probabilistic aspect of quantum mechanics, despite having had a leading hand in laying the foundations for the theory himself, and against the accuracy of its predictions.

When one is completely clueless about complex topics, it's advisable to keep an open mind rather than immediately embracing the opinion of the one expert, even against the consensus of other specialists in the field or, well... readily observable facts.

damn. beat us to it. 

in any event, sharp ain't being too sharp by using worst possible example support his conclusion.  

am glad he focused on every 'cause it means he realizes his former military folks and cops ain't "every." so who are they? sharp points to imagined folks at a bar or on internet message boards to counter? uses worst possible example o' experts being wrong to defend proposition?

now don't get us wrong. as we said, is not good logic or good sense to be over reliant on experts. one expert might be right while the multitude is wrong. rely on experts, particular using number o' experts to support, can be dangerous.

even so, keep in mind that with the initial point we aren't even referencing objective science. talking 'bout something inherent subjective-- would any prosecutor charge? this is a cost 'n benefit analysis weighed out based on objective and subjective factors. is no strict formula. ask a multitude o' former prosecutors whether or not they would charge? +1000 says yes, and they has public attached name to memorialize such a position. Gromnir, btw, has just over a year experience as a fed prosecutor, so we coulda' added name to the list...but we didn't. why? in spite o' technical being a former fed prosecutor, we don't consider our self an expert on such matters and would be misleading to add name. am hardly gonna be unique in this regard. one suspects the clowns talking their arse off in a bar or message board site is unlikely to attach name to the kinda public list we see.

so, sharp goes into his alternate reality bar or internet message board where all the retired corporals who think they is alexander hang out. he finds a former fed prosecutor and shows the guy ~200 pages o' AG office fact finding which suggests sharp could be charged with _______. sharp asks the prosecutor should he be worried... could he be charged with a crime and should he get a lawyer?  

sharp repeats question to fed prosecutors over and over. is broad range o' expertise 'mongst people he asks, from relative untested to folks who were considered best prosecutor in their respective office for decades. eventual he gets more than a thousand fed experts to commit to the notion sharp could be charged. 

would sharp be worried?

no doubt 'mongst the multitude who says "charge," some would say sharp got nothing to worry 'bout. 'course is noteworthy we ain't seen such a competing list, eh? nevertheless, how many nays would it take to make sharp sleep better at night? again, keep in mind the, you are skrewed with the sharp end o' a rusty knife list includes men and women considered premiere experts on the subject. 1? 10? 100? 1000? 2000? 10000?  

as an aside, am at a loss trying to identify even a single former military guy on this board who genuine believes he could win every war. not one. if you can't even get us the bumblebee guy...

...

gd might be a cheat option 'cause am suspecting he would tell us that avoid fighting any foreign war is key to real victory. 

HA! Good Fun!

ps we didn't respond to your "case papers" silliness 'cause you did a fantastic job illuminating your own ignorance. thanks.

Edited June 26, 2019 by Gromnir

[Elerond]

6 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Of course experts are great thing to rely on in most cases. Like how to produce scotch or bourbon or if the bumblebee is physically able to fly. Which the latter was by experts deemed impossible regardless of the clear evidence that they do fly.

If you count as expert a person who didn't even actually study of subject who based their statement to miss calculations of some other person who had even less knowledge of subject.

[injurai]

Given nazism's historical context, unless someone is aligned with similar ethno-nationalist goals, it's better to use the term fascists when it's those same tendencies being applied along different identitarian lines.

Fascist underpinnings can be entertained on behalf of any identity to cultivate a "living space" for the select peoples.

Edited June 26, 2019 by injurai

[Gfted1]

More than 100 Oregon bills in jeopardy.

*limbers up horsewhipping arm*

[Pidesco]

12 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

More than 100 Oregon bills in jeopardy.

*limbers up horsewhipping arm*

 

Shouldn't people be in a panic over that? That sort of behaviour seems really, really dangerous for democracy.

[Gfted1]

15 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

 

Shouldn't people be in a panic over that? That sort of behaviour seems really, really dangerous for democracy.

You would think so, but if you peruse a few pages back you will see that the usual brainiac consider that "working as intended". Me? Id launch them into the sea with a catapult.

[Gromnir]

34 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

 

Shouldn't people be in a panic over that? That sort of behaviour seems really, really dangerous for democracy.

isn't panic worthy, but it is dangerous for democracy. quorum busting has a fair bit o' history in US politics. the tyranny of the majority has always been a problem in democracies. am knowing it is difficult to sympathize with what appears to be a bunch o' republicans fighting climate change legislation (a gross oversimplification) but keep in mind this sorta action is typical the last resort o' the minority group. looks different when is the seeming only option for the black caucus in deep south states post civil war, eh?  US Constitution's Bill of Rights were penned as a check on democracy, but there is few practical limits on democracy, particular at state and local levels. founders were afeared o' quorum busting and is referenced in legislative history as well as federalist papers-- they were aware, and they instituted no great limits on quorum busting save the democratic process itself.

US politics has become so polarized and intransigent, am suspecting you are gonna see this kinda thing more often. if democrats in a red state walk out to prevent a vote which would criminalize abortions, will be little surprise from us. yeah, quorum rules will be changed... democratically. the senators hiding? well, they can be voted out o' office. even so, quorum busting is dangerous for democracy. other than the Bill of Rights and a few other amendments, isn't too much to challenge the tyranny of the majority.

HA! Good Fun!

[Elerond]

1 hour ago, injurai said:

Given nazism's historical context, unless someone is aligned with similar ethno-nationalist goals, it's better to use the term fascists when it's those same tendencies being applied along different identitarian lines.

Fascist underpinnings can be entertained on behalf of any identity to cultivate a "living space" for the select peoples.

Hitler took ideology for his National Socialist German Workers' Party from Pan-European political fascist movement especially from Italian National Fascist Party.  

[ShadySands]

Quote

Some Republicans are taking a more extreme stance: Sen. Brian Boquist told a Portland TV station that opponents would have to "send bachelors and come heavily armed," adding "I'm not going to be a political prisoner in the state of Oregon."   
 
His comment seemed to encourage local militias. Over the weekend, authorities warned Democrats of a "possible…threat" to the capitol.

#BlueLivesMatter unless they are coming after us

[Gromnir]

10 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

#BlueLivesMatter unless they are coming after us

yeah, the threats o' violence is indefensible. we noted earlier--

"the newish militia threat? now that deserves a horse whipping. if a minority group can't get honest input and consideration because the democratic process is rigged, am in favor o' creative means o' protest and  resistance, but thin veiled threats o' violence is 'bout as blunt and uncreative as is possible to imagine. 'course those threats came after your post so am not giving you the benefit o' the doubt on those. nevertheless, we would agree that the minority senators should public condemn the militia threats in no uncertain terms."

'course

3 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

You would think so, but if you peruse a few pages back you will see that the usual brainiac consider that "working as intended". Me? Id launch them into the sea with a catapult.

you do realize stuff in quotes means you believe we said such, yes?

find "working as intended," from Gromnir regarding oregon senators.

will wait.

...

*jeopardy music plays*

...

no?

we actual said equivalent o' opposite, so is easy to see how gifted would be confused. perhaps you did a trump air quotes reversal? in any event, situation is 180 from working as intended. worse, is stoopid and utter avoidable. no excuses.  horse whipping frenzy? nope. 

situation is hardly unique and the senators playing hooky isn't alone as responsible parties deserving chastisement. thanks to excessive gerrymandering by both parties, we got states and districts which is so polarized it is now possible to levy a targeted tax which affects those who didn't vote for the majority. is so the opposite o' working as intended that politicians is resorting to extreme measures to resist. in a pure democracy, the minority gotta swallow whatever bitter pill the majority forces 'pon 'em. thankful the US ain't that kinda republic. use quorum rules to avoid tyranny o' majority? given current political climate, gifted shouldn't be shocked by this and is not historical new.  

oh, and seeing how gifted is equal frenzied when senators showup and pass legislation, is tough to work up any kinda sympathy for poor, frazzled gifted. "politics gonna politic," right?

HA! Good Fun!

[Skarpen]

4 hours ago, Gromnir said:

am glad he focused on every 'cause it means he realizes his former military folks and cops ain't "every." so who are they? sharp points to imagined folks at a bar or on internet message boards to counter?

Nice try spinning this around as Gromnir were the one who didn't realize that "everyone who..". doesn't mean "every". If Gromnir only meets people in the bar or on internet mb then it's really sad. But let Gromnir imagine that people can have different life experience and meet various people. I know this will go over Gromnir head like every point made ever. 

As for who I would ask if something is chargeable or not I would say that I would ask practicing attorney or an actual prosecutor. And I would only need to ask one person as people with law degree in Poland actually know the law. Unlike apparently USA where they will let anyone be in justice system even people that don't know what a case file is 

[Gromnir]

42 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

Nice try spinning this around as Gromnir were the one who didn't realize that "everyone who..". doesn't mean "every". If Gromnir only meets people in the bar or on internet mb then it's really sad. But let Gromnir imagine that people can have different life experience and meet various people. I know this will go over Gromnir head like every point made ever. 

As for who I would ask if something is chargeable or not I would say that I would ask practicing attorney or an actual prosecutor. And I would only need to ask one person as people with law degree in Poland actually know the law. Unlike apparently USA where they will let anyone be in justice system even people that don't know what a case file is 

weren't you talking 'bout case papers before... y'know, the "cellulose?" stuff with the ink on it? *snort* somehow by looking at the case papers (presumable stuff other than the mueller report as otherwise your observation would be complete pointless) a lawyer would have a change o' heart and balk at going before a judge with a charging document. 

what on earth do you think were the purpose o' the report? the report were the basis for barr and rosenstein's determinations. +400 of your case papers. didn't have barr or rosenstein complain 'bout insufficiency o' mueller's case papers, eh? 

you don't know enough to know how little you know... you know?

*chuckle*

would only need ask one knowledgeable attorney in poland? puts you in quite a pickle as over 1000 experts on US fed crim law and procedure has expressed their opinion... but we are going in circles.

buzz. 

talk 'bout trying to spin. but try and stay focused.

you were dismissive o' +1000 former prosecutors. for what should be obvious reasons, you can't get opinions from current fed prosecutors regarding the mueller report. "former," btw, don't mean they is no longer practicing. heck, a few is teaching at prestigious law schools, which also don't preclude an attorney from practicing.  news to sharp? likely. more than a few o' the +1000 is now state prosecutors as 'posed to fed. etc. and any one o' those guys could tell sharp what is requirements for a charging document rather than nonsensical observations 'bout the case papers.

HA!

while we know you wanna evade, the issue were you dismissing the opinion o' +1000 former fed prosecutors who read the same report as barr and rosenstein. heck, would be similar foolish to harken to all those experts declaring bumblebees were incapable o' flight, yes?

"They sound like every retired militaryman who "would win every war" and retired policemen who "would solve every crime" etc. if only they were younger."

and yeah, you can't even identify the multitude o' retired military men on this board who would win every war.

regardless, you don't know enough to discuss w/o the benefit o' expert help. 

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

1025 who is willing to help you keep from making more laughable mistakes.

HA! Good Fun!

ps add something new. have gone past point where all we is doing is repeating, and you evade.

[Skarpen]

8 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

weren't you talking 'bout case papers before... y'know, the "cellulose?" stuff with the ink on it? *snort* somehow by looking at the case papers (presumable stuff other than the mueller report as otherwise your observation would be complete pointless) a lawyer would have a change o' heart and balk at going before a judge with a charging document. 

what on earth do you think were the purpose o' the report? the report were the basis for barr and rosenstein's determinations. +400 of your case papers. didn't have barr or rosenstein complain 'bout insufficiency o' mueller's case papers, eh? 

you don't know enough to know how little you know... you know?

*chuckle*

would only need ask one knowledgeable attorney in poland? puts you in quite a pickle as over 1000 experts on US fed crim law and procedure has expressed their opinion... but we are going in circles.

buzz. 

talk 'bout trying to spin. but try and stay focused.

you were dismissive o' +1000 former prosecutors. for what should be obvious reasons, you can't get opinions from current fed prosecutors regarding the mueller report. "former," btw, don't mean they is no longer practicing. heck, a few is teaching at prestigious law schools, which also don't preclude an attorney from practicing.  news to sharp? likely. more than a few o' the +1000 is now state prosecutors as 'posed to fed. etc. and any one o' those guys could tell sharp what is requirements for a charging document rather than nonsensical observations 'bout the case papers.

HA!

while we know you wanna evade, the issue were you dismissing the opinion o' +1000 former fed prosecutors who read the same report as barr and rosenstein. heck, would be similar foolish to harken to all those experts declaring bumblebees were incapable o' flight, yes?

"They sound like every retired militaryman who "would win every war" and retired policemen who "would solve every crime" etc. if only they were younger."

and yeah, you can't even identify the multitude o' retired military men on this board who would win every war.

regardless, you don't know enough to discuss w/o the benefit o' expert help. 

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

1025 who is willing to help you keep from making more laughable mistakes.

HA! Good Fun!

ps add something new. have gone past point where all we is doing is repeating, and you evade.

Wow, there is so much wrong it's hard to even find a place to start. So I make it brief.

1) Papers, files all the same thing . People tend to have rich vocabulary and actually comprehend meaning of words and phrases. 

2) I never said anything about Mueller report. I made a hypothetical scenario about those +1000  putting the money where their mouth is. It's an idiom and it's meaning is not literal. I don't want you rambling about how unhygienic actually putting money in mouth is.

3) I never talked anything about who those +1000 former prosecutors are. It's irrelevant. You just make things up. 

4) Why would I have to identify retired military men on this board? To what purpose? Unlike you I don't have some obsession about who is who on internet message boards.

5) I don't evade anything. It's just that you don't comprehend what's being said, that's all. Let's bring the original statement:

"There's nobody on Earth who could bring an obstruction case based on these facts," he said."

+1000 former fed prosecutors disagree. 

To which my response is and I will try to use simple terms: Produce this person who will bring obstruction case or your disagreement means nothing. 

Simple as that. It's a big country, plenty of people in the legal field. Finding someone who isn't fan of the current president shouldn't be hard. 

[Gfted1]

Well, theres your problem! And now it all becomes clear to me. I do not value your opinion or feeling for me so you may cast off the yoke that burdens you. I have not asked for, or require, your sympathy. Bullet ---> dodged.   Kookoo.

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, Skarpen said:

Wow, there is so much wrong it's hard to even find a place to start. So I make it brief.

+ nonsense

you specific distinguished case papers. distinguished as celulose with ink on it.  nobody refers to case papers. had no idea what you thought were case papers... but your bullet point evasion once again fails to make sense-- you suggested if the lawyers got 'em, whatever they are, they would balk at going before a judge. the lawyers in our link, all +1000, got the stuff barr and rosenstein got. they got the same papers. duh. 

you were dismissive o' the +1000. again--

"They sound like every retired militaryman who "would win every war" and retired policemen who "would solve every crime" etc. if only they were younger."

the actual abilities and experience o' the +1000 is thus quite relevant. were core. nevertheless, even though it were an evasion by sharp, am still not knowing who these retired military folks is you speak o' as you can't produce any (irony.)

"We are former federal prosecutors. We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations at different levels of the federal system: as line attorneys, supervisors, special prosecutors, United States Attorneys, and senior officials at the Department of Justice. The offices in which we served were small, medium, and large; urban, suburban, and rural; and located in all parts of our country.

"Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice."

there is a list o' 1025 names attached. knock yourself out.

fact that they cannot bring the case with barr as ag don't in anyway diminish the expertise o' the +1000. just as there is no doubt more than one expert on bumblebee aerodynamics in the world (HA!) there can be multiple people with expertise on legal questions. the best neurosurgeon in the world suffers tennis elbow and cannot perform a surgery. doesn't mean his opinion is invalidated, eh? the +1000 have the bona fides to qualify a experts; a few o' them is daunting qualified. fact that only one person has power to make a decision or perform an action hardly precludes others from being capable o' contributing valuable and even superior insights.

evasion. 

as to gifted, is good to know you don't need sympathy, 'cause with all the whining and hand wringing 'bout senators and free press and not enough chinese style do the last few pages, you sure seemed like you needed a hug.

...

aw, what the heck. can't be stingy with the hugs.

now dontcha feel better?

HA! Good Fun!

ps this shouldn't be necessary, but given how blunt sharp has been since returning, am thinking it just might be necessary to clarify how graham's observation regarding nobody on earth who could were an observation o' ability rather than capacity. wouldn't be a point if the senator's total pool o' earthlings were limited to barr.  

Edited June 26, 2019 by Gromnir

[Malcador]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/06/26/pro-trump-message-board-quarantined-by-reddit-following-violent-threats/?utm_term=.9382d681d18a

Funny that  subreddit getting policed would make the news, hah.

[injurai]

What exactly does quarantine mean in relation to a sub-reddit? I've only ever heard of sub-reddits being banned.

[Gromnir]

Proposed bill would rescind Medals of Honor given for Wounded Knee massacre

conflicted. 

rescind is fine if there is specific recognition o' removal retained. erase the entries feels like a waste of effort and ultimate counter-productive. 

example chosen at random:

https://themedalofhonor.com/medal-of-honor-recipients/recipients/nolan-richard-indian-campaigns

full award citation reads: 

For bravery in action on 30 December 1890, while serving with Company I, 7th U.S. Cavalry, in action at White Clay Creek, South Dakota.

kinda vague for a medal of honor citation, no? 

erase the entry makes seem like the award were never given.  hand out twenty medals for massacre o' women, children and old men? 

*shrug* 

am not losing sleep on this one, but is a wasted opportunity in our mind. we would leave on the rolls with a "rescinded 2019" tag. in entry for each removed medal, include a synopsis o' the events of wounded knee. 

aside: am actual not one o' the proponents o' the narrative wounded knee were a planned massacre. our read o' the admitted one-sided and nevertheless conflicting accounts is that wounded knee were a result o' bad planning coupled with multiple mistakes. am doubting twenty-five members o' US 7th cavalry woulda' been killed and another 39 injured if the event were part o' some planned event. somebody got twitchy. there were a mistake. gatling gun emplacements had been set up in case things went south, and when they did, there were no hesitation in mowing down indians. revenge minded 7th cavalry likely wanted to kill indians, but am doubting they planned to do so on that day.  

recognize that root 'causes were human error instead o' overt villainy doesn't make event any less tragic.

and serious, twenty medals? each citation is unenlightening as the one we offered as example. 

leave the entries, but use as a teaching lesson.

then again, am the guy who has suggested leaving aggrandizing confederate civil war monuments where they are just so long as they is given a paint job which makes 'em appear as if covered in blood.

 

[Malcador]

Quote

On a platform as open and diverse as Reddit, there will sometimes be communities that, while not prohibited, average redditors may nevertheless find highly offensive or upsetting. In other cases, communities may be dedicated to promoting hoaxes (yes we used that word) that warrant additional scrutiny, as there are some things that are either verifiable or falsifiable and not seriously up for debate (eg, the Holocaust did happen and the number of people who died is well documented). In these circumstances, Reddit Administrators may apply a quarantine.

The purpose of quarantining a community is to prevent its content from being accidentally viewed by those who do not knowingly wish to do so, or viewed without appropriate context. Quarantined subreddits and their subscribers are still fully obliged to abide by Reddit’s Content Policy and remain subject to enforcement measures.  

Quarantined communities will display a warning that requires users to explicitly opt-in to viewing the content. They generate no revenue, do not appear in non-subscription-based feeds (eg Popular), and are not included in search or recommendations. Reddit may also enforce a number of additional product restrictions that exist currently or as they may develop in the future (eg removing custom styling tools).  

 

Meaningless really, but certain panties are getting in a twist over this - so there's comedy.

Edited June 27, 2019 by Malcador

[Zoraptor]

1 hour ago, Malcador said:

Funny that  subreddit getting policed would make the news, hah.

 

Similar time as the Project Veritas/ Alphabet and Facebook stuff breaking, and like it or not reddit is a major internet site. For the more right wing, same time and left leaning subs with similar behaviour ('encouraging violence', hiding buttons) regularly escape censure.

[Malcador]

8 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

 

Similar time as the Project Veritas/ Alphabet and Facebook stuff breaking, and like it or not reddit is a major internet site. For the more right wing, same time and left leaning subs with similar behaviour ('encouraging violence', hiding buttons) regularly escape censure.

Which left leaning subs do that ? Seems all I've ever seen on Reddit has been just garbage spewing and insularity rather than serious calls for violence, doubting this is the case for T_D as well.

Ah ok, apparently this r/chapotraphouse does.

 

Edited June 27, 2019 by Malcador

[Guard Dog]

9 hours ago, Pidesco said:

 

Shouldn't people be in a panic over that? That sort of behaviour seems really, really dangerous for democracy.

Oregon has 11266 enforceable laws in effect right now. Many are repetitive. some even contradict others. I'm sure they'll get along just fine until this so called "crisis" really just a bit of theater is over.