monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@Baldimo,

That's the tu quoque fallacy. That someone else does an immoral thing doesn't excuse others who do immoral things. Mr. Obama is not at issue here, Donald Plump is.

2 Replies

@blatham,

Read the Vox piece. I already kind of knew what their research uncovered, but that chart is still chilling.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

That's the tu quoque fallacy. That someone else does an immoral thing doesn't excuse others who do immoral things. Mr. Obama is not at issue here, Donald Plump is.

No, it isn't at all. It's an indirect way of attempting to acquaint you with simple facts that you appear to be completely unaware of, by example. The President, via the DOJ, has a great deal of universally acknowledged and accepted discretion in deciding what "crimes" to prioritize/prosecute. Everyone knows this (except you, apparently).

You seem to be unaware of even 3rd great civics, demanding to know where in the constitution the President is given authority to preside over the executive branch of government.

0 Replies

@blatham,

Quote:

But he clearly has no moral conscience of the sort that would lead him to refrain from falsehoods and given his broad ...

You might have to rethink that, blatham, Snood, ... . One might ask why can't you folks be as honest as Donald Trump.

Quote:

The United States and the Russian devil: 1917-2017

Conservatives have had a very hard time getting over President Trump’s much-repeated response to Fox News anchor Bill O’Reilly’s calling Russian president Vladimir Putin “a killer”. Replied Trump: “There are a lot of killers. We have a lot of killers. You think our country is so innocent?”

One could almost feel a bit sorry for O’Reilly as he struggled to regain his composure in the face of such blasphemy. Had any American establishment media star ever heard such a thought coming from the mouth of an American president? From someone on the radical left, yes, but from the president?

Senator John McCain on the floor of Congress, referring to Putin, tore into attempts to draw “moral equivalency between that butcher and thug and KGB colonel and the United States of America.”

Ah yes, the infamous KGB. Can anything good be said about a person associated with such an organization? We wouldn’t like it if a US president had a background with anything like that. Oh, wait, a president of the United States was not merely a CIA “colonel”, but was the Director of the CIA! I of course speak of George Herbert Walker Bush. And as far as butchery and thuggery … How many Americans remember the December 1989 bombing and invasion of the people of Panama carried out by the same Mr. Bush? Many thousands killed or wounded; thousands more left homeless.

DO READ ON, DEAR READER.

https://williamblum.org/aer/read/149

0 Replies

We would have been conquered long ago if we weren't killers. Something cheese-eaters never seem to understand. They think sitting around in a circle singin Kum-ba-ah and giving boxes of chocolate to Ruskies and ISIS pervs assures eternal peace and non-violence amongst all, eh?

2 Replies

@snood,

It is. The author notes an earlier Vox interview with Jonas Kaplan, a research psychologist at USC doing work relevant to these phenomena. I've just sent off a letter to Kaplan as I'd like to talk with him a bit on his findings and future research.

0 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

We would have been conquered long ago if we weren't killers.

You all are killers and supporters of killers. The other part is bullshit!

0 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

We would have been conquered long ago if we weren't killers.

This does seem to be true but would you agree that empathy is just as naïve as antisocial psychopathy? Maybe you share a flawed understanding of reality similar to that of an empathic person? Shocked

1 Reply

Just one point on "hope".

Finn is a nice man. He lives in Texas. I plan in a while to be down in Texas myself. I hope nothing happens to Finn's car.

2 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Well, RL, I watched your video, which was pretty entertaining. But they guy ends up making the argument that we NEED so-called "sociopaths" in our society, eh? He has a point, I figure.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Quote:

I hope nothing happens to Finn's car.

Do not be surprised when I come nocking on your door in the morning for threatening Flynn's car.

0 Replies

@layman,

Of course we need sociopaths. The naïve are the empathic and the cluster B disorders. Do not get me wrong but I think empathy is subjective and a part of evolution but until we understand it better it is a naïve position. Wink

Antisocial psychopathic behavior in my view is just a barbaric or less evolved form of social behavior.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

Antisocial psychopathic behavior in my view is just a barbaric or less evolved form of social behavior.

Well, RL, the way you put it, I don't think anyone would disagree. "Antisocial psychopathic behavior" is a generally considered to be pretty extreme. Guys like Ted Bundy come to mind, when you put it that way.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

That's the tu quoque fallacy. That someone else does an immoral thing doesn't excuse others who do immoral things. Mr. Obama is not at issue here, Donald Plump is.

That sounds more like a moral position than a logic rule.

It is a moral position that I vehemently reject. While it is pretty clear that Trump has committed no crime, if he had actually committed obstruction, the fact that Bill Clinton did it too would be ample justification for giving Trump a free pass on the matter.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

As its been said amply and repeatedly, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE requires no underlying crime,

I missed the significance of this earlier. This is effectively an admission that your concern isn't Russia at all. You just want to abuse the law to harm people who disagree with you.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Jesus, oralloy, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE is a crime! A very serious crime, especially for those in high office.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

I missed the significance of this earlier.

You miss the significance of everything, rabid, gunga like partisan that you are!

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I didn't pick up on that oralloy, but you're right. DAs endeavor to influence investigations all of the time. Let's give Debra the benefit of the doubt though and assume she miss worded her comment.

You haven't read the laws for yourself? You both should look up and read all of the federal laws on obstruction. Pay attention to the word "endeavor" when you read it ... right there ... in statutory law. Unless, of course, you're reading 18 USC 1512(c). There you will find the word "attempt" instead of "endeavor". Self education is a wonderful thing. Try it.

3 Replies

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Jesus, oralloy, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE is a crime! A very serious crime, especially for those in high office.

If it was no big deal for Bill Clinton to do it, then it is no big deal for Trump to do it.

But don't worry. Trump has committed no crime. The Democrats are just abusing the law here to harm people who disagree with them.

Once we successfully abolish the Democratic Party in America, things will be OK again.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Do you care to cite the portion of the constitution in which the president is given that authority? Or are you, in fact, whistling past the graveyard because you're just as ignorant of the constitution as President Plump?

Allow me.

Article II. Section 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

0 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know