monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

only a small minority are jihadis.

Perhaps. But many of the rest are happy to celebrate those jihadis when they massacre innocent people.

And many of the rest are happy to murder people who merely criticize Islam (or who are falsely accused of criticizing Islam).

Not to mention the ones who will happily murder their teenage daughters for going out on a date.

The problem with Islam extends well beyond the jihadis.

0 Replies

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

Interesting legal/constitutional point I had not heard before

Your "Look everyone! I think what that guy thinks!" game sure steered you wrong this time.

Quote:

...Many scholars agree that once a president has been impeached, he or she loses the power to pardon anyone for criminal offenses connected to the articles of impeachment.

The president is not able to pardon anyone from the impeachment charges. There is no loss of any power to pardon for criminal offenses.

Quote:

Less noticed is that even after the Senate's failure to convict the president, he or she does not regain this power.

There is no need to regain a power that has never been lost.

Mr. Trump remains free to pardon whoever he wants to pardon.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Nonsense. The constitutional provision at issue rather clearly forbids the President from pardoning other Federal officials who have been impeached and convicted by Congress for malfeasance in office. Roger Stone is not one.

Indeed. And in addition to that, he is also only prevented from pardoning them from the impeachment. He remains able to pardon them from any criminal prosecutions that may arise.

The left sure is getting goofy and delusional these days.

0 Replies

Quote:

Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson
Yesterday, there were 60 U.S. cases of Coronavirus, including 1 discretely identified case in CA; Trump came out and falsely said there were "15" and we were headed to "zero."

Today, CA said it *alone* has 28 cases. Please listen to the CDC and state health officials, NOT TRUMP.

0 Replies

So which do you consider more trustworthy if they don’t agree, Coldjoint -
State health officials and the CDC, or Donald Trump?

1 Reply

Quote:

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
· 1h
Do Nothing Democrats were busy wasting their time on the Impeachment Hoax, & anything they could do to make the Republican Party look bad, while I was busy calling early boarder & flight closings, putting us way ahead in our battle with the Coronavirus. Dems called it very wrong!

Border closings? Border closings? Boarder closing? Does someone - anyone - know of any border closings? And flight closings? What?

Seriously, does this guy think his base is this stupid? Is his base this stupid? What the **** is going on with this man?

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

State health officials and the CDC, or Donald Trump?

I would say Trump. Any bureaucracy after the FBI and DOJ is hard to trust.

0 Replies

Quote:

Bill Murray
@StayWonked
5h
You know, I’ve been giving this a lot of thought lately but i think may have been a huge mistake to find the worst human being in America, make him President, and have him lead us to our doom.

0 Replies

Top 8 Largest Dow Jones Drops in American History.

1) Trump: -1,191 2/27/20
2) Trump: -1,175 2/5/18
3) Trump: -1,032 2/8/18
4) Trump: -1,031 2/24/20
5) Trump: -879 2/25/20
6) Trump: -831 10/10/18
7) Trump: -800 8/14/19
8) Trump: -799 12/4/18

WINNING.

1 Reply

You hafta like that election map from 56. As the article notes, that election was basically the United States vs the KKK, even the enlightened parts of the old South didn't want any part of it.

https://steemitimages.com/640x0/https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmUePLSWeCmCx7Ms1XimGaqTwnEzngK2K7MmxCKbryjVd2/image.png

0 Replies

@snood,

Quote:

WINNING.

Try posting the record gains. Trump is ahead of the game.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

Not to mention the fact that it's the percentage change that matters with the stock market, not the change in raw point numbers.

0 Replies

Isn’t it funny how he points to himself with every gain, but points everywhere else at every loss?

Hilarious.

1 Reply

@hightor,

Quote:

Did it ever occur to you that the criticisms of the Snopes site might themselves be prompted by bias?

No. A man and wife "team snopes" employed a helper of the feminine gender, and the man began a relationship with her, which destroyed the original snopes "team".

He also used the company to pay for prostitutes.

This happened years ago, but snopes had a great public standing, so it was usurped by the PTB, and that's all she wrote, brother.

It's surprising that anyone attempting to debate topics online even considers looking to snopes for verification of anything, today.

Explain to the readers why you're still giving snopes credibility.

1 Reply

@Builder,

Quote:

This happened years ago...

Exactly. And it was trumpeted on the right because the right hates the way its lies are routinely exposed on the site. (Leftist misinformation gets skewered as well.)

Look, it's the same with Wikipedia. If you're writing a college essay, you can't just copy and paste a Wiki page about the subject and call that "research". But if you look at the sources in the article and in the footnotes, you can further research those accounts and decide whether you think those sources are reliable.

Now, if you look at the Snopes article about the pandemic team you'll see that highlighted sources are provided all through the article. It's all laid out there and you can judge for yourself whether or not it looks fair or biased.

It's ignorant to just show up any time someone refers to a Snopes page and say "Snopes is biased, Mikkelson paid for prostitutes" as if that has anything to do with Trump firing the pandemic team. You haven't raised one objection to any fact stated in the Snopes article, nor have you given one pertinent reason to doubt its editorial neutrality.

2 Replies

@hightor,

I am unfamiliar with the event that you guys are talking about. However, I consider Snopes' denial of the fact that the UN was trying to foster a global gun ban treaty to be ample reason for doubting them.

0 Replies

@hightor,

Quote:

You haven't raised one objection to any fact stated in the Snopes article, nor have you given one pertinent reason to doubt its editorial neutrality.

You haven't provided any evidence that snopes is a legitimate neutral source for any information, either.

1 Reply

@Builder,

Quote:

You haven't provided any evidence that snopes is a legitimate neutral source for any information, either.

I just explained it to you. Its legitimacy can be judged on a case to case basis by investigating the links provided in the article and scanning the text for obvious signs of bias. You apparently have no objections to any of the links or haven't bothered to read the article. I have no reason to doubt the timeline it establishes and the provided sources are believable. It's not a matter where the facts are in dispute anyway — the Trump administration fired the U.S. pandemic response team in 2018 to cut costs. Sure, it's a bit embarrassing for his defenders but that's not a reason to deny that it happened.

1 Reply

@hightor,

Every now and again, I gain the suspicion that the conservative types on sites like this one aren't much fond of reading.

Switching topics...
Krugman just wrote a tweet in reference to Brooks' column arguing that Sanders "is not a liberal, he's the end of liberalism"

Quote:

Sanders isn't an authoritarian; he's self-indulgent. Saying nice things about Cuba etc — like pretending to be a socialist — was a way of saying "Hey, I'm different!" Harmless in a maverick senator. Potentially disastrous in a presidential candidate

Spot on.

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

Isn’t it funny how he points to himself with every gain, but points everywhere else at every loss?

Hilarious.

To be expected from him or from Fox. What depresses is that anyone gets suckered by this.

Edit: We ought to note that this drop in the markets worldwide is obviously not Trump's fault even though he would certainly claim he was responsible if it went up.

He has pegged a lot of hopes on a continued rise (even though all he could have claimed is that he didn't kill it) so he's very unhappy with this turn of events.

What's going to **** him up is his long record of lying, his egomaniacal rejection of other more educated opinions, his lack of attention to details and learning, and his organizational incompetence. Everyone of those things ought to have ousted him long ago but in a crisis like this one, they stand in high relief.

0 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know