|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 20 2018 04:26 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 02:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 20 2018 02:00 TheTenthDoc wrote:
At least from a societal standpoint it's probably better not to hear about things like this. It's not like there's anything an individual can do to deal with it, especially if the bomber is escalating and changing techniques as Sunday's bombings indicate, and media attention might only make him escalate faster.
Not that modern media are generally preoccupied with what's best for society, but still. I can concede that the Boston Bombing was a more significant event initially, but there was a pretty massive and illegal (depending how far you let them go in the name of national security) manhunt that followed. Is there any reason to think this person isn't capable of something comparable to whatever those brothers were after Boston? Or that they don't already have it planed? Isn't every major event in Texas a potential target every day for something worse than Boston? Should they be looking for them like they looked for the Boston Bombers, disregarding residents 4th amendment rights (or others) in favor of national security or should they continue to do what they've done for the first 2 weeks, whatever that has been? I mean, with the Boston bombing they actually had images of the suspects hence the ability to conduct the massive manhunt and actually infringe on anyone's rights in the first place. Here they (as far as we know) have no images, no real idea of motive, and absolutely nothing to go on. I mean, they only locked down Watertown after the brothers were already traced to there. They don't have anything close to that now. If you're talking releasing the images of the backpack'd men, they don't even have that material from what limited press we've heard! If we find out that they were sitting on UPS cameras recording the men depositing the packages or tangible leads and are neglecting follow-up it would be one thing, but I haven't heard any evidence of that...
Interesting points. Do you also remember Sunil Tripathi?
Do you think it's possible we have grainy images of someone that could be the suspect? If it was a similar situation would you rather they not release them for fear of false identification, or release them and sort out the false positives after?
On March 20 2018 04:36 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:because clearly ad campaigns are the answer to the opioid crises. So just say no to your doctor prescribing you painkillers when your in massive amounts of pain? short article so I'll just quote the whole thing. Show nested quote +(CNN)President Donald Trump announced Monday that his administration will push a "large-scale" ad campaign aimed at combating the opioid epidemic.
The call harkens back to the "Just Say No" campaign -- and during his speech in New Hampshire, Trump said such commercials have made an impact before.
"The best way to beat the drug crisis is to keep people from getting hooked in the first place," Trump said. "This has been something I have been strongly in favor of -- spending a lot of money on great commercials showing how bad it is."
Trump added: "So that kids seeing those commercials during the right shows on television or wherever, the internet, when they see these commercials they, 'I don't want any part of it.' That is the least expensive thing we can do. Where you scare them from ending up like the people in the commercials and we will make them very, very bad commercials. We will make them pretty unsavory situations and you have seen it before and it is had an impact on smoking and cigarettes."
He later described the proposal as a "large-scale rollout of commercials."
That seems too clever to be Trump's idea. That's really damn smart. You know who's going to eat this up? Anyone who wants a fat government contract to make and air these ads.
That's a god damn genius idea to be able to publicly bribe a wide variety of politicians local, state, and federal, celebrities, organizations, corporations there's practically no one you can't funnel money to through this and do it right out in the open.
It's so ingeniously stupid it just might be Trumps idea after all.
EDIT: Oh hey, guess who wants some of that money?
|
Ohhhh, I love that one for so many reasons... And I'll wait eagerly the next one, as the article concludes : "Part Three, on the company’s work in the United States, will be broadcast at 7pm tomorrow (Tuesday, 20 March 2018)."
It is amazing how everything touched by Trump, close or far, turns out to be full of ****. How is it possible to be so effective at getting people to trust you, when you are doing the exact opposite of what you say, in nearly every way possible. In this case, "draining the swamp", "getting the very best people around me, the very best !".
It is some weird kind of magic, amazing me in a weird way every time... Either it's genius, or being so gullible that you get exploited by everyone, or both... Can't decide.
Extrapolating here taking an exemple with this firm and a hypothetical event : if they used these kind of tactics to Trump's benefit, let's say in Rep primaries. Would he have known and actively seeked that ? Would he have trusted words like "don't worry we'll achieve something cleanly" ? Would other people have contracted these guys without his knowledge ?
I have absolutely no idea... This guy looks so clueless I can't know if it is an act... Is he a genius at scapegoating while looking clean, or is he actually clean and an idiot?... I'm willing to wait 10+ years to get this answer, if we still have a world left after that.
(Disclaimer : I'm not american, but sadly this sad show if affecting my work and life from across the world...)
|
|
|
Pizzagate was projection all along.
|
|
|
Cambridge analytica is so fucked rofl
This is hilariously damning
|
On March 20 2018 05:32 IyMoon wrote:Who is this?
Someone fed up with Cuomo's leadership in New York and running for the spot themselves.
|
On March 20 2018 05:39 Mohdoo wrote:
Cambridge analytica is so fucked rofl
This is hilariously damning
Didn't you see??? They only ask those things to weed out clients who want to do illegal things... Totally in the clear
|
On March 20 2018 06:01 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 05:39 Mohdoo wrote:
Cambridge analytica is so fucked rofl
This is hilariously damning Didn't you see??? They only ask those things to weed out clients who want to do illegal things... Totally in the clear
In law that's as good as "t'was just a prank bro" after throwing some dog turds at a guy twice your weight class.
|
When a take is too hot for Schiff, you know it’s spicy.
|
"However without seeing the inspector general’s report, McCabe’s firing is “impossible to evaluate,” Schiff said."
Not entirely what you're implying mate.
|
In general the goverment releases the report that recommend the firing at the time of the firing.
|
On March 20 2018 06:35 m4ini wrote:"However without seeing the inspector general’s report, McCabe’s firing is “impossible to evaluate,” Schiff said." Not entirely what you're implying mate.
“impossible to evaluate,”
Is entirely different than what just about everyone here was saying. I don't think you objected previously?
|
On March 20 2018 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 06:35 m4ini wrote:"However without seeing the inspector general’s report, McCabe’s firing is “impossible to evaluate,” Schiff said." Not entirely what you're implying mate. “impossible to evaluate,” Is entirely different than what just about everyone here was saying.
Wasn't everyone saying that if he deserved to be fired they should have done it at the time and not 2 days before he retired and not with tweets being a dick about it from Trump? That is what I remember reading from people.
|
On March 20 2018 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 06:35 m4ini wrote:"However without seeing the inspector general’s report, McCabe’s firing is “impossible to evaluate,” Schiff said." Not entirely what you're implying mate. “impossible to evaluate,” Is entirely different than what just about everyone here was saying. I don't think you objected previously?
What you think matters little. Go back and read.
It's also not even close to what everyone was saying. Good try tho.
|
On March 20 2018 06:42 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 20 2018 06:35 m4ini wrote:"However without seeing the inspector general’s report, McCabe’s firing is “impossible to evaluate,” Schiff said." Not entirely what you're implying mate. “impossible to evaluate,” Is entirely different than what just about everyone here was saying. Wasn't everyone saying that if he deserved to be fired they should have done it at the time and not 2 days before he retired and not with tweets being a dick about it from Trump? That is what I remember reading from people.
Wulfey literally presented the idea that we know the reason will be bullshit right after m4ini posted (about something else) and Gor was the only one to challenge it (good on you Gor).
On March 20 2018 06:46 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 06:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 20 2018 06:35 m4ini wrote:"However without seeing the inspector general’s report, McCabe’s firing is “impossible to evaluate,” Schiff said." Not entirely what you're implying mate. “impossible to evaluate,” Is entirely different than what just about everyone here was saying. I don't think you objected previously? What you think matters little. Go back and read. It's also not even close to what everyone was saying. Good try tho.
On March 19 2018 05:47 Ayaz2810 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2018 05:10 Wulfey_LA wrote:On March 19 2018 04:49 Gorsameth wrote:On March 19 2018 04:41 Wulfey_LA wrote:Trump's words and actions make it super clear that firing McCabe was about Comey/Mueller. But some Trump loyalists at the DOJ have cobbled together a pretextual reason to fire McCabe that has not yet been revealed. Even further, Trump has demonstrated no actual knowledge of the secrete pretextual reason. But because of the secret pretextual reason, some people choose to pretend like the obvious answer provided by Trump in his own tweets is not the correct answer.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said on ABC’s “This Week” said he’s waiting to see more information on McCabe’s dismissal before making an ultimate judgment. Democrats and ex-intelligence officials have roundly criticized the decision by Attorney General Jeff Sessions — seen as imposed by President Trump — to fire McCabe two days before his pension would have vested.
“You know, his firing may be justified,” Schiff said.
“There's no way for us to know at this point, but even though it may have been justified, it can also be tainted. And I think the president's badgering of the attorney general, his urging that he be fired before his pension could vest, and the fact that McCabe and every other of the James Comey associates … who corroborate James Comey on the issue of potential obstruction of justice, every one of them has been targeted by the administration, by the Republicans and Congress. And is this because they corroborate James Comey? That's a question we also have to answer.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/adam-schiff-andrew-mccabes-firing-may-be-justifiedEDIT: this all should feel familiar. We should all remember when DAG Rosenstein wrote the pretextual memo justifying Comey's firing. DAG argued that since Comey was unfair to HRC, Comey should be fired. DJT then quickly came out and tweeted that that was not the case, and that Comey was fired because he wouldn't close down the Russia thing and because he wouldn't pledge his fealty to DJT personally. The usual suspects pretended like the DAG's memo wasn't a pretext for two weeks, and then they went silent as DJT repeatedly reinforced that firing Comey was about Russia. There will be a pretextual memo soon. It should be dismissed out of hand just like the previous pretexts. Its not a secret reason? The IG report recommended his firing. Either Sessions is lying (which would be dumb since the report will come out or the IG will correct him), the IG is lying (I assume his report will have evidence to support his conclusion) or McCabe did something wrong. Do you have a link to the report? And do you think Trump read it? I am not denying the existence of a pretextual memo to provide cover for Trump's desired results. I do think it exists. I think it will be (1) bullshit like the previous pretextual memos... Ding ding ding!
your turn to read.
Do you have a link to the report? And do you think Trump read it? I am not denying the existence of a pretextual memo to provide cover for Trump's desired results. I do think it exists. I think it will be (1) bullshit like the previous pretextual memos...
Ding ding ding!
This page right before it pretty much sums up liberals in this thread
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=10084
|
It's going to be really amusing if the IG report shows that Comey directed McCabe to leak stuff as is suggested by McCabe's public comments.
|
On March 20 2018 06:49 GreenHorizons wrote:
your turn to read.
I don't think you objected previously?
The fuck do i care what others said? You're implying that i am in acknowledgement with others because i didn't object. By default your "everyone" argument fails because i don't agree, i know that i don't know enough to make a judgement on being justified or not.
In fact i've never stated an opinion on justified or not for a very simple reason: how the fuck am i supposed to tell. I can tell that it was extremely petty of trump, out of the question. If there was something to fire him for, that was there already months ago.
I never ever disputed that there could be something, because again, your crying victim about how bad the FBI is (regardless of how bad in fact it is) means jack shit for an objective judgement. The same with "a drone king" that i responded to, he might be a dickhole, the hell would i know: but he's not "a drone king" if those drone attacks were ordered a decade before he came into office.
|
On March 20 2018 06:57 m4ini wrote:The fuck do i care what others said? You're implying that i am in acknowledgement with others because i didn't object. In fact i've never stated an opinion on justified or not for a very simple reason: how the fuck am i supposed to tell. I can tell that it was extremely petty of trump, out of the question. If there was something to fire him for, that was there already months ago. I never ever disputed that there could be something, because again, your crying victim about how bad the FBI is (regardless of how bad in fact it is) means jack shit for an objective judgement. The same with "a drone king" that i responded to, he might be a dickhole, the hell would i know: but he's not "a drone king" if those drone attacks were ordered a decade before he came into office.
I love when people lash out with these non-sensical responses. Of course you care about others say/said lol.
K, not everyone supported the idea but only one person shot down the idea that we didn't know McCabe deserved to be fired because of Trump's history.
Glad to know Democrats/Liberals are of the position they don't know if McCabe should have been fired or not and reflexively presumed because of the timing it couldn't have been justified, but now completely agree it could be justified.
|
On March 20 2018 04:37 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2018 04:26 TheTenthDoc wrote:On March 20 2018 02:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 20 2018 02:00 TheTenthDoc wrote:
At least from a societal standpoint it's probably better not to hear about things like this. It's not like there's anything an individual can do to deal with it, especially if the bomber is escalating and changing techniques as Sunday's bombings indicate, and media attention might only make him escalate faster.
Not that modern media are generally preoccupied with what's best for society, but still. I can concede that the Boston Bombing was a more significant event initially, but there was a pretty massive and illegal (depending how far you let them go in the name of national security) manhunt that followed. Is there any reason to think this person isn't capable of something comparable to whatever those brothers were after Boston? Or that they don't already have it planed? Isn't every major event in Texas a potential target every day for something worse than Boston? Should they be looking for them like they looked for the Boston Bombers, disregarding residents 4th amendment rights (or others) in favor of national security or should they continue to do what they've done for the first 2 weeks, whatever that has been? I mean, with the Boston bombing they actually had images of the suspects hence the ability to conduct the massive manhunt and actually infringe on anyone's rights in the first place. Here they (as far as we know) have no images, no real idea of motive, and absolutely nothing to go on. I mean, they only locked down Watertown after the brothers were already traced to there. They don't have anything close to that now. If you're talking releasing the images of the backpack'd men, they don't even have that material from what limited press we've heard! If we find out that they were sitting on UPS cameras recording the men depositing the packages or tangible leads and are neglecting follow-up it would be one thing, but I haven't heard any evidence of that... Interesting points. Do you also remember Sunil Tripathi? Do you think it's possible we have grainy images of someone that could be the suspect? If it was a similar situation would you rather they not release them for fear of false identification, or release them and sort out the false positives after?
I somehow doubt we have grainy photos of someone mailing a package from somewhere in the country or setting up a tripwire in a southwest Austin residential area (maybe that last one, if they got lucky with security cams). It's almost like competent bombers (or bombers that don't want to be caught) avoid conspicuous public areas and events where there are hundreds of cameras.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
