EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5523
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
"We don't have any chess grandmaster" Right. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 12 2016 21:27 Nevuk wrote: what US presidential candidate from a major party has called for the jailing of their opponent besides Trump? I think you need to review the quote. Let me rephrase this in a way you might understand: Are you mad at Obama that his FBI and Justice department let a criminal go free? When you allege a miscarriage of justice, the plain meaning is under a different administration, the internal corruption wouldn't have held sway over the investigation. For the rest of it, people should open their ears to the part when Trump called for an independent investigator/special prosecutor. That point was the very one I wanted my elected representatives to push for when the story broke. I even heard from people in this thread justifying giving Hillary preferential treatment before the law given its impact on the election process who admit a low-ranking official would be put on trial and deserve it. I'd have a lot more sympathy if Democrats showed the same concern to abusing the legal process against people like David Daleiden, Scott Walker, and the broad threats of jail made against climate change deniers. If one shocks and offends and the other gets zero media attention and zero outrage, I'd say the real problem is partisanship. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
| ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:15 bardtown wrote: He actually said 'grand chessmaster', so he's technically correct :D I noticed, the same thing. Evil media always misconstruing his words. | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 12 2016 23:38 biology]major wrote: I don't give a shit about her server with 3 classified emails out of 30, 000. I care about the possibility of collusion and her attempts to repeatedly lie to cover it up. There is a huge conflict of interest. The DOJ is run by a president who endorsed HRC. DOJ AG was seen with Bill Clinton before hand discussing kids and golf. HRC is a democratic nominee with the backing of the entire establishment and lobbying power. You have to be naive as hell to think this was even remotely impartial. Comey added in an intent element, but as Gowdy said numerous times, intent can be shown indirectly through her repeated lying, for which the FBI says it did not look over the benghazi hearing(??). The whole investigation is suspect, and I will keep bringing it up. I hope trump brings it up a few more times in the next debate as well. Actually, you can't prove someone is lying without intent either. To prove someone is lying you have to show that at the time they made the factually untrue statement they knew it was factually untrue. So when Clinton says she didn't send classified emails, or Bush says Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, you have to prove they knew otherwise when they said those things to prove they were lying. Otherwise they're just wrong. So it doesn't matter that you think Clinton was lying, it's meaningless unless there's clear evidence she knew what she was saying was untrue. Without proof she knew better her statements can't be used to prove intent. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 12 2016 23:36 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: If one candidate had 95%+ of Wall St donations I wouldn't vote for them, put it that way. FYI. All Americans that work for a company (any company) and who has money in a bank (any bank) and owns property (any property) is automatically part of Wall Street. This is because "Wall Street" is simply the exchange of goods/stocks with each other for value. This includes money in the banks, goods in the stores, paychecks, payments, property, etc... All of that are part of Wall Street. When you say companies that are part of Wall Street, that's all of them. Mom and pop shops, the buying and selling of homes, the food you eat, the toilets you shit in, everything. When you say "the Banks" that's also ALL of them. Big banks, little banks, banks that climb on rocks--all of them are part of Wall Street. 99.99% of all donations are linked to Wall Street in one way or another. So when you say "If one candidate had 95%+ of Wall St donations I wouldn't vote for them, put it that way" you need to be much much more specific than that. But why then do people bring up Wall Street? Because when people say "Wall Street" what they mean is "People Richer than I am" and Wall Street is a great scapegoat since there's only 1-2 people on the entire planet that can honestly say that there isn't someone richer than them with money in Wall Street. Doesn't matter if you're minimum wage or make a billion dollars a year--there will always be someone richer than you in Wall Street and so its always so comfortable to point at Wall Street, say that it's "so evil," and its something both homeless people and billionaires say with equal pride. As an example, Donald Trump's campaign hinges on the idea that he is a billionaire, and that he is against Wall Street. Think about that for a moment. A literal billionaire, that brags about being one, can comfortably point at Wall Street as a scapegoat that there's too much money. Its because "Wall Street" is not a real thing, its a concept or idea that someone who is abstractly better than you should not get a vote. That's what "wall street money" really means. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
Jesus Christ, I have to quit twitter, I'm gonna have a heart attack. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:16 Rebs wrote: I noticed, the same thing. Evil media always misconstruing his words. Actually there are over 850 chess masters in the US, I'm pretty certain that a lot of them are grand. Checkmate. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15725 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:20 Biff The Understudy wrote: Actually there are over 850 chess masters in the US, I'm pretty certain that a lot of them are grand. Checkmate. Wow, crazy. My friend recently got promoted to master. Had no idea it was such a distinguished title. | ||
|
PassiveAce
United States18076 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:15 bardtown wrote: He actually said 'grand chessmaster', so he's technically correct :D this election is incredibly embarrassing | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:16 Thieving Magpie wrote: FYI. All Americans that work for a company (any company) and who has money in a bank (any bank) and owns property (any property) is automatically part of Wall Street. This is because "Wall Street" is simply the exchange of goods/stocks with each other for value. This includes money in the banks, goods in the stores, paychecks, payments, property, etc... All of that are part of Wall Street. When you say companies that are part of Wall Street, that's all of them. Mom and pop shops, the buying and selling of homes, the food you eat, the toilets you shit in, everything. When you say "the Banks" that's also ALL of them. Big banks, little banks, banks that climb on rocks--all of them are part of Wall Street. 99.99% of all donations are linked to Wall Street in one way or another. So when you say "If one candidate had 95%+ of Wall St donations I wouldn't vote for them, put it that way" you need to be much much more specific than that. But why then do people bring up Wall Street? Because when people say "Wall Street" what they mean is "People Richer than I am" and Wall Street is a great scapegoat since there's only 1-2 people on the entire planet that can honestly say that there isn't someone richer than them with money in Wall Street. Doesn't matter if you're minimum wage or make a billion dollars a year--there will always be someone richer than you in Wall Street and so its always so comfortable to point at Wall Street, say that it's "so evil," and its something both homeless people and billionaires say with equal pride. As an example, Donald Trump's campaign hinges on the idea that he is a billionaire, and that he is against Wall Street. Think about that for a moment. A literal billionaire, that brags about being one, can comfortably point at Wall Street as a scapegoat that there's too much money. Its because "Wall Street" is not a real thing, its a concept or idea that someone who is abstractly better than you should not get a vote. That's what "wall street money" really means. Yeah let's just paint over factious rivalries and call the whole thing Wall Street. It's basically just a synonym for capitalist now right??? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21953 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:14 Danglars wrote: I think you need to review the quote. Let me rephrase this in a way you might understand: Are you mad at Obama that his FBI and Justice department let a criminal go free? When you allege a miscarriage of justice, the plain meaning is under a different administration, the internal corruption wouldn't have held sway over the investigation. For the rest of it, people should open their ears to the part when Trump called for an independent investigator/special prosecutor. That point was the very one I wanted my elected representatives to push for when the story broke. I even heard from people in this thread justifying giving Hillary preferential treatment before the law given its impact on the election process who admit a low-ranking official would be put on trial and deserve it. I'd have a lot more sympathy if Democrats showed the same concern to abusing the legal process against people like David Daleiden, Scott Walker, and the broad threats of jail made against climate change deniers. If one shocks and offends and the other gets zero media attention and zero outrage, I'd say the real problem is partisanship. See my post to Biologymajor. Where is the Congressional appointed special prosecutor? 100+ ACA votes, 7 Benghazi investigations. Why is it that the Republicans have only tried to do Emailghazi through the FBI? If it is so obvious that the FBI and Obama are protecting Hillary why has Congress not acted with the power they hold? | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:22 Mohdoo wrote: Wow, crazy. My friend recently got promoted to master. Had no idea it was such a distinguished title. Well he must be pretty fucking good. Master is an unbelievably high level. It's like being code S in SC2, except there are so many of them and so much better ahead of your head that nobody really cares. Many people have talent, a devouring passion for chess, spends years and years studying and never get there. Chess is a sad world. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:24 PassiveAce wrote: this election is incredibly embarrassing Once you've established that reality was not an obstacle anymore, you open up a world of new possibilities. And also not giving a fuck about facts makes you invincible in a discussion, because you can just change reality whenever is convenient, as shown with a high degree of virtuosity by some hardcore trumpers in this very thread. | ||
|
PassiveAce
United States18076 Posts
gonna have to get a hillary/kaine tattoo on my forehead or soemthing | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:30 PassiveAce wrote: im trying to get into a masters program in paris and im worried about living there if trump wins... :/ gonna have to get a hillary/kaine tattoo on my forehead or soemthing You better fucking do hinhinhin. Nobody in Europe except for the usual suspects from the Front National and UKIP understands what's going on. People look at this elections and are totally, utterly baffled. I live in Norway, and if Trump was to be rated on a scale from 0 to 100, I don't know anyone who would not simply give him 0. | ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:30 PassiveAce wrote: im trying to get into a masters program in paris and im worried about living there if trump wins... :/ gonna have to get a hillary/kaine tattoo on my forehead or soemthing INSEAD ? You will get alot of sympathetic stares | ||
| ||
