|
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 June 24 2017 12:44 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 12:35 TheTenthDoc wrote:
While I don't think the election was illegitimate per se, saying continuously raising stink about it is a poor strategy for the Democrats is fascinating in light of the fact that a man who spent half a decade raising stink about the legitimacy of a Democratic president based on complete fabrication is currently sitting in the White House. Bonus points because the man earnestly believes there were 3 million illegal votes in the 2016 election so he actually won the popular vote.
Kind of reminds me of people saying the Dems should sit down quietly and not obstruct GOP bills when it worked great for the past 8 years. Or that the left-leaning media should lean to the right after right-spinning media was a fulcrum in the GOP win.
Edit: Which is not to say I think running entirely on "the 2016 election was illegal" is a winning strategy any more than running on entirely on "Obama isn't a citizen" would have been. But it's a tool. What do you want to prove? That Democrats can be just as shitty, obstructionist, and petty as the Republicans whose petty, scummy obstructionism brought us here? All you will accomplish is to throw Obama's rhetoric of a moral high ground down the crapper and legitimize anything and everything that the Republicans have used as a tool against Democrats in the past. Evidently that that "why should we be any better than those pond scum" attitude will do wonders for that "revenge" against the GOP that you clearly hope for. Or maybe, just maybe, not so much.
Voters have shown they don't care about any of that stuff. The GOP's strategy of obstructing and demonizing the Democrats has worked beautifully. Why wouldn't you copy it?
You have to win to enact your policies. It's shitty, but it's proven to be effective.
|
he also never actually apologized for the claims
|
I've been away for a while, but have we discussed that America's Republican Party wants to give $800 billion dollars in tax cuts to people with multiple bank accounts, by taking it from people in wheelchairs?
Because that's so fucked up, even Donald Trump wouldn't think he'd get away with it.
He'd "shoot someone on 5th avenue"... and yet he felt compelled to promise to not cut Medicaid.
So, it's like, Republicans realized they're branded evil now, so they just said fuck it: let's take money from disabled children after we bathe ourselves in the blood of sacrificial virgins.
And I'm not even surprised anymore. McConnell could snuff-film someone on the Capitol steps, and I'd just have to say, "Yeah, that's McConnell. The leading Senator of my country is this demented, malformed, snide creature-thing, and he will kill again."
WTF is wrong with these people? Am I nuts? At what point does all this stop being a game of spiting liberals and ideology? At any point are we just going to collectively admit that Republicans actively seek general misery for others? That this is a cult of sadism?
Trump may be a crook, a Putin-plant, etc., etc. Republicans want to just cut taxes for rich people, and deregulate protections for people, etc., etc. There is at least some selfish motive to typical Republican shit. It at least makes sense, regardless of how terrible I think it is.
Cutting $800 billion in taxes directly out of Medicaid and health-subsidies doesn't make sense. You're actively taking money from the people who deservedly need it the most. You could get that tax cut from anywhere else -- hell, just borrow it like they always do. The House and Senate healthcare bills are, quite simply, fucked-up monstrous shit of the absolute highest order, and I'm not sure how anyone could possibly think it's a good idea except for the fact that they're following the cult's orders.
|
I have railed and railed on here before about Trump's Russian bullshit, and now I don't even care. I'm starting to realize McConnell and Ryan make Trump and Putin look fucking good in comparison.
edit: actually that's not true, Russia's healthcare is fucking pits and inhumane too. I guess that's what we're aiming for nowadays.
|
On June 24 2017 08:22 Danglars wrote:
I'm loving this new era of civility. Let's tiptoe right to the edge of calling the GOP murderers right after one almost got assassinated by a Berniebro.
Your ideology kills people.
Actions have consequences. It isn't the Democrats job to lie about your policies, you do that well enough on your own.
Bernie isn't telling his followers to shoot people. Your ideology is what's doing that. I, for one, don't want to see people get shot. But it's going to happen if you screw people over hard enough -- eroding basic democratic principles, shirking all decorum, and robbing from the poor and disabled.
It's just a fact. I don't want to see civil strife, let alone anything amounting to a civil war, with politicians getting shot. But at some point you have to accept that there are limits. If there weren't, we'd still be an English colony.
|
On June 24 2017 11:32 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 10:50 ShambhalaWar wrote:On June 24 2017 09:42 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On June 24 2017 09:35 zlefin wrote:On June 24 2017 09:29 TheLordofAwesome wrote:On June 24 2017 08:52 zlefin wrote:On June 24 2017 08:45 TheLordofAwesome wrote:
Do we actually know what's in the Senate bill yet? Last I heard the contents were still secret from the general public.
Also, Clinton's, Bernie's, and Warren's tweets on the matter are really stupid. Danglars is absolutely correct when he says they are helping Trump's 2020 campaign. Their words are better advertising for Trump's style than anything that Trump could ever say.
The only effective Dem response about healthcare bill I've seen so far comes from Joe Biden. If Democrats want to win elections, they should look to him for guidance. I think we do, iirc someone posted a full text aways back in the thread; but maybe that was just a working copy. those tweets do have some issues; but they're not counterfactual, which is something at least. they may not play well amongst republicans, but they do play well amongst the democrats, so they do so because it's in their individual interest to look like they're fighting trump. Great point. "Look like." Therein lies the problem. If they actually wanted to fight Trump, they could retweet the AFLCIO or Biden. Or write 140 characters expressing the same sentiments. Instead, their actions are Trump's greatest asset. Why? Because I know a lot of Trump voters, and I don't know anyone who voted for Trump because they thought he was a genius. They voted for him because of this: "The Outsider, Donald Trump, has arrived to clean house! You don’t have to agree with him! You don’t even have to like him! He is your personal Molotov cocktail to throw right into the center of the bastards who did this to you! SEND A MESSAGE! TRUMP IS YOUR MESSENGER!" - Michael Moore And when those Trump voters see "death party" it just reinforces that they made the right choice. Yes, it's a tragedy of the commons situation, there's no good answer to it. individual defection is too valuable for the larger strategy ot be maintained. I full well know it can be an asset to trump voters; extremists feed off each other, each one justifying the others' existence. also those Trump voters are idiots; but that's nothing new, still quite sad though, it also ofc makes them assholes. The dynamics that lead to increasing partisanship and vitriol have been quite well studied; it's why my preferred solution is to alter the inputs that lead to a partisan dynamic. change the dynamics and the solutions will work themselves out. What are you talking about, tragedy of the commons? I don't see how that applies here at all. I have an answer to the problems that the Dem party is facing, and it is very simple. You want to win elections? Look to the examples set by Bill Clinton and to a lesser extent Joe Biden. Try for some of that Slick Willie charm instead of the Biden gaffe machine. (Don't worry if you aren't as charming as Bill was in his heyday; you're facing Donald Trump aka the most disliked candidate in US presidential history.) You want to lose elections? Continue down the road of extreme identity politics and culture wars. Keep smearing all of your opponents as racist, sexist, and evil. Your statement is based on the assumption that the USA elections in 2017 were actually legitimate democratic elections. If any one of these things didn't occur and flawlessly damage the election process, Hillary Clinton would be president. Literally ALL of these had to happen along with a perfect storm to have Clinton lose. 1) Comey speaks out a week before election and falsely reopens Clinton investigation to damage credibility. 2) Everything Russia did that we know and that we don't know. 3) MASSIVE, MASSIVE, voter suppression via "interstate crosscheck", google interstate crosscheck, greg palast, best democracy money can buy. 4) Pick a candidate like Hillary Clinton and have a candidate lose the primary like Bernie Sanders lose the primary (also leak that the dems played favorites and tilted the scales). All of this and many more little things that allow someone like Trump to come and ride the wave Bernie started as the non-mainstream option. Well 1 the election was in 2016 not 2017 2. comey announced that they had to reopen the investigation because they might have found new evidence. Do you not think that they found new evidence or that they didn't reopen the investigation? I don't see how democratically picked candidate (no matter how much the organization as a whole was tipping the scales) delegitimizes the election as a whole. Also just general "whatever russia did" isn't a real point its speculation. I'm sure Isreal has had an effect on US elections for the entirety of their existence but It doesn't delegitimizes the election. The Idea that the election was illegitimate is whats keeping the democrats from moving on and capitalizing on trumps presidency. at this rate the 2018 elections are going to be a wash and god save us in 2020.
There was no new evidence with the Clinton investigation, there were a batch of backed up emails they already had on a different computer, even if there was knew evidence you don't announce it a week before the election when you know for a fact it will influence the election. Everyone new that, and even many republicans spoke out about what Comey did as a horribly wrong thing.
She had already been investigated and already cleared of any criminal wrongdoing. Yet he spoke out about more random emails, before he even knew what he had as evidence? WTF sense does that make? It's the FBI, they knew what they had the minute they had it, and if they didn't... In no way is it ok to reopen investigation publicly before you know if you even have credible evidence (which they did not have at the end of the day, they just had another copy of the same emails... hence no charges).
Second Russia hacking into our voting systems, that's not fiction, that's fact according to most or all major news sources at this point. I'm not sure why you are quoting me as saying, "whatever Russia did," because I didn't say that... I said, "Everything Russia did that we know and that we don't know." For example, we know they hacked voting machines, they hacked into DNC systems, they hired people to use bots and troll the internet creating fake news... I think it's safe to assume more happened and we didn't know about it. But even if that's all that did happen, it's more than enough to influence an election.
*You must remember American (who voted Trump) people are smart enough to believe these kinds of fake news stories and then follow up on them by going into a pizza joint with and m16 and fire off shots, so clearly (idk how) some people believe these stories and act on impulses created by reading this stuff.
For my example of Bernie, I clearly remember the day of the final primaries. I woke up early, about 7 am, turned on cnn at 8. By the time I turned the tv on, cnn had already declared Clinton the winner. BY 8 AM... BEFORE ANYONE HAD EVEN VOTED.
The night before... they were also running the story, "HILLARY CLINTON HAS JUST MADE HISTORY!"
THE NIGHT BEFORE ANYONE VOTED... I promise you up and down, some Bernie supporters woke up to those headlines and decided to stay home because they thought it was already over. Also even in states Bernie won by 80% of the vote, the "super delegates" came out 5-1 against him. WTF sense does that make?
These kind of manipulations describe the entirety of this fucked up third world election that happened in the USA.
You didn't even try to address interstate cross check and the massive voter suppression that has been a problem in our country for decades. People racially scrubbing the voter rolls based on name getting flagged with minimal criteria as being a duplicate name.
To your last point, it's not an idea, it's simply a fact... this was not a legitimate election in any sense of the term. A legitimate election doesn't include parties being hacked, the FBI making false claims about candidates, voter suppression or playing party favorites... Everyone and their mom know's clinton backed off during obamas time, took he cabinet position with promise that in 2016 she would be the golden child for the DNC.
The party was not going to allow anyone else to run.
For the record I support Bernie and voted up and down like a good little soldier for Hillary. And I would have been damn happy with her, but not have my heart behind her like I did him. And she did win...
Think about this as well... all the early polling data for the election results was drastically off... Why was that?
Everyone just simply said, "Wow all the polling people are morons, they've never been off before, but now this time... they blew it, they were all wrong!" Well that is one possible explanation of what happened, but it doesn't make much sense. Polling has been accurate for the most part for a long time, so why would everyone all of a sudden be wrong?
Imagine instead that the polling was actually right, but what wasn't right was the result.
Then tell me which answer makes more sense... 1) Polling was off for some unknown and random reasons (or because pollsters all of a sudden became dumb and inaccurate) in a way that it has never been off in my lifetime. 2) Polling (wasn't off, but) appeared off because the result was manipulated.
#1 isn't even a reason, but that's what you heard on every major news station across the country.
I can go on for days about any of this... Why do we even use electronic voting machines in this country without paper trails... ?????? Why not just use paper period... we've known for years all this stuff is hackable by amateurs.
Edit:An addendum: I completely forgot about gerry mandering Which of course deserves an entire thread of its own, but we can hear about that now in the supreme court. Yes the same court with the stolen appointment.
|
Trump literally said to his supporters at a rally that they should punch protesters in the face and he would pay their legal fees. You can youtube it.
Bernie spoke out IMMEDIATELY and loudly AGAINST ANY VIOLENCE in any context.
|
On June 24 2017 12:35 TheTenthDoc wrote:
While I don't think the election was illegitimate per se, saying continuously raising stink about it is a poor strategy for the Democrats is fascinating in light of the fact that a man who spent half a decade raising stink about the legitimacy of a Democratic president based on complete fabrication is currently sitting in the White House. Bonus points because the man earnestly believes there were 3 million illegal votes in the 2016 election so he actually won the popular vote.
Kind of reminds me of people saying the Dems should sit down quietly and not obstruct GOP bills when it worked great for the past 8 years. Or that the left-leaning media should lean to the right after right-spinning media was a fulcrum in the GOP win.
Edit: Which is not to say I think running entirely on "the 2016 election was illegal" is a winning Dem strategy any more than running on entirely on "Obama isn't a citizen" would have been for the GOP. But it's a tool.
The difference between your examples would be that one is true, and the other is not.
It's not running on "tools" just simply stating reality, without pretending it to be something different than what it is.
|
On June 24 2017 13:36 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 13:31 Danglars wrote:On June 24 2017 13:24 TheTenthDoc wrote:On June 24 2017 13:13 Danglars wrote:On June 24 2017 12:44 LegalLord wrote:On June 24 2017 12:35 TheTenthDoc wrote:
While I don't think the election was illegitimate per se, saying continuously raising stink about it is a poor strategy for the Democrats is fascinating in light of the fact that a man who spent half a decade raising stink about the legitimacy of a Democratic president based on complete fabrication is currently sitting in the White House. Bonus points because the man earnestly believes there were 3 million illegal votes in the 2016 election so he actually won the popular vote.
Kind of reminds me of people saying the Dems should sit down quietly and not obstruct GOP bills when it worked great for the past 8 years. Or that the left-leaning media should lean to the right after right-spinning media was a fulcrum in the GOP win.
Edit: Which is not to say I think running entirely on "the 2016 election was illegal" is a winning strategy any more than running on entirely on "Obama isn't a citizen" would have been. But it's a tool. What do you want to prove? That Democrats can be just as shitty, obstructionist, and petty as the Republicans whose petty, scummy obstructionism brought us here? All you will accomplish is to throw Obama's rhetoric of a moral high ground down the crapper and legitimize anything and everything that the Republicans have used as a tool against Democrats in the past. Evidently that that "why should we be any better than those pond scum" attitude will do wonders for that "revenge" against the GOP that you clearly hope for. Or maybe, just maybe, not so much. I think we're well beyond legitimizing all the Republicans did in the past. We accepted our two defeats at the hands of Obama, by and large, but now a large, vocal group has delegitimized his freely elected replacement for like eight months now. + Show Spoiler + You realize that the current President spent years on a wild goose chase delegitimizing the freely elected President, right? That's exactly what we're talking about legitimizing here. Yes, and he was shamed and birthers were never a major part of the Obama presidency. So they're totally different, if you can take the blinders off and simply observe. Both sides are wrestling in the dirt and nobody's on the high ground. Democrats only played nice with Obama in charge of the executive; they operate on a second set of rules when America rejects their candidate, as is obvious now. Democrats got smart and realized the Republicans don't operate in good faith. They are not getting doped into the Iraq war 2.0 or whatever nightmare this new congress cooks up to hang over the Democrats head for another 10 years.
Except for the fact that they were gung-ho to get into a war with Syria.
|
I wish these indictments were more common, as I'm fairly sure there are quite a few televangelists who could be brought up on similar charges.
North Carolina televangelist Todd Coontz – author of numerous books on faith and finances – has been indicted on charges of tax fraud spanning more than a decade.
"As a minister, Coontz preached about receiving and managing wealth, yet he failed to keep his own finances in order," Jill Westmoreland Rose, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina, said as she announced the charges. "Coontz will now receive a first-hand lesson in 'rendering unto Caesar' that which is due."
The charges include three counts of failure to pay tax, each carrying a maximum federal prison term of one year, and four counts of aiding and assisting in filing false tax returns, each carrying a maximum term of three years.
Coontz, 50, is described on his website as a "pastor, evangelist, television host, author, humanitarian, philanthropist, businessman." He currently lives in Florida and the books he's written include Breaking the Spirit Debt and Please Don't Repo My Car.
The televangelist "promised financial miracles for people who sent money to his ministry," according to Channel 9 WSOCTV of Charlotte, N.C. The news station recounts some examples of his claims:
" 'You need to plant the $273 recovery seed. I'm only going to give you two to three minutes to respond,' Coontz once told his viewers.
"Coontz posted videos on Twitter as recently as Wednesday, promising financial blessings to the faithful.
" 'Suddenly miracles are happening. I want to work with your faith for quick things, swift things,' Coontz said in the video."
Coontz's attorney Mark Foster said in a statement to WSOCTV that Coontz "unequivocally asserts his innocence of these charges." He added: "Todd Coontz has always endeavored to follow the law and to be a good citizen, father and minister. He trusted others to manage his finances and taxes for him and was shocked to find out he was under criminal investigation by the IRS."
The charges allege that Coontz filed delinquent federal income tax returns from 2000-2014, with federal tax liabilities amounting to more than $326,000.
He also allegedly purchased the following vehicles through his corporations or ministry: "a 2011 BMW, a 2011 Regal 2500 boat, a 2012 BMW convertible, a 2011 Lexus, a 2011 Land Rover, a 2006 Ferrari, a 2012 Maserati, a 2013 BMW, a 2013 Land Rover, and a 2012 Ferrari."
"All payments associated with these vehicles were treated as business expenses on corporate and ministry accounting records even though COONTZ's family members drove some of the vehicles and no records were kept about the supposed business use of the vehicles," the indictment states.
North Carolina Televangelist Indicted On Charges Of Tax Crimes
|
So, this happened then yesterday?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-st-louis-police-officer-shoots-off-duty-black-officer/
A black off-duty St. Louis police officer was shot by a white on-duty police officer from the same department who apparently mistook him for a fleeing suspect, according to a statement from the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department.
Which is funny, because of this:
Two officers "challenged the off-duty officer and ordered him to the ground," the department said. The officer complied and once they recognized him the on-duty officers told him "to stand up and walk toward them."
At about the same time, another officer who had just arrived on the scene saw what was happening and "fearing for his safety" and apparently not recognizing the off-duty officer, discharged a shot, striking the off-duty officer in the arm."
You must have manly cops. Like, steady as rocks, calm as a mountain - the epitome of courage. A black man (cop) walking towards two other cops after being told so is enough now to fear for your life. Which is even weirder considering he not only was scared for his life, but also assumed somehow that it was "a fleeing person" that walked towards the cops.
You can't make this shit up.
@above: first time i heard that televangelists even exist was on John Olivers show. I thought he made some compelling points on that one.
|
On June 24 2017 20:09 m4ini wrote:So, this happened then yesterday? http://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-st-louis-police-officer-shoots-off-duty-black-officer/Show nested quote +A black off-duty St. Louis police officer was shot by a white on-duty police officer from the same department who apparently mistook him for a fleeing suspect, according to a statement from the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. Which is funny, because of this: Show nested quote +Two officers "challenged the off-duty officer and ordered him to the ground," the department said. The officer complied and once they recognized him the on-duty officers told him "to stand up and walk toward them."
At about the same time, another officer who had just arrived on the scene saw what was happening and "fearing for his safety" and apparently not recognizing the off-duty officer, discharged a shot, striking the off-duty officer in the arm." You must have manly cops. Like, steady as rocks, calm as a mountain - the epitome of courage. A black man (cop) walking towards two other cops after being told so is enough now to fear for your life. Which is even weirder considering he not only was scared for his life, but also assumed somehow that it was "a fleeing person" that walked towards the cops. You can't make this shit up. @above: first time i heard that televangelists even exist was on John Olivers show. I thought he made some compelling points on that one.
*Something about how all black men are dangerous and deserve to be shot without regard for the situation*
But really, there is no systematic problem with the US police force. /s
|
On June 24 2017 20:09 m4ini wrote:So, this happened then yesterday? http://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-st-louis-police-officer-shoots-off-duty-black-officer/Show nested quote +A black off-duty St. Louis police officer was shot by a white on-duty police officer from the same department who apparently mistook him for a fleeing suspect, according to a statement from the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. Which is funny, because of this: Show nested quote +Two officers "challenged the off-duty officer and ordered him to the ground," the department said. The officer complied and once they recognized him the on-duty officers told him "to stand up and walk toward them."
At about the same time, another officer who had just arrived on the scene saw what was happening and "fearing for his safety" and apparently not recognizing the off-duty officer, discharged a shot, striking the off-duty officer in the arm." You must have manly cops. Like, steady as rocks, calm as a mountain - the epitome of courage. A black man (cop) walking towards two other cops after being told so is enough now to fear for your life. Which is even weirder considering he not only was scared for his life, but also assumed somehow that it was "a fleeing person" that walked towards the cops. You can't make this shit up. @above: first time i heard that televangelists even exist was on John Olivers show. I thought he made some compelling points on that one.
Fucking christ that's embaressing. At least they guy's not dead.
|
On June 24 2017 16:41 Leporello wrote:Your ideology kills people. Actions have consequences. It isn't the Democrats job to lie about your policies, you do that well enough on your own. Bernie isn't telling his followers to shoot people. Your ideology is what's doing that. I, for one, don't want to see people get shot. But it's going to happen if you screw people over hard enough -- eroding basic democratic principles, shirking all decorum, and robbing from the poor and disabled. It's just a fact. I don't want to see civil strife, let alone anything amounting to a civil war, with politicians getting shot. But at some point you have to accept that there are limits. If there weren't, we'd still be an English colony.
You mean civil strife like Venezuela? The colombian Guerrilla? Maybe Cuba's dictatorship? Those right wing ideas really kill people.
|
On June 24 2017 23:42 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 20:09 m4ini wrote:So, this happened then yesterday? http://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-st-louis-police-officer-shoots-off-duty-black-officer/A black off-duty St. Louis police officer was shot by a white on-duty police officer from the same department who apparently mistook him for a fleeing suspect, according to a statement from the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. Which is funny, because of this: Two officers "challenged the off-duty officer and ordered him to the ground," the department said. The officer complied and once they recognized him the on-duty officers told him "to stand up and walk toward them."
At about the same time, another officer who had just arrived on the scene saw what was happening and "fearing for his safety" and apparently not recognizing the off-duty officer, discharged a shot, striking the off-duty officer in the arm." You must have manly cops. Like, steady as rocks, calm as a mountain - the epitome of courage. A black man (cop) walking towards two other cops after being told so is enough now to fear for your life. Which is even weirder considering he not only was scared for his life, but also assumed somehow that it was "a fleeing person" that walked towards the cops. You can't make this shit up. @above: first time i heard that televangelists even exist was on John Olivers show. I thought he made some compelling points on that one. Fucking christ that's embaressing. At least they guy's not dead.
Embarrassing just about sums up the US police force at the moment. Sad!
|
On June 24 2017 23:42 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2017 20:09 m4ini wrote:So, this happened then yesterday? http://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-st-louis-police-officer-shoots-off-duty-black-officer/A black off-duty St. Louis police officer was shot by a white on-duty police officer from the same department who apparently mistook him for a fleeing suspect, according to a statement from the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. Which is funny, because of this: Two officers "challenged the off-duty officer and ordered him to the ground," the department said. The officer complied and once they recognized him the on-duty officers told him "to stand up and walk toward them."
At about the same time, another officer who had just arrived on the scene saw what was happening and "fearing for his safety" and apparently not recognizing the off-duty officer, discharged a shot, striking the off-duty officer in the arm." You must have manly cops. Like, steady as rocks, calm as a mountain - the epitome of courage. A black man (cop) walking towards two other cops after being told so is enough now to fear for your life. Which is even weirder considering he not only was scared for his life, but also assumed somehow that it was "a fleeing person" that walked towards the cops. You can't make this shit up. @above: first time i heard that televangelists even exist was on John Olivers show. I thought he made some compelling points on that one. Fucking christ that's embaressing. At least they guy's not dead.
Which btw is a mistake under the code of policing right? If you're using deadly force you're supposed to kill them aren't you.
|
This is mostly just kinda amusing :
|
On June 24 2017 20:09 m4ini wrote:So, this happened then yesterday? http://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-st-louis-police-officer-shoots-off-duty-black-officer/Show nested quote +A black off-duty St. Louis police officer was shot by a white on-duty police officer from the same department who apparently mistook him for a fleeing suspect, according to a statement from the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. Which is funny, because of this: Show nested quote +Two officers "challenged the off-duty officer and ordered him to the ground," the department said. The officer complied and once they recognized him the on-duty officers told him "to stand up and walk toward them."
At about the same time, another officer who had just arrived on the scene saw what was happening and "fearing for his safety" and apparently not recognizing the off-duty officer, discharged a shot, striking the off-duty officer in the arm." You must have manly cops. Like, steady as rocks, calm as a mountain - the epitome of courage. A black man (cop) walking towards two other cops after being told so is enough now to fear for your life. Which is even weirder considering he not only was scared for his life, but also assumed somehow that it was "a fleeing person" that walked towards the cops. You can't make this shit up. @above: first time i heard that televangelists even exist was on John Olivers show. I thought he made some compelling points on that one.
obviously not even (off-duty) police officers know how to correctly behave so that he's not going to get shot while being stopped by police 
|
Clean, beautiful minors working with clean, beautiful coal.
I wonder what planet you have to live on to call coal clean in 2017.
|
On June 25 2017 02:14 NewSunshine wrote:Clean, beautiful minors working with clean, beautiful coal. I wonder what planet you have to live on to call coal clean in 2017.
Hey, at least this isn't one of Trump's neologisms. He's just been brainwashed into thinking coal is clean because people jerk off over "clean coal" and he doesn't understand what the word means.
Similar to how if we opened up a nuclear plant he'd probably talk about our great cold fusion.
Calling it beautiful is just facepalm worthy though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
