|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 22 2024 21:10 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2024 20:06 Acrofales wrote:On January 22 2024 19:47 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 16:13 Acrofales wrote:On January 22 2024 15:14 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 09:05 KwarK wrote:On January 22 2024 08:11 King_Charles_III wrote:On January 21 2024 05:03 KwarK wrote:
That's not to say that there aren't merits to some of the specific complaints like the excessive power of big tech to unilaterally limit the ways in which people engage with the world. There are. It's just that the people making those complaints are all fucking morons who are actively supporting the side doing it. It's the old "only Trump, a New York trust fund baby who actively steals from working class contractors and brags about it understands the working class" thing. The working class have valid issues, but how is putting them massively in debt to fund tax cuts for the 1% the policy they vote for? The issues with excessive and capricious law enforcement being wielded as a weapon are probably not going to be fixed by the guy who is specifically vowing that he's definitely going to use them as a weapon.
Big Tech is not left wing. The left think it should be nationalized and treated as utilities because it's as vital as roads and power lines these days. Big Finance is not left wing. The left think the bankers should have had their property seized. The Democratic Party isn't left wing.
I don't look down on the specific issues. I look down on you. You personally oBlade. You're a proudly outspoken member of the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party and you come in here and cry about how the leopards must be stopped. I don't disagree that they must be stopped. I think the first step is not voting LEPFP.
It's like the Epstein thing, I don't disagree that a billionaire having a secret island where he molested children is a problem. But how is Trump, the guy who bragged about his trips to that island and when asked about it commented “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." the guy to stop it. The guy with the AG whose father hired an unqualified Epstein to be a school teacher. That guy.
My problem with these Republican voters is that they're morons. To a man. Each and every one of them. Talk about exaggerations. This is a discourse that is well past the point of resembling reality or understanding. 2024 is going to be a wild year. The two sides are just so far apart on what constitutes reality. Meanwhile, the dem side is doing overkill prosecutions of the Republican candidate, prosecutions that are premised on the dem side's echo-chamber narratives. Not good. The only path to become a well informed American citizen in 2024 (and tbh, who has the time) is to divorce yourself from the MSM reporters' headlines and arguments and instead mine their articles for raw facts, while also gathering raw facts from X and wherever else. If you do that for long enough while also reading about the US govt's regime-change capabilities, what you will inevitably see is a super-constellation of circumstantial evidence that those regime-change capabilities have been turned inwards against populism. The Western counterglobalization movement that began around 2013 (of which Trump is the US standard bearer currently) is viewed as an existential threat by Western security states. They have responded with full-scale domestic political meddling. The events and investigations that you think are organic, and that form the bulk of your understanding of trump, were manufactured by highly sophisticated actors, the US executive agencies. Thus why Trump is a reasonable choice for the moderate voter in 2024, regardless of Trump’s specific policies (which of course are not going lead to a dictatorship or whatever is the hysteria of the day on the dem side). He represents our last stand against the US's Praetorian Guard. Democrats, meanwhile, are temporarily allied with the Praetorian Guard because they have a common enemy for now. That won't lead to a good result even if they finally succeed in getting Trump into a jail cell. Trump broke the law repeatedly and flagrantly, as he has for decades, long before he showed any political inclinations. He has attempted to spin this into some kind of political persecution, despite benefiting massively from the reluctance of the justice department to prosecute his crimes. Trump isn't being politically persecuted, Trump has escaped a life sentence in prison so far precisely because of the fear of the appearance of political persecution. He stole secret Iran invasion plans from the White House and showed them to Kid Rock in a bizarre attempt to impress him. Even Kid Rock called him out on that one and said that he probably shouldn't be looking at them. A journalist recorded him for an interview in which he explained to her how funny it was that the law said that he couldn't show her the documents that he was currently showing her. Trump explains, out loud, in his own voice, exactly why he is guilty and which crimes he is committing. At what point will it be enough for you people? How many times has Trump been criminally indicted for his “decades of flagrantly breaking the law”? Doesn’t the timing seem a little suspicious to you if he has been breaking the law for decades but the indictments only pour in during the run up to an election? Many times, but even if the answer was "never", he has also never before been in a position to show classified documents to Kid Rock, or to incite an attempted coup d'etat. As for tax fraud, eh. I'll grant you that they are probably only going to these lengths to get him because he's a VIP rather than a regular ole sleazy businessman. But that doesn't mean he didn't commit tax fraud. Most real estate moguls probably did. There's just limited resources to investigate and of course the VIP is going to get investigated more thoroughly than a generic business man. But as the saying goes, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. The question is if Trump retired to Mar-A-Largo to spend his golden years eating McDonalds and playing golf do you think anyone would care about him showing a classified document to Kid Rock? Yes, they definitely would. If he had them in a basement collecting dust because he forgot about them maybe not, but if an ex-president is showing off state secrets as trophies to impress guests, obviously they would. Obviously they would care if he took classified docs he wasn't supposed to have to his house and used them to impress guests, hence the FBI raid. The Kid Rock thing happened in 2017, at the white house and when he was still President. I just don't imagine an ex head of state facing severe blowback for bragging to a rock 'n roller 7 years after the fact. Maybe I'm just cynical towards our justice system. If you think this is some partisan hot-take, consider that I also don't think Hunter Biden wouldn't be facing any indictments either if Joe Biden were retired and sitting on the couch watching re-runs of Gunsmoke. Sure if he didn't take all those documents after he left office it probably doesn't come up and if it did it would be less of a fuss.
It gets brought up because of all the other stuff, because it shows a pattern and shows that he would show the classified things to others, because he has done so before.
|
On January 22 2024 20:54 Sadist wrote:
"EVs have poor performance in extreme temperatures" ok sure lets try to fix that?
Just want to point out, that the issues with recharging and discharging batteries in low temperature environment, is not something that can be fixed.
The same way, that co2 emission due to the combustion of fossil fuels cannot be fixed. The issue is the fundamental temperature dependence of the involved chemical processes.
No amount of technology, or advancement, can change laws of nature.
|
On January 22 2024 21:21 Branch.AUT wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2024 20:54 Sadist wrote:
"EVs have poor performance in extreme temperatures" ok sure lets try to fix that?
Just want to point out, that the issues with recharging and discharging batteries in low temperature environment, is not something that can be fixed. The same way, that co2 emission due to the combustion of fossil fuels cannot be fixed. The issue is the fundamental temperature dependence of the involved chemical processes. No amount of technology, or advancement, can change laws of nature.
So pretty sure there are other systems that can be added to warm the battery to help mitigate this. It may not be perfect but it can help.
Also this is another point where hybrid fuel cell could help.
|
On January 22 2024 21:25 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2024 21:21 Branch.AUT wrote:On January 22 2024 20:54 Sadist wrote:
"EVs have poor performance in extreme temperatures" ok sure lets try to fix that?
Just want to point out, that the issues with recharging and discharging batteries in low temperature environment, is not something that can be fixed. The same way, that co2 emission due to the combustion of fossil fuels cannot be fixed. The issue is the fundamental temperature dependence of the involved chemical processes. No amount of technology, or advancement, can change laws of nature. So pretty sure there are other systems that can be added to warm the battery to help mitigate this. It may not be perfect but it can help. Also this is another point where hybrid fuel cell could help.
So youre going to heat the battery, connector and environment surrounding, huh? Where's the power coming from?
The battery - Tesla already does that. Just look at the recent headlines how well that workes. You're trying to use the already low charge battery, to draw high current dor heating, when the environment is cold.
This approach tries to fix the issue, by cause the same issue to occur. Like a snake eating its own tail.
EV right now has a definite space and niche in individual transit. Mainly among the upper middle class that can afford it as a secondary vehicle. Who already have PV installed on their roof. Who can charge the vehicle nearly for free,and uae it in suburba and cities for short distance,like errands and commute.
With the ability to comfortably fall back on an ICE vehicle for weekend trips and extreme weather conditions. It will take a good 10-15 years before the working class masses can feasibly make use of it. Snd some issurs (like cold weather, will probably never get resolved.
|
|
|
On January 22 2024 22:29 Branch.AUT wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2024 21:25 Sadist wrote:On January 22 2024 21:21 Branch.AUT wrote:On January 22 2024 20:54 Sadist wrote:
"EVs have poor performance in extreme temperatures" ok sure lets try to fix that?
Just want to point out, that the issues with recharging and discharging batteries in low temperature environment, is not something that can be fixed. The same way, that co2 emission due to the combustion of fossil fuels cannot be fixed. The issue is the fundamental temperature dependence of the involved chemical processes. No amount of technology, or advancement, can change laws of nature. So pretty sure there are other systems that can be added to warm the battery to help mitigate this. It may not be perfect but it can help. Also this is another point where hybrid fuel cell could help. So youre going to heat the battery, connector and environment surrounding, huh? Where's the power coming from? The battery - Tesla already does that. Just look at the recent headlines how well that workes. You're trying to use the already low charge battery, to draw high current dor heating, when the environment is cold. This approach tries to fix the issue, by cause the same issue to occur. Like a snake eating its own tail. EV right now has a definite space and niche in individual transit. Mainly among the upper middle class that can afford it as a secondary vehicle. Who already have PV installed on their roof. Who can charge the vehicle nearly for free,and uae it in suburba and cities for short distance,like errands and commute. With the ability to comfortably fall back on an ICE vehicle for weekend trips and extreme weather conditions. It will take a good 10-15 years before the working class masses can feasibly make use of it. Snd some issurs (like cold weather, will probably never get resolved.
That heater could run off the charger's current when plugged in so it can kickstart the heater rather than trying to charge a freezing battery which loses the charge before it can fire up the heater. It doesn't seem like rocket science. Not super efficient in general having to use battery power to keep the battery warm enough to not lose its charge, but better than outright not working.
Worth noting that combustion engines also have problems in extreme cold. Not as many, and it'll take about -40 before the gasoline starts turning to sludge and refuses to vaporize, but still, cold weather is a problem for cars in general.
|
|
|
As someone with a hybrid and deals with this in Minnesota I do have an electric blanket I turn on when I wake in the morning before I go to work to warm up things when it gets super cold. Engine block heaters have been a thing for a really long time it's 2024 the same issues with evs are the issues ices face.
Everyone's known the gop primary was a farce but at least we are in the final stage. I would expect haley to stay in the race in case trump dies or his mental state collapses like it's been looking to so far this campaign. It shouldn't need to be mentioned but no haley was not responsible for Jan 6th and was not in Washington at the time.
|
On January 22 2024 22:34 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2024 21:10 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 20:06 Acrofales wrote:On January 22 2024 19:47 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 16:13 Acrofales wrote:On January 22 2024 15:14 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 09:05 KwarK wrote:On January 22 2024 08:11 King_Charles_III wrote:On January 21 2024 05:03 KwarK wrote:
That's not to say that there aren't merits to some of the specific complaints like the excessive power of big tech to unilaterally limit the ways in which people engage with the world. There are. It's just that the people making those complaints are all fucking morons who are actively supporting the side doing it. It's the old "only Trump, a New York trust fund baby who actively steals from working class contractors and brags about it understands the working class" thing. The working class have valid issues, but how is putting them massively in debt to fund tax cuts for the 1% the policy they vote for? The issues with excessive and capricious law enforcement being wielded as a weapon are probably not going to be fixed by the guy who is specifically vowing that he's definitely going to use them as a weapon.
Big Tech is not left wing. The left think it should be nationalized and treated as utilities because it's as vital as roads and power lines these days. Big Finance is not left wing. The left think the bankers should have had their property seized. The Democratic Party isn't left wing.
I don't look down on the specific issues. I look down on you. You personally oBlade. You're a proudly outspoken member of the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party and you come in here and cry about how the leopards must be stopped. I don't disagree that they must be stopped. I think the first step is not voting LEPFP.
It's like the Epstein thing, I don't disagree that a billionaire having a secret island where he molested children is a problem. But how is Trump, the guy who bragged about his trips to that island and when asked about it commented “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." the guy to stop it. The guy with the AG whose father hired an unqualified Epstein to be a school teacher. That guy.
My problem with these Republican voters is that they're morons. To a man. Each and every one of them. Talk about exaggerations. This is a discourse that is well past the point of resembling reality or understanding. 2024 is going to be a wild year. The two sides are just so far apart on what constitutes reality. Meanwhile, the dem side is doing overkill prosecutions of the Republican candidate, prosecutions that are premised on the dem side's echo-chamber narratives. Not good. The only path to become a well informed American citizen in 2024 (and tbh, who has the time) is to divorce yourself from the MSM reporters' headlines and arguments and instead mine their articles for raw facts, while also gathering raw facts from X and wherever else. If you do that for long enough while also reading about the US govt's regime-change capabilities, what you will inevitably see is a super-constellation of circumstantial evidence that those regime-change capabilities have been turned inwards against populism. The Western counterglobalization movement that began around 2013 (of which Trump is the US standard bearer currently) is viewed as an existential threat by Western security states. They have responded with full-scale domestic political meddling. The events and investigations that you think are organic, and that form the bulk of your understanding of trump, were manufactured by highly sophisticated actors, the US executive agencies. Thus why Trump is a reasonable choice for the moderate voter in 2024, regardless of Trump’s specific policies (which of course are not going lead to a dictatorship or whatever is the hysteria of the day on the dem side). He represents our last stand against the US's Praetorian Guard. Democrats, meanwhile, are temporarily allied with the Praetorian Guard because they have a common enemy for now. That won't lead to a good result even if they finally succeed in getting Trump into a jail cell. Trump broke the law repeatedly and flagrantly, as he has for decades, long before he showed any political inclinations. He has attempted to spin this into some kind of political persecution, despite benefiting massively from the reluctance of the justice department to prosecute his crimes. Trump isn't being politically persecuted, Trump has escaped a life sentence in prison so far precisely because of the fear of the appearance of political persecution. He stole secret Iran invasion plans from the White House and showed them to Kid Rock in a bizarre attempt to impress him. Even Kid Rock called him out on that one and said that he probably shouldn't be looking at them. A journalist recorded him for an interview in which he explained to her how funny it was that the law said that he couldn't show her the documents that he was currently showing her. Trump explains, out loud, in his own voice, exactly why he is guilty and which crimes he is committing. At what point will it be enough for you people? How many times has Trump been criminally indicted for his “decades of flagrantly breaking the law”? Doesn’t the timing seem a little suspicious to you if he has been breaking the law for decades but the indictments only pour in during the run up to an election? Many times, but even if the answer was "never", he has also never before been in a position to show classified documents to Kid Rock, or to incite an attempted coup d'etat. As for tax fraud, eh. I'll grant you that they are probably only going to these lengths to get him because he's a VIP rather than a regular ole sleazy businessman. But that doesn't mean he didn't commit tax fraud. Most real estate moguls probably did. There's just limited resources to investigate and of course the VIP is going to get investigated more thoroughly than a generic business man. But as the saying goes, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. The question is if Trump retired to Mar-A-Largo to spend his golden years eating McDonalds and playing golf do you think anyone would care about him showing a classified document to Kid Rock? Yes, they definitely would. If he had them in a basement collecting dust because he forgot about them maybe not, but if an ex-president is showing off state secrets as trophies to impress guests, obviously they would. Obviously they would care if he took classified docs he wasn't supposed to have to his house and used them to impress guests, hence the FBI raid. The Kid Rock thing happened in 2017, at the white house and when he was still President. I just don't imagine an ex head of state facing severe blowback for bragging to a rock 'n roller 7 years after the fact. Maybe I'm just cynical towards our justice system. If you think this is some partisan hot-take, consider that I also don't think Hunter Biden wouldn't be facing any indictments either if Joe Biden were retired and sitting on the couch watching re-runs of Gunsmoke. Do you believe the two times that he casually showed people classified documents on tape was the only two times he ever did that? Do you believe he was hiding the documents when the government asked for them back because he never planned to show them to anyone else? Would you be OK with it if it was Joe Biden stealing, hiding and showing top secret documents to who ever he pleased?
This is such a silly discussion. The goalposts have shifted beyond anything reasonable now. For normal people, if they commit a crime, get caught, and get sentenced because of the crime, that is just normal.
Somehow, for Trump, people argue that because other rich people sometimes evade justice, it would be okay if he did here, too.
Instead of arguing that maybe the laws should work for everyone, and we should prevent rich & powerful people from ignoring them, we now have law-and-order conservatives argueing that prosecuting someone for crimes he did commit is a political witchhunt.
I wonder if they would react the same way if it wasn't their Messias Trump stealing state secrets and trying to overthrow the government, and instead some random black dude with half a gram of weed.
The partisanship is just absurd.
|
|
|
On January 22 2024 22:34 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2024 21:10 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 20:06 Acrofales wrote:On January 22 2024 19:47 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 16:13 Acrofales wrote:On January 22 2024 15:14 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 09:05 KwarK wrote:On January 22 2024 08:11 King_Charles_III wrote:On January 21 2024 05:03 KwarK wrote:
That's not to say that there aren't merits to some of the specific complaints like the excessive power of big tech to unilaterally limit the ways in which people engage with the world. There are. It's just that the people making those complaints are all fucking morons who are actively supporting the side doing it. It's the old "only Trump, a New York trust fund baby who actively steals from working class contractors and brags about it understands the working class" thing. The working class have valid issues, but how is putting them massively in debt to fund tax cuts for the 1% the policy they vote for? The issues with excessive and capricious law enforcement being wielded as a weapon are probably not going to be fixed by the guy who is specifically vowing that he's definitely going to use them as a weapon.
Big Tech is not left wing. The left think it should be nationalized and treated as utilities because it's as vital as roads and power lines these days. Big Finance is not left wing. The left think the bankers should have had their property seized. The Democratic Party isn't left wing.
I don't look down on the specific issues. I look down on you. You personally oBlade. You're a proudly outspoken member of the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party and you come in here and cry about how the leopards must be stopped. I don't disagree that they must be stopped. I think the first step is not voting LEPFP.
It's like the Epstein thing, I don't disagree that a billionaire having a secret island where he molested children is a problem. But how is Trump, the guy who bragged about his trips to that island and when asked about it commented “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." the guy to stop it. The guy with the AG whose father hired an unqualified Epstein to be a school teacher. That guy.
My problem with these Republican voters is that they're morons. To a man. Each and every one of them. Talk about exaggerations. This is a discourse that is well past the point of resembling reality or understanding. 2024 is going to be a wild year. The two sides are just so far apart on what constitutes reality. Meanwhile, the dem side is doing overkill prosecutions of the Republican candidate, prosecutions that are premised on the dem side's echo-chamber narratives. Not good. The only path to become a well informed American citizen in 2024 (and tbh, who has the time) is to divorce yourself from the MSM reporters' headlines and arguments and instead mine their articles for raw facts, while also gathering raw facts from X and wherever else. If you do that for long enough while also reading about the US govt's regime-change capabilities, what you will inevitably see is a super-constellation of circumstantial evidence that those regime-change capabilities have been turned inwards against populism. The Western counterglobalization movement that began around 2013 (of which Trump is the US standard bearer currently) is viewed as an existential threat by Western security states. They have responded with full-scale domestic political meddling. The events and investigations that you think are organic, and that form the bulk of your understanding of trump, were manufactured by highly sophisticated actors, the US executive agencies. Thus why Trump is a reasonable choice for the moderate voter in 2024, regardless of Trump’s specific policies (which of course are not going lead to a dictatorship or whatever is the hysteria of the day on the dem side). He represents our last stand against the US's Praetorian Guard. Democrats, meanwhile, are temporarily allied with the Praetorian Guard because they have a common enemy for now. That won't lead to a good result even if they finally succeed in getting Trump into a jail cell. Trump broke the law repeatedly and flagrantly, as he has for decades, long before he showed any political inclinations. He has attempted to spin this into some kind of political persecution, despite benefiting massively from the reluctance of the justice department to prosecute his crimes. Trump isn't being politically persecuted, Trump has escaped a life sentence in prison so far precisely because of the fear of the appearance of political persecution. He stole secret Iran invasion plans from the White House and showed them to Kid Rock in a bizarre attempt to impress him. Even Kid Rock called him out on that one and said that he probably shouldn't be looking at them. A journalist recorded him for an interview in which he explained to her how funny it was that the law said that he couldn't show her the documents that he was currently showing her. Trump explains, out loud, in his own voice, exactly why he is guilty and which crimes he is committing. At what point will it be enough for you people? How many times has Trump been criminally indicted for his “decades of flagrantly breaking the law”? Doesn’t the timing seem a little suspicious to you if he has been breaking the law for decades but the indictments only pour in during the run up to an election? Many times, but even if the answer was "never", he has also never before been in a position to show classified documents to Kid Rock, or to incite an attempted coup d'etat. As for tax fraud, eh. I'll grant you that they are probably only going to these lengths to get him because he's a VIP rather than a regular ole sleazy businessman. But that doesn't mean he didn't commit tax fraud. Most real estate moguls probably did. There's just limited resources to investigate and of course the VIP is going to get investigated more thoroughly than a generic business man. But as the saying goes, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. The question is if Trump retired to Mar-A-Largo to spend his golden years eating McDonalds and playing golf do you think anyone would care about him showing a classified document to Kid Rock? Yes, they definitely would. If he had them in a basement collecting dust because he forgot about them maybe not, but if an ex-president is showing off state secrets as trophies to impress guests, obviously they would. Obviously they would care if he took classified docs he wasn't supposed to have to his house and used them to impress guests, hence the FBI raid. The Kid Rock thing happened in 2017, at the white house and when he was still President. I just don't imagine an ex head of state facing severe blowback for bragging to a rock 'n roller 7 years after the fact. Maybe I'm just cynical towards our justice system. If you think this is some partisan hot-take, consider that I also don't think Hunter Biden wouldn't be facing any indictments either if Joe Biden were retired and sitting on the couch watching re-runs of Gunsmoke. Do you believe the two times that he casually showed people classified documents on tape was the only two times he ever did that? Do you believe he was hiding the documents when the government asked for them back because he never planned to show them to anyone else? Would you be OK with it if it was Joe Biden stealing, hiding and showing top secret documents to who ever he pleased?
Biden had documents stashed in his home and his UPenn office from when he was VP. You probably knew that? There is an argument of executive privilege to VPs, but it's markedly weaker than the one for presidents for a couple specific reasons. (Although I'm not personally for trying to legally bother VPs for glorified filing issues either.) The reason some people don't get what's going on is either they're working from a European or other framework, and/or a kind of petty denialism that Trump could be president and get to do things that presidents are fully in their power to do, even if they didn't like that thing or nobody else usually does or has ever done it.
The first difference between VP and president is that the president can pass executive orders. Why is this important? The entire US classification system is directly based solely on the authority of the president. Since the Cold War when they first thought up the modern system, it is on executive authority, via executive order, that the entire system exists. It's essentially an enormous filing system for a huge company that hasn't seen a profit in decades.
The current system is outlined by an updated executive order from the Obama administration.
There are parallel laws about espionage but they're not directly connected. Just because something is classified doesn't even mean it's something that isn't publicly known, or is actually something important that would matter if it leaked to anyone. Believe me I know about the railroading that happens to random people for minor infractions in this bullshit system. That sucks, but the answer isn't trying to railroad a president.
Is there someone in government more powerful than the president? Hopefully not, as we don't want a world with puppetmasters and shadow governments. Can the president create a rule that he can't break? Can a previous president create a rule that a future president can't break? That would seem to defy the point of democracy, for example as stupid as Biden's repealing of Trump's border policy and also for example Houthi terrorist designation were, when he entered the Oval Office and did it purely out of spite on day 1, only to rue the disasters that would follow, he was totally in his authority as the elected leader of the executive branch to do it.
There is not a separate "national security" that the president is subordinate to. To the extent that a president could theoretically go crazy, there's a 25th amendment and impeachment. If you don't impeach or notice someone while they're supposedly getting elected president and then doing treason by "stealing state secrets and showing them to everyone (including foreign nationals, spy’s whoever)" which as far as I can tell is a conspiracy theory, it's incredibly suspect to go after them afterwards for what amounts to a paperwork dispute. Saying Trump had classified documents he shouldn't have had after he left is equivalent to charging the mayor of a town with building a fence illegally because they didn't get the permission they needed from the mayor. This is what is really meant by democratic norms. Clinton and Bush and Obama gave us literal war crimes and using the Oval Office as a brothel, and conveniently avoided any prosecutions. Now Bush is hailed by erudite geniuses as a model reasonable Republican because of the brave stance he sometimes takes against Trump, which costs him nothing and does nothing for anyone.
Here's your "national security" concern. Of the two recordings in question, the one with Kid Rock is during the presidency when Trump undisputedly can share whatever he wants with anyone. Same as when he posts a high-resolution satellite image to Twitter. Someone in DoD might get upset and write him a memo, and he can read that and consider how careful he's being about something that might be sensitive, but the DoD aren't the commander-in-chief, the guy who was elected by the people is, the Constitution is explicit. Second: The post-presidency recording deals with an alleged document about attacking a country (Iran) by a person (General Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff). When I heard about it and the "official" I assumed it was Bolton because that fucker wants to attack everything. Wow such national security secret. If it's actually about Milley, whether confirmed or not, here's what you need to know about "national security" and Milley.
1) He's the one whose idea it was to leave billions in munitions in Afghanistan and abandon the bases before evacuating the embassy and civilians in normal order, meaning the whole operation ended up being under the State Department calling the Defense Department to rescue them
2) He's the one who let the Chinese ballon float across the entire American continent
3) He's the one who took it upon himself to go behind Trump's back to assure China that he wouldn't be doing anything hostile towards China just because a silly person like his Commander-in-Chief ordered it
4) He was directly accused by Trump of doing the same as regards Iran here - He went to Trump with a "contingency" plan to invade Iran, Trump said what the fuck are you talking about (this is the same Trump who specifically didn't retaliate against human life after Iran shot down a US drone) - then Milley went around in predictable Washington nature going "durr Trump is crazy he wants to invade Iran." (the peace through strength no new wars president) So at the time of the recording this alleged document that the president had all authority to classify or not would have been about a years-old fake plan.
Mentioning "national security" in a situation where Milley is involved - I'd feel safer if the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs were James Gandolfini's General Flintstone from the movie In The Loop - and James Gandolfini isn't even alive.
And a fat lot of good this mysterious selling out has benefited Trump - You have to simultaneously believe he's a conniving genius who got elected president of the most powerful country in the world simply to increase his own wealth and also that he's so stupid that he failed so miserably as to cut his own net worth by half.
|
On January 23 2024 01:38 oBlade wrote:<Snip for length>
I fully admit I didn't read every word of that and just skimmed it over once I realised what point your trying to make but I found it interesting I didn't see you point out a different big difference between Biden and Trumps handling of classified documents.
Biden returned them when they were noticed and Trump lied about having them and tried to keep them.
Do you think this difference in reaction might have something to do with the difference in how their possession is being treated?
|
United States41385 Posts
They tried countless times to get them back from Trump without making a big deal out of it. As with everything else they tried endlessly to do anything except prosecuting him because they treat him with white gloves to avoid the appearance of partisan political justice. But he just wouldn’t do it. His lawyers, who knew by this point that they needed to document everything so they didn’t accidentally become part of a criminal conspiracy, have all of this documented. They have him saying that wouldn’t it be great if the subpoenaed hard drives got wiped just like Hillary’s emails. They have him directing some lawyers to lie to other lawyers in the furtherance of making false statements to the FBI.
All of this took place long after the polite requests and the firm requests were made. These are the crimes he voluntarily committed to cover up other crimes when all they wanted was for him to stop doing crime.
The idea of a classification system based on the mental state of the President is absurd. Even if you believe the President has the right to declassify documents at will he still has to actually do that, even if it’s just writing DECLASSIFIED on them. He can’t just think that they’re declassified and they become so. If he could then there would be no way of anyone knowing what was classified and what wasn’t. A reasonable spy could insist that he stole documents acting in the belief that despite the CLASSIFIED markers on them he believed that they had been mentally declassified by former President Bush Sr, and nobody could disprove that.
There’s also some nonsense in there about Chinese balloons, deep states, and Biden which is pure brain worms. Increase your dosage of ivermectin.
|
United States41385 Posts
Also on the Trump being better for national security than Biden note, as a reminder, Trump’s former bagman (the guy who carries his bags) wrote up an order directing the US army to withdraw all troops from Germany, gave it to Trump to sign, got it signed, and then gave it to the army to perform. It was a legal order which, fortunately, was stopped by the deep state when they went to meet with him and asked what the fuck was going on and had him order them to disregard it.
That’s what we’re dealing with here.
|
“The classification system is at the President’s discretion” is technically true, and responsive to circumstances where the President appears to break normal classification rules. For instance, remember in 2017 when he was reported to have shared confidential Israeli intelligence with the Russian ambassador in a closed door meeting with no recordings or minutes? That was entirely within his rights, whether or not it was a good idea.
It’s not remotely responsive to Presidential Records Act violations, nor is it responsive if the former president is mishandling classified information. If it was a mere “filing issue” (e.g. he had retained some records by mistake and returned them when the government asked for them back), I’d understand advocating for a pretty lenient approach. But that’s not what happened! He purposely held on to them, refused to return them, lied to the government in order to keep them, and even drilled his staff on moving them to somewhere else if the government came looking for them. That’s the crime here, it’s really pretty blatant.
|
United States41385 Posts
He literally explained why it was a crime in the recording. If he believed he had the power to declassify it then that would have been what he explained.
Except it is, like, highly confidential. This is secret information. Look, look at this.
See as president I could have declassified it. Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret. Isn’t that interesting.
He specifically states that he didn’t declassify it, that “this is still a secret”. Then he specifically showed the secret document to someone without clearance. Trump knows that it’s a crime. Why don’t his voters believe his explanation that it’s a secret document that he could have declassified but didn’t.
|
On January 22 2024 22:36 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2024 22:29 Branch.AUT wrote:On January 22 2024 21:25 Sadist wrote:On January 22 2024 21:21 Branch.AUT wrote:On January 22 2024 20:54 Sadist wrote:
"EVs have poor performance in extreme temperatures" ok sure lets try to fix that?
Just want to point out, that the issues with recharging and discharging batteries in low temperature environment, is not something that can be fixed. The same way, that co2 emission due to the combustion of fossil fuels cannot be fixed. The issue is the fundamental temperature dependence of the involved chemical processes. No amount of technology, or advancement, can change laws of nature. So pretty sure there are other systems that can be added to warm the battery to help mitigate this. It may not be perfect but it can help. Also this is another point where hybrid fuel cell could help. So youre going to heat the battery, connector and environment surrounding, huh? Where's the power coming from? The battery - Tesla already does that. Just look at the recent headlines how well that workes. You're trying to use the already low charge battery, to draw high current dor heating, when the environment is cold. This approach tries to fix the issue, by cause the same issue to occur. Like a snake eating its own tail. EV right now has a definite space and niche in individual transit. Mainly among the upper middle class that can afford it as a secondary vehicle. Who already have PV installed on their roof. Who can charge the vehicle nearly for free,and uae it in suburba and cities for short distance,like errands and commute. With the ability to comfortably fall back on an ICE vehicle for weekend trips and extreme weather conditions. It will take a good 10-15 years before the working class masses can feasibly make use of it. Snd some issurs (like cold weather, will probably never get resolved. That heater could run off the charger's current when plugged in so it can kickstart the heater rather than trying to charge a freezing battery which loses the charge before it can fire up the heater. It doesn't seem like rocket science. Not super efficient in general having to use battery power to keep the battery warm enough to not lose its charge, but better than outright not working. Worth noting that combustion engines also have problems in extreme cold. Not as many, and it'll take about -40 before the gasoline starts turning to sludge and refuses to vaporize, but still, cold weather is a problem for cars in general.
The thing is, that heating up those cells needs to be precise, and takes quite a while. Cause you know, that shit gets really fiery, quite quickly. And charging time is already the greatest knock on EVs that ICE people can come up with.
And they're right. If you aren't charging over night in AC, in many cases its super inconvenient having to wait around 30 minutes if you're charging DC. If you have to preheat the battery first, you can easily add 15-20 minutes to the charging.
Since this topic isn't related to US Politics TRUMP in any way, im now going to bow out of this thread. Send me a PM if you would like to keep discussing EVs with me.
|
On January 22 2024 08:11 King_Charles_III wrote:
The only path to become a well informed American citizen in 2024 (and tbh, who has the time) is to divorce yourself from the MSM reporters' headlines and arguments and instead mine their articles for raw facts, while also gathering raw facts from X and wherever else. If you do that for long enough while also reading about the US govt's regime-change capabilities, what you will inevitably see is a super-constellation of circumstantial evidence that those regime-change capabilities have been turned inwards against populism. The Western counterglobalization movement that began around 2013 (of which Trump is the US standard bearer currently) is viewed as an existential threat by Western security states. They have responded with full-scale domestic political meddling. The events and investigations that you think are organic, and that form the bulk of your understanding of trump, were manufactured by highly sophisticated actors, the US executive agencies.
Thus why Trump is a reasonable choice for the moderate voter in 2024, regardless of Trump’s specific policies (which of course are not going lead to a dictatorship or whatever is the hysteria of the day on the dem side).
This is an insane non sequitur, and completely untrue. We have study upon study, survey upon survey, demonstrating that conservatives, Republicans, and *especially* Trump supporters tend to be less informed and less educated on political issues than the average voter (and than those on the left). Fox News and the newer alt-right "news" sources are even less reliable than centrist/liberal MSM news (not that any news source is perfect).
Following Trump is how you become less informed, not more informed.
Following news sources that push Trump's agenda is how you become less informed, not more informed.
Trump is also not a moderate choice in any capacity, especially given that he's a wannabe autocrat who has been actively trying to undermine the democratic process and voters' rights for years. And it's not like he's trying to hide it; these are things he actively brags about.
|
United States41385 Posts
Well, sure, if you listen to the things that Trump literally says then you might think that but that’s just the MSM broadcasting his words verbatim. You can’t trust that.
|
On January 22 2024 23:31 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2024 22:34 JimmiC wrote:On January 22 2024 21:10 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 20:06 Acrofales wrote:On January 22 2024 19:47 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 16:13 Acrofales wrote:On January 22 2024 15:14 BlackJack wrote:On January 22 2024 09:05 KwarK wrote:On January 22 2024 08:11 King_Charles_III wrote:On January 21 2024 05:03 KwarK wrote:
That's not to say that there aren't merits to some of the specific complaints like the excessive power of big tech to unilaterally limit the ways in which people engage with the world. There are. It's just that the people making those complaints are all fucking morons who are actively supporting the side doing it. It's the old "only Trump, a New York trust fund baby who actively steals from working class contractors and brags about it understands the working class" thing. The working class have valid issues, but how is putting them massively in debt to fund tax cuts for the 1% the policy they vote for? The issues with excessive and capricious law enforcement being wielded as a weapon are probably not going to be fixed by the guy who is specifically vowing that he's definitely going to use them as a weapon.
Big Tech is not left wing. The left think it should be nationalized and treated as utilities because it's as vital as roads and power lines these days. Big Finance is not left wing. The left think the bankers should have had their property seized. The Democratic Party isn't left wing.
I don't look down on the specific issues. I look down on you. You personally oBlade. You're a proudly outspoken member of the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party and you come in here and cry about how the leopards must be stopped. I don't disagree that they must be stopped. I think the first step is not voting LEPFP.
It's like the Epstein thing, I don't disagree that a billionaire having a secret island where he molested children is a problem. But how is Trump, the guy who bragged about his trips to that island and when asked about it commented “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side." the guy to stop it. The guy with the AG whose father hired an unqualified Epstein to be a school teacher. That guy.
My problem with these Republican voters is that they're morons. To a man. Each and every one of them. Talk about exaggerations. This is a discourse that is well past the point of resembling reality or understanding. 2024 is going to be a wild year. The two sides are just so far apart on what constitutes reality. Meanwhile, the dem side is doing overkill prosecutions of the Republican candidate, prosecutions that are premised on the dem side's echo-chamber narratives. Not good. The only path to become a well informed American citizen in 2024 (and tbh, who has the time) is to divorce yourself from the MSM reporters' headlines and arguments and instead mine their articles for raw facts, while also gathering raw facts from X and wherever else. If you do that for long enough while also reading about the US govt's regime-change capabilities, what you will inevitably see is a super-constellation of circumstantial evidence that those regime-change capabilities have been turned inwards against populism. The Western counterglobalization movement that began around 2013 (of which Trump is the US standard bearer currently) is viewed as an existential threat by Western security states. They have responded with full-scale domestic political meddling. The events and investigations that you think are organic, and that form the bulk of your understanding of trump, were manufactured by highly sophisticated actors, the US executive agencies. Thus why Trump is a reasonable choice for the moderate voter in 2024, regardless of Trump’s specific policies (which of course are not going lead to a dictatorship or whatever is the hysteria of the day on the dem side). He represents our last stand against the US's Praetorian Guard. Democrats, meanwhile, are temporarily allied with the Praetorian Guard because they have a common enemy for now. That won't lead to a good result even if they finally succeed in getting Trump into a jail cell. Trump broke the law repeatedly and flagrantly, as he has for decades, long before he showed any political inclinations. He has attempted to spin this into some kind of political persecution, despite benefiting massively from the reluctance of the justice department to prosecute his crimes. Trump isn't being politically persecuted, Trump has escaped a life sentence in prison so far precisely because of the fear of the appearance of political persecution. He stole secret Iran invasion plans from the White House and showed them to Kid Rock in a bizarre attempt to impress him. Even Kid Rock called him out on that one and said that he probably shouldn't be looking at them. A journalist recorded him for an interview in which he explained to her how funny it was that the law said that he couldn't show her the documents that he was currently showing her. Trump explains, out loud, in his own voice, exactly why he is guilty and which crimes he is committing. At what point will it be enough for you people? How many times has Trump been criminally indicted for his “decades of flagrantly breaking the law”? Doesn’t the timing seem a little suspicious to you if he has been breaking the law for decades but the indictments only pour in during the run up to an election? Many times, but even if the answer was "never", he has also never before been in a position to show classified documents to Kid Rock, or to incite an attempted coup d'etat. As for tax fraud, eh. I'll grant you that they are probably only going to these lengths to get him because he's a VIP rather than a regular ole sleazy businessman. But that doesn't mean he didn't commit tax fraud. Most real estate moguls probably did. There's just limited resources to investigate and of course the VIP is going to get investigated more thoroughly than a generic business man. But as the saying goes, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. The question is if Trump retired to Mar-A-Largo to spend his golden years eating McDonalds and playing golf do you think anyone would care about him showing a classified document to Kid Rock? Yes, they definitely would. If he had them in a basement collecting dust because he forgot about them maybe not, but if an ex-president is showing off state secrets as trophies to impress guests, obviously they would. Obviously they would care if he took classified docs he wasn't supposed to have to his house and used them to impress guests, hence the FBI raid. The Kid Rock thing happened in 2017, at the white house and when he was still President. I just don't imagine an ex head of state facing severe blowback for bragging to a rock 'n roller 7 years after the fact. Maybe I'm just cynical towards our justice system. If you think this is some partisan hot-take, consider that I also don't think Hunter Biden wouldn't be facing any indictments either if Joe Biden were retired and sitting on the couch watching re-runs of Gunsmoke. Do you believe the two times that he casually showed people classified documents on tape was the only two times he ever did that? Do you believe he was hiding the documents when the government asked for them back because he never planned to show them to anyone else? Would you be OK with it if it was Joe Biden stealing, hiding and showing top secret documents to who ever he pleased? This is such a silly discussion. The goalposts have shifted beyond anything reasonable now. For normal people, if they commit a crime, get caught, and get sentenced because of the crime, that is just normal. Somehow, for Trump, people argue that because other rich people sometimes evade justice, it would be okay if he did here, too. Instead of arguing that maybe the laws should work for everyone, and we should prevent rich & powerful people from ignoring them, we now have law-and-order conservatives argueing that prosecuting someone for crimes he did commit is a political witchhunt. I wonder if they would react the same way if it wasn't their Messias Trump stealing state secrets and trying to overthrow the government, and instead some random black dude with half a gram of weed. The partisanship is just absurd.
These are not competing ideas. You could support the idea that anyone should be held to account for violating the law no matter how big or small while also acknowledging that's often not how it works. Acknowledging that powerful people get special treatment is not an endorsement that they "should" get special treatment.
The question of whether Trump "should" be prosecuted is entirely different from the question of whether Trump "would" be prosecuted and you mustn't conflate them.
Take the Stormy Daniels case which I believe marks the first time an ex-President had been charged with a crime.
But Bragg built his case on an exceedingly uncertain legal theory. Even if Trump did the things he’s accused of, it’s not clear Bragg can legally charge Trump for them, at least under the felony version of New York’s false records law.
Bragg, in other words, has built one of the most controversial and high-profile criminal cases in American history upon the most uncertain of foundations. And that foundation could crumble into dust if the courts reject his legal arguments on a genuinely ambiguous question of law.
Source: Vox*
The idea that America is just so committed to equal treatment under the law that it would prosecute a former President using dubious legal theory for a hush money payment to a prostitute 7 years after the fact is not based in reality. Anyone that honestly thinks this case would exist if Trump were not running for President is blinded by partisanship, imo.
*Anyone that may think Vox is a Fox News equivalent pushing partisan narratives isn't familiar with Vox
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
