Because Trump 2.0

[rmgill]

7 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

After they were run out of the chamber by guys carrying confederate flags and waving nooses?

You realize that the pro-lynching party was and still IS the DNC right? You are aware of that caveat of history and current behavior? 

[R011]

5 hours ago, Stargrunt6 said:

GWB staffers back Kamala

https://nitter.privacydev.net/simonateba/status/1828771467934228609#m

 

So Never-Trumpers still hate Trump.

[R011]

2 hours ago, 17thfabn said:

Two things I've never understood about British history:

Why if the British decided if they needed a king, why they picked one of the Stuarts, seeing how much trouble they had caused. There were times where a new royal line was established in the past. If they were going to go with a Stuart, why they didn't pass a law saying they were going to be a figure head, Parliament was supreme. 

Why QE II named her eldest son Charles with the horrible history of that name for British royalty.  And why Chuckie didn't change his name when he assumed the throne. A king Arthur or Alfred would be nice.

They picked a Stuart because James VI of Scotland was the next closest relative to Elizabeth I.  parliament didn't have the authority to choose monarchs until they won the Civil War.  After Oliver Cromwell died, there wasn't a legitimate Parliamentary successor so they reverted to the Stuarts until Charles II's brother James II pissed them off enough to change to his daughter Mary.

[sunday]

7 minutes ago, R011 said:

Charles II's brother James II pissed them off enough to change to his daughter Mary

I think there was also a Dutch invasion related to that.

[17thfabn]

2 hours ago, Ssnake said:

He could have picked an awe-inspiring name like "Bloodfeast The Abominable" and demand daily sacrifices, but noooo...

That would be cool, but I don't think Chucky could pull that off.  Arthur or Alfred would be a stretch but possibly.

[17thfabn]

20 minutes ago, R011 said:

They picked a Stuart because James VI of Scotland was the next closest relative to Elizabeth I.  parliament didn't have the authority to choose monarchs until they won the Civil War.  After Oliver Cromwell died, there wasn't a legitimate Parliamentary successor so they reverted to the Stuarts until Charles II's brother James II pissed them off enough to change to his daughter Mary.

They could resort to the ancient law of we won, you lost. Winners make the rules.

I'll bet that sounds classy in Latin.

[Skywalkre]

20 hours ago, R011 said:

No.  Asking the DoJ to actually conduct a proper investigation into a possibly stolen election and asking officials to do due diligence instead of rubber stamping.

Is there a section in the First Amendment that says a president can't dispute an election whether rightly or mistakenly?

A third of Americans think that election was stolen.  Instead of supporting measures to reassure people that future elections would be fully transparent and fair, the Democrats have opposed any such measures.

That is a remarkably pro-Trump (one might say partisan) take on explaining the events leading up to 6Jan.  You say you've read up on everything... did you read the testimony/accounts of acting AG Jeffrey Rosen and acting Deputy AG Richard Donoghue?  (Both of them are Rs, btw.)  Their accounts highlight Trump wasn't looking for an honest investigation, he was pressuring them to say things that the evidence didn't support.  The DOJ environmental lawyer that Trump had tagged to take over the DoJ, Jeffrey Clark, who was willing to go along with the plan was recently found at fault by the DC Bar and they suggested his license be suspended for two years.  There was a statement in their findings that there was zero reason for him to believe what Trump wanted him to do.

All of this was done after weeks of investigations and court hearings all over the country where no evidence was ever provided to seriously bring the results into question.  (And even more investigations and court cases since haven't changed this conclusion.)

As for the Americans who still question the '20 election, upwards of a quarter of Americans think vaccines cause autism.  Ok, that doesn't change the fact that they're dumbasses.  Elected officials have been transparent, the conspiracy theorists just aren't listening.  That's not the Ds fault... and as such those folks don't deserve any sympathy.

[rmgill]

21 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

That is a remarkably pro-Trump (one might say partisan) take on explaining the events leading up to 6Jan.  You say you've read up on everything... did you read the testimony/accounts of acting AG Jeffrey Rosen and acting Deputy AG Richard Donoghue?  (Both of them are Rs, btw.)  Their accounts highlight Trump wasn't looking for an honest investigation, he was pressuring them to say things that the evidence didn't support.

Hang on, you reference January 6 and complain about lack of unpartisan investigations? Seriously? 

21 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

The DOJ environmental lawyer that Trump had tagged to take over the DoJ, Jeffrey Clark, who was willing to go along with the plan was recently found at fault by the DC Bar and they suggested his license be suspended for two years. 

You complain about the politicization of the DOJ with a straight face? Again, I will note that the Obama DOJ and since has been so politicized and corrupt that they violate legal canon of ethics as a matter of routine. Down to basic things like discovery and basic due process? 

How many J6 attendees simply walked in and were prosecuted without exculpatory evidence provided to the defense? Don't complain about the motes in other people's eyes when there's a beam in your own. 

21 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

All of this was done after weeks of investigations and court hearings all over the country where no evidence was ever provided to seriously bring the results into question.  (And even more investigations and court cases since haven't changed this conclusion.)

Again, I'll note that hearings on standing aren't the same thing and your representation as such isn't very credible. Yes, the evidence presented was paltry, but the problem is that the chain of custody in many cases was broke on the ballots and the entire system of absentee ballots with no verification doesn't lend itself to credibility. 

You and the folks that accept those mechanisms would fail any financial audit you sought to pass with the same sort of standards. I'll note it again, in the financial sector, we're likely to suffer million dollar fines for losing chain of custody of a hard drive with financial data on it. We can't USE hard drives that have questionable chain of custody and we can't use servers or other IT equipment with similar broken chain of custody.

You're fine with piles of absentee ballots, with no matching signatures, dumped into drop boxes, en masse by ballot harvesters and there's no evidence of fraud. You're right, there's no evidence because short of a confession by an effector of such fraud the system has been so contrived so as to be as credible as the money that  Fani Willis was paid back by her lover for their thousand dollar trips to the Bahamas. 

21 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

As for the Americans who still question the '20 election, upwards of a quarter of Americans think vaccines cause autism.  Ok, that doesn't change the fact that they're dumbasses.

How many of your fellow travelers think socialism works? Or communism? 

Something is causing autism. Likely it's due to the transparent policy that had salt, fats, eggs, on the don't eat list and pushed carbs as the best thing. 

Transparency. The medical profession was utterly opaque with the vaccine roll out and it's effects and did everything it could to suppress and destroy alternate treatments including ones that were known efficacy for treating other disease and had been extolled for decades in it's application. The horse paste story line pushed by the federal government and those transparent elected officials is front and center. 

21 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

Elected officials have been transparent, the conspiracy theorists just aren't listening.  That's not the Ds fault... and as such those folks don't deserve any sympathy.

This is a patent and outright lie. Elected officials promulgated rules/regulations/guidelines that were not transparent, caused harm both to people's health and the economy as well as businesses of individuals, they encouraged corruption and effected censorship. You bloody well know this. 

A simple test. How many elected officials denied the Chinese link? The lab Leak? What was promulgated? Wet market? 6 foot social distancing? Closure of outdoor parks? Encouraging folks to stay inside? Closing down and keeping schools closed for how long? 

Transparenct? Some other meaning of the word I was previously aware of. They were as transparent as sludge out of a super fund site's ground water monitoring well taps. 

Edited August 29 by rmgill

[Skywalkre]

6 minutes ago, rmgill said:

This is a patent and outright lie. Elected officials promulgated rules/regulations/guidelines that were not transparent, caused harm both to people's health and the economy as well as businesses of individuals, they encouraged corruption and effected censorship. You bloody well know this. 

A simple test. How many elected officials denied the Chinese link? The lab Leak? What was promulgated? Wet market? 6 foot social distancing? Closure of outdoor parks? Encouraging folks to stay inside? Closing down and keeping schools closed for how long? 

Transparenct? Some other meaning of the word I was previously aware of. They were as transparent as sludge out of a super fund site's ground water monitoring well taps. 

This is why I'm not bothering with you anymore.  What you bolded in my post has nothing to do with COVID.  R011's post was clearly not talking about COVID.  Your response here... is talking about COVID.  You don't fucking pay attention to, nor do you read, what you're responding to.  How in the world can anyone engage with you when that's the case?  Think on that for a bit...

[Murph]

When was the last time a leftist did anything like this?  I cannot recall a single time, they are too busy stealing other people's money:

 

 

[rmgill]

58 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

This is why I'm not bothering with you anymore.  What you bolded in my post has nothing to do with COVID. 

YOU BROUGHT UP VACCINES! That was your evidence for a further example of voter confidence in their betters. So you opened the bloody door. 

And, it has everything to do with COVID because the voting system was changed with the justification as COVID. The absentee ballot methods in PA specifically violated state law but that didn't matter. 
 

58 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

R011's post was clearly not talking about COVID.  Your response here... is talking about COVID.  You don't fucking pay attention to, nor do you read, what you're responding to. 

Then why did you mention vaccines and autism? 

More to the point, they, the always truthful and transparent elected officials, lied about covid but they're 100% truthful and transparent on the elections system. I'll bring it up again, Abrams and her group wanted voter ID requirements shitcanned. I could have voted with my mother's water bill. That Method was NOT transparent NOR honest. But that's what the Georgia Democrat party fought for. So your argument that they were transparent is a lie there too. 

Part of the issue is confidence. Does the public feel like they're doing a good job in insuring integrity. NO. So, what doe that mean? Is it just that the public is too stupid to know what they're about? All of them? Why even bother with a semblance of democracy at all then? Is that your point? Or just lie and gas light them until they go along with what their betters want? 

The DNC has always wanted a border wall. 

58 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

How in the world can anyone engage with you when that's the case?  Think on that for a bit...

They can engage when they're honest and consistent. You're not. You bring up an example and then when I rebut it with more evidence you get bent out of shape. Try having a consistent standard. 

Edited August 29 by rmgill

[sunday]

There are people that once they reach rock bottom, they start to dig. Not many of them do that with a backhoe.

Edited August 29 by sunday

[R011]

1 hour ago, 17thfabn said:

They could resort to the ancient law of we won, you lost. Winners make the rules.

I'll bet that sounds classy in Latin.

They did.  That's how they got Cromwell.  What they didn't have was a viable, recognized, succession save the old monarchy.

[Skywalkre]

14 minutes ago, rmgill said:

YOU BROUGHT UP VACCINES!

Which still wasn't talking about COVID.  The idiocy of vaccines causing autism has been around for a long time.  I was bringing it up to highlight how a large % of the population believes that... but that doesn't change how they're dumbasses for believing it (just like folks who believe the 2020 election was stolen are dumbasses).  Just a few days ago in a different thread sunday mentioned that that connection should be looked into and several posters, rightfully so, jumped in to highlight how it has been and there's nothing there.

You saw one word, started frothing at the mouth, and missed the entire point of the discussion to go off on something that I wasn't talking about.  This reply of yours... just proved the point I was making in my last post.

Enjoy screaming into the nether again...  👋

[17thfabn]

46 minutes ago, R011 said:

They did.  That's how they got Cromwell.  What they didn't have was a viable, recognized, succession save the old monarchy.

Seems like there was never a shortage of people running around with a claim to the throne. If they had too go with a Stuart, at   least tell him to shut up and just sit on his throne, parliament has the real power.

You gave the Stuart king power and he seeks revenge. Who could have seen that coming.

Edited August 29 by 17thfabn

[rmgill]

51 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

Which still wasn't talking about COVID.  The idiocy of vaccines causing autism has been around for a long time. 

Yes. But did it get better or worse with the COVID Vaccine push? 

51 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

I was bringing it up to highlight how a large % of the population believes that...

Which would go to the messaging that the public health officials failed with abysmally. 

Naturally MORE of the Don Lemon types are making this point despite the same Don Lemon types pushing the horse paste narrative (for example). 

So, you don't get to cite vaccine hesitancy when they current standing of the trust in the medical community is crap due to a VERY clear set of policies and standards on the part of the FDA, medical establishment, CDC and Drug Companies.
 

51 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

but that doesn't change how they're dumbasses for believing it (just like folks who believe the 2020 election was stolen are dumbasses).

And the dumb asses who believe in JOY and FORWARD when their candidate has no policies, hasn't done an interview and hasn't held a consistent policy outwards on anything in the past 4 years? 

Do explain that. 
 

51 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

  Just a few days ago in a different thread sunday mentioned that that connection should be looked into and several posters, rightfully so, jumped in to highlight how it has been and there's nothing there.

I expect for you, that there will ALWAYS be nothing there. That's why you defend Kamala's border policy and find nuance in it when she branded such policy previously as a medieval vanity project. 

You lack consistency. 

51 minutes ago, Skywalkre said:

You saw one word, started frothing at the mouth, and missed the entire point of the discussion to go off on something that I wasn't talking about.  This reply of yours... just proved the point I was making in my last post.

Sure we can take it all in isolation. Just like how you take Kamala's new policy in isolation and ignore the past 4 years of policy, inaction, posturing and standards. 

 

Edited August 29 by rmgill

[sunday]

No one whose opinions I care for posted any answer to that suggestion about autism and vaccines, I think. So I did not feel any need to elaborate/clear possible misunderstandings.

Edited August 29 by sunday

[Murph]

2 hours ago, 17thfabn said:

They could resort to the ancient law of we won, you lost. Winners make the rules.

I'll bet that sounds classy in Latin.

Vicimus, perdidisti, nunc praecepta facimus!

We won, you lost, we make the rules now!

[sunday]

2 minutes ago, Murph said:

Vicimus, perdidisti, nunc praecepta facimus!

We won, you lost, we make the rules now!

I think the last formulation out there is "Elections have consequences"

[rmgill]

27 minutes ago, sunday said:

No one whose opinions I care for posted any answer to that suggestion about autism and vaccines, I think. So I did not feel any need to elaborate/clear possible misunderstandings.

I have a gut feeling that the rise in autism is probably more related to shifts in diet and other environmental factors than vaccines. But the complexity of diet and other things going on with child development leave me wondering. It very well could be a little of column A and a little of column B. 

I remain skeptical of anything food or medication wise and more inclined to look at the fine print and study data before placing faith. But then I was raised by someone who had a copy of the PDR (physician's desk reference) in the household reference books. 

[sunday]

That seems eminently reasonable, and in conformity with scientific principles.

[rmgill]

Perhaps having been raised in a medical family AND having worked in the industry itself for a time I have a more nuanced view of it all. 

I am reminded of when I was working for Dr Klein, cardiology was potentially great. But at the same time, we saw patient films where their cardiologist had put in 4-6 stents. Given Dr Klein's study data on restenosis was something like 20% chance for a given stent to have a re-occulsion at that juncture, the patients with 5-6 stents were GOING to have another occlusion. Doctors shotgunning what ever treatment at a patient because it's in their tool box is not always a good thing. It's as much art as science and many doctors and professionals are not very artistic. 

Like with anything, over use when it's not needed often manifests problems. Be it alcohol, vaccines, medication, anti-biotics, or what ever. 

And the medical profession is NOT good at self reflection, self awareness OR credulity in the face of utter or gross mistakes. 

Edited August 29 by rmgill

[Mr King]

After the clear evidence that the scientific and medical community are compromised from their actions during the covid epidemic and "vaccine" campaign, why would anyone ever put trust in them again? Especially trust in their promotion of other vaccines?

 

Sorry I am not taking serious the opinions of people who think this is reasonable

 

[sunday]

Then there is the so-called replication crisis, on top of that.

Quote

The replication crisis[a] is an ongoing methodological crisis in which the results of many scientific studies are difficult or impossible to reproduce. Because the reproducibility of empirical results is an essential part of the scientific method,[2] such failures undermine the credibility of theories building on them and potentially call into question substantial parts of scientific knowledge.

The replication crisis is frequently discussed in relation to psychology and medicine, where considerable efforts have been undertaken to reinvestigate classic results, to determine whether they are reliable, and if they turn out not to be, the reasons for the failure.[3][4] Data strongly indicate that other natural and social sciences are affected as well.[5]

 

[17thfabn]

1 hour ago, Murph said:

Vicimus, perdidisti, nunc praecepta facimus!

We won, you lost, we make the rules now!

Thanks! The Latin does tend to class up a brutal but real concept.