Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Rjd2

2 Scoops wrote: »

Very commendable, I see Everlast said the same so fair dues. I despise the use of the word "protestors" in the media reports surrounding this incident. It's not a protest if you're ramming someones door and spray painting their driveway which can be heard on the police audio or chanting "We'll fight you we know where you sleep at night". That's vandalism and intimidation. His wife was alone in side terrified. He's taken time off presumably to move house.

What sickens me is there many verified accounts on twitter with large followings encouraging this time of behavior, On the flipside others called it out. Twitter took a long time to ban this account, initially they just removed the posts containing home addresses, it's the same group who got in the face of Ted and Heidi Cruz. There should be zero tolerance for this behavior of any kind, right or left. The extremities on each end of the spectrum make the vast majority of decent people look bad.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/tucker-carlson-critics-defend-protest-house-2018-11

To be fair the reaction has been pretty respectful from looking at those on twitter who would be considered left wing, heck plenty I consider way to partisan have been respectful and pushed back.

The only one who made me squirm was Yglesias at Vox. However I don't really think anyone seriously rates him whatsoever. A dull guy who says silly stuff in a desperate bid to be relevant.

Shame as I think Vox can be really good at times. I think its due to his connections more than actual talent he has his role, but could be wrong. I don't really want to spend the night digging deep into his background.

You'd get similarly stupid takes if it was a prominent left winger in the same scenario.

2 Scoops

Rjd2 wrote: »

To be fair the reaction has been pretty respectful from looking at those on twitter who would be considered left wing, heck plenty I consider way to partisan have been respectful and pushed back.

The only one who made me squirm was Yglesias at Vox. However I don't really think anyone seriously rates him whatsoever. A dull guy who says silly stuff in a desperate bid to be relevant.

Shame as I think Vox can be really good at times.

You'd get similarly stupid takes if it was a prominent left winger in the same scenario.

I just read through the first few replies on Anna Navarros tweet many of them are extreme and encouraging this behavior. America on the path it's going down is doomed. Same thing on the right calling the pipe bombs fake.

Hande hoche!

Will be curious as to what happens with Roger Stone over the next few days.

Rjd2 wrote: »

The only one who made me squirm was Yglesias at Vox. However I don't really think anyone seriously rates him whatsoever. A dull guy who says silly stuff in a desperate bid to be relevant.

That's actually a very apt summary of the chap. Used to bother with his articles but life is too short.

jobbridge4life

2 Scoops wrote: »

Fully aware of that, please point to the post where I said Trump treated him fairly.

Right after you point to the post where I said what you claim above, highlighted to prevent further obfuscation. There is no one fooled by these tactics.

2 Scoops wrote: »

I took issue with a poster's innuendo about Sessions and his interactions with Russians.

IF you did you are well capable of parsing comments, and expressing yourself in clear terms.

Rjd2

I think you are best off ignoring random twitter nobodies tbh. As I said plenty of blue ticks who are way to one eyed to be interesting have condemned it.

I am sure if I was to go look at Ben Shapiro's responses to tragic events, I'd find some right wing nobodies with silly takes.

Wait until you see some of the responses on youtube videos!

2 Scoops

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Will be curious as to what happens with Roger Stone over the next few days.

He's greasier than a snake in butter. An entertaining character and I can understand the dislike for him. There's a good documentary about him on Neflix.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/get_me_roger_stone/

The thing is, if Stone did communicate in some way with Julian Assange and Assange told him that he had documents on Podesta which is what his tweet alluded to, what would constitute an actual crime in that case? Stone directing the release of the emails? Merely being told they exist amounts to nothing. He's not the one who hacked the DNC or released the emails. Edit: Well that's not true, Stone would have told the campaign which meant they'd also have prior knowledge. Not reporting that to officials would get them in trouble, politically it would be a disaster.

badtoro

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Also the shooting in California, I mean is there a point in me or anyone here trying to make sense of it and suggest solutions ? The majority of us are based in Ireland or not America so until they themselves decide to change in some way then it's pointless.

Here's a mad solution, which obviously has absolutely no chance of ever happening.

Ban guns.

"Oh, but you're a European, you simply don't understand America. The second amendment is one of our most cherished freedoms."

"I bet if you banned guns there would be a lot less gun deaths."

"That's far too simplistic. You don't understand the culture."

"Yes, I do. I understand that your gun culture is totally insane. Not only can the rest of the world see it but most of your own country can see it."

"The framers of our consti-toooo-shun were visionaries. They understood that a well armed militia is the only protection against tyranny."

"You have a tyrant in the White House. And your "militias" are fanatical supporters of him."

"But such a ban would never get through Congress."

"Well, start voting for better politicians."

"But there would be civil war over it."

"Well, it's highly unlikely to be any worse than it is now, because as it is you're going around shooting the bejaysus out of each other. 13,000 gun deaths a year. That's 130,000 in a decade. Since the Iraq War, it's over 200,000 dead."


I know. It's so simplistic. And so obvious. So obvious that it's staring America in the face.

And I bet anything it would work a hell of a lot better than the gun laws there work now.

Ban. Fooking. Guns.

And ammo, while you're at it.

Guns in themselves aren't the problem, they're, or rather their effect are a symptom of the problem - that pretty much anyone can have one.

I, here in Ireland own three guns, amazingly they have failed to kill or wound anyone in the decade plus I've owned them.

An appropriate licensing and check system would help. However the sheer number of firearms in circulation in the USA must be recognised. It's rather like the one about asking a Kerry man directions "Well, I wouldn't start from here..."

Itssoeasy

2 Scoops wrote: »

Very commendable, I see Everlast said the same so fair dues. I despise the use of the word "protestors" in the media reports surrounding this incident. It's not a protest if you're ramming someones door and spray painting their driveway which can be heard on the police audio or chanting "We'll fight you we know where you sleep at night". That's vandalism and intimidation. His wife was alone in side terrified. He's taken time off presumably to move house.

What sickens me is there many verified accounts on twitter with large followings encouraging this time of behavior, On the flipside others called it out. Twitter took a long time to ban this account, initially they just removed the posts containing home addresses, it's the same group who got in the face of Ted and Heidi Cruz. There should be zero tolerance for this behavior of any kind, right or left. The extremities on each end of the spectrum make the vast majority of decent people look bad.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/tucker-carlson-critics-defend-protest-house-2018-11

So, you are giving Everlast and I credit for simply being human ? Okay then.

Manic Moran

relax carry on wrote: »

God it's bad when Fox isn't exactly rowing in behind the acting AG.

"Napolitano said Whitaker, however, is not legally qualified for the role of acting attorney general because of "very precise laws" written by Congress in the wake of the Watergate scandal.

He said there are only three ways someone can become acting attorney general: if they are the deputy attorney general and the president signs an executive order to make them acting attorney general, if they are already at the Justice Department in a job that both required and received Senate confirmation or if the Senate in in recess, they can be a recess appointment.

He said none of those apply in this case, as Whitaker is not deputy attorney general, he did not receive Senate confirmation for his current role at the DOJ and the Senate is not in recess.

"So with deference and respect to what the president's trying to do -- he has every right to want whoever he wants to run the Justice Department -- he has chosen someone who does not qualify under the law to be the acting attorney general of the United States," Napolitano said."

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/11/08/judge-napolitano-matthew-whitaker-does-not-qualify-under-law-be-acting-attorney-general

That’s an interesting observation. I wonder what the enforcement mechanism is?

everlast75

K A Conway's husband, George has a Twitter account and its golden. Can't imagine the dinner conversation with herself though...


https://twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/1060589818458062848?s=19

2 Scoops

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So, you are giving Everlast and I credit for simply being human ? Okay then.

For bringing up the incident voluntarily in this thread. I never alluded anyone was sub human or the like, you know that after I replied to your pm. If maddow or whoever else was targeted I would say the same thing, it's unacceptable.

vetinari

badtoro wrote: »

Guns in themselves aren't the problem, they're, or rather their effect are a symptom of the problem - that pretty much anyone can have one.

I, here in Ireland own three guns, amazingly they have failed to kill or wound anyone in the decade plus I've owned them.

An appropriate licensing and check system would help. However the sheer number of firearms in circulation in the USA must be recognised. It's rather like the one about asking a Kerry man directions "Well, I wouldn't start from here..."

Easy access to guns specifically handguns is a massive part of the gun problem in the US. Unfortunately it won't be changing any time soon. The pro gun people are perfectly fine with a few random people getting shot here and there. One can only hope that it's their loved ones who get gunned down in the next mass shooting.

AbusesToilets

vetinari wrote: »

Easy access to guns specifically handguns is a massive part of the gun problem in the US. Unfortunately it won't be changing any time soon. The pro gun people are perfectly fine with a few random people getting shot here and there. One can only hope that it's their loved ones who get gunned down in the next mass shooting.

Charming attitude to take.

2 Scoops

Tucker responds to the incident on his Wife and family home. Scroll to 2 minutes

gimli2112

vetinari wrote: »

Easy access to guns specifically handguns is a massive part of the gun problem in the US. Unfortunately it won't be changing any time soon. The pro gun people are perfectly fine with a few random people getting shot here and there. One can only hope that it's their loved ones who get gunned down in the next mass shooting.

the sad thing is this probably won't change their mind. just trot out the old "if they had guns to defend themselves with it wouldn't have happened"

rossie1977

Just get a few black folks to open carry assault weapons down the mall in DC, NYC, Chicago, LA and Houston and Republicans will sign an weapons ban in double quick time just like when they passed the Mulford Act.

everlast75

2 Scoops wrote: »

For bringing up the incident voluntarily in this thread. I never alluded anyone was sub human or the like, you know that after I replied to your pm. If maddow or whoever else was targeted I would say the same thing, it's unacceptable.

There is a world of class and professionalism between Maddow and Carlson. Carson incites violence, promotes dangerous conspiracy theories and mocks the misfortune of others.

He still didn't deserve this. I just wanted to point out the glaring difference between the two as she didn't deserve to be spoken of in the same breath as that hate peddling agitator.

everlast75

gimli2112 wrote: »

the sad thing is this probably won't change their mind. just trot out the old "if they had guns to defend themselves with it wouldn't have happened"

If Sandy Hook didn't, nothing will

dr.fuzzenstein

gimli2112 wrote: »

the sad thing is this probably won't change their mind. just trot out the old "if they had guns to defend themselves with it wouldn't have happened"

And don't forget the militias who, in their mind, want to "defend" the country in case the evil gubbermint gets bad ideas instead of being a bunch of sad, inbred hillbillies with a Walter Mitty complex the size of a planet.
And in real life, how long would the last in an armed conflict with government forces? 5 minutes? 10?
No, nothing will change. At this stage you can just sigh and shrug your shoulders.

Rhineshark

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

And don't forget the militias who, in their mind, want to "defend" the country in case the evil gubbermint gets bad ideas instead of being a bunch of sad, inbred hillbillies with a Walter Mitty complex the size of a planet.
And in real life, how long would the last in an armed conflict with government forces? 5 minutes? 10?
No, nothing will change. At this stage you can just sigh and shrug your shoulders.

And that's leaving aside that the pro-gun lot, when they finally do get a tyrannically-inclined government, is on its side.

Igotadose

rossie1977 wrote: »

Just get a few black folks to open carry assault weapons down the mall in DC, NYC, Chicago, LA and Houston and Republicans will sign an weapons ban in double quick time just like when they passed the Mulford Act.

Nothing's changed - Occupy Democrats posted a video of a white guy and a black guy open carrying in an open carry. Guess which one got hassled badly by the police?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfH36aAUAnI

8-10

everlast75 wrote: »

K A Conway's husband, George has a Twitter account and its golden. Can't imagine the dinner conversation with herself though...

Even more heated than James Carville and Mary Matalin you'd imagine!

Eric Cartman

Igotadose wrote: »

Nothing's changed - Occupy Democrats posted a video of a white guy and a black guy open carrying in an open carry. Guess which one got hassled badly by the police?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfH36aAUAnI

Firstly : Occupy democrats... thing is probably a complete setup , probably had the black guy go round till he found a cop who got scared like that.

Secondly : Black males are the victims in over 80% of gun related homocides in the US , the police shooting black men accounts for about 1% of these deaths, other black people account for over 75% of these. However on the other side of police shot by suspects , over 80% of incidents where a police officer was shot or shot at , the suspect was black. If you consider a mass shooting still a mass shooting when the targets are gang members then black men over represent in mass shootings compared to whites.

Like it or not, in the US there is a systemic problem between black men and guns that is disproporionate to the problems other races have with guns , There are FBI stats to back that up, so ofcourse police are more likely to be wary of a black man open carrying a gun.

A lot of this obviously stems from historic racism and tensions between police and the black community arent great for reasons of police actions of the past, but that said when it comes to the topic of 'whos got a gun and will they shoot' the police have a hell of a lot of figures to justify being more afraid of the black guy

everlast75

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Firstly : Occupy democrats... thing is probably a complete setup , probably had the black guy go round till he found a cop who got scared like that.

Secondly : Black males are the victims in over 80% of gun related homocides in the US , the police shooting black men accounts for about 1% of these deaths, other black people account for over 75% of these. However on the other side of police shot by suspects , over 80% of incidents where a police officer was shot or shot at , the suspect was black. If you consider a mass shooting still a mass shooting when the targets are gang members then black men over represent in mass shootings compared to whites.

Like it or not, in the US there is a systemic problem between black men and guns that is disproporionate to the problems other races have with guns , There are FBI stats to back that up, so ofcourse police are more likely to be wary of a black man open carrying a gun.

A lot of this obviously stems from historic racism and tensions between police and the black community arent great for reasons of police actions of the past, but that said when it comes to the topic of 'whos got a gun and will they shoot' the police have a hell of a lot of figures to justify being more afraid of the black guy

Lots of black men have problems with guns, says he in the wake of 2 mass shootings within the past 11 days... carried out by white men


Edit - lol. That vid was probably filmed with crisis actors eh?

B0jangles

Eric, without even delving into the gun death stats, are you aware of just how recent 'historic' racism is in the US?



That's Dorothea Counts trying to go to school with white students in North Carolina - they spat on her, they threw rocks and rubbish at her, her family got threatening phonecalls and a car was burned out.

The harassment was so bad that her parents removed her from the school after 4 days


This is her in 2017

The generation of people who spat at her, who threw rocks at her, who made threatening phonecalls and burned out cars simply to keep a young black woman from attending school with them are still around, they still hold positions of power and authority, they still vote.

Handwaving the virulence of racism in the US away as 'Historic' is either profoundly ignorant, or intentionally misleading.

everlast75

2 Scoops wrote: »

Very commendable, I see Everlast said the same so fair dues. I despise the use of the word "protestors" in the media reports surrounding this incident. It's not a protest if you're ramming someones door and spray painting their driveway which can be heard on the police audio or chanting "We'll fight you we know where you sleep at night". That's vandalism and intimidation. His wife was alone in side terrified. He's taken time off presumably to move house.

What sickens me is there many verified accounts on twitter with large followings encouraging this time of behavior, On the flipside others called it out. Twitter took a long time to ban this account, initially they just removed the posts containing home addresses, it's the same group who got in the face of Ted and Heidi Cruz. There should be zero tolerance for this behavior of any kind, right or left. The extremities on each end of the spectrum make the vast majority of decent people look bad.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/tucker-carlson-critics-defend-protest-house-2018-11

Just for parity....


https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1060558060345810944?s=19

Dohnjoe

Good overview on how broken and anti-majority the Senate system is in the US presently

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/08/democrats-republicans-senate-majority-minority-rule

Each of America’s 50 states elects two senators, regardless of population, and only a third of the country’s Senate seats are voted on each election cycle.

What that means is that California, which has a population of just under 40 million, holds the same representation in the Senate as Wyoming, which at roughly 579,000 is the least populous state in the country.

“That’s a radically undemocratic principle, and it gives rise to what we see,” said David Golove, a professor at the New York University School of Law, “which is that the minority populations are going to have a disproportionate impact in the United States. That tends to mean conservatives have a disproportionate influence over the Senate.”

Eric Cartman

B0jangles wrote: »

Eric, without even delving into the gun death stats, are you aware of just how recent 'historic' racism is in the US?



That's Dorothea Counts trying to go to school with white students in North Carolina - they spat on her, they threw rocks and rubbish at her, her family got threatening phonecalls and a car was burned out.

The harassment was so bad that her parents removed her from the school after 4 days


This is her in 2017

The generation of people who spat at her, who threw rocks at her, who made threatening phonecalls and burned out cars simply to keep a young black woman from attending school with them are still around, they still hold positions of power and authority, they still vote.

Handwaving the virulence of racism in the US away as 'Historic' is either profoundly ignorant, or intentionally misleading.

Historic can apply up to the modern day, I am in no way belittling the racism that black people in the US have faced, I was simply replying to a video about the 'inequality' in the way police treT black men with guns. While I abhore and condemn a lot of the inequalities leveraged on black people in the US, being more cautious in relation to guns is justified and backed by facts and figures.

Everlast - still doesnt change anything , all mass shootings are bad, a mass shooting happening doesnt mean we stop talking about the US's violent issues with guns , also white people statistically still commit less mass shootings.

Pelvis

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Firstly : Occupy democrats... thing is probably a complete setup , probably had the black guy go round till he found a cop who got scared like that.

Secondly : Black males are the victims in over 80% of gun related homocides in the US , the police shooting black men accounts for about 1% of these deaths, other black people account for over 75% of these. However on the other side of police shot by suspects , over 80% of incidents where a police officer was shot or shot at , the suspect was black. If you consider a mass shooting still a mass shooting when the targets are gang members then black men over represent in mass shootings compared to whites.

Like it or not, in the US there is a systemic problem between black men and guns that is disproporionate to the problems other races have with guns , There are FBI stats to back that up, so ofcourse police are more likely to be wary of a black man open carrying a gun.

A lot of this obviously stems from historic racism and tensions between police and the black community arent great for reasons of police actions of the past, but that said when it comes to the topic of 'whos got a gun and will they shoot' the police have a hell of a lot of figures to justify being more afraid of the black guy

According to the Department of Justice, offenders of all gun homicides between 1980-2008 were 56.9% black. Victims of gun homicides were 51.4% black.

Where are you getting your figures?

Igotadose

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Firstly : Occupy democrats... thing is probably a complete setup , probably had the black guy go round till he found a cop who got scared like that.

Your proof it's a 'complete setup' is... you don't want to believe it? Or your believe Occupy Democrats is making it up because...you don't agree with them?

Do you think this is the only example like this out there, of blacks being told to hit the ground because they're open carrying? FWIW a little googling showed the occupy democrats video filming the white guy in Oregon (left wing cesspool!) and the black guy in Nevada (MAGA heaven!)