Donald Trump discussion Thread IX (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Itssoeasy

pixelburp wrote: »

We can all have a wry chuckle at the outlandish idiocy of believing in space lasers starting bushfires, but it takes an especially depraved mind that would fictionalise dead children rather than confront the horrific reality of widespread gun ownership. That's a cognitive gordian knot.

Particularly as, if indeed school shootings WERE faked, the conspiracy clearly isn't working given shootings continue to be a common fact of American life, while legislation stalls within legislative bodies. It's a terrible strategy by all accounts; surely it'd be cheaper to bribe the senators needed.

Mind you. I've said it before, but in any other civilised country, Sandy Hook WOULD have been the watershed moment. That wake-up call that the issue had trailed long enough and required intervention - see Dunblane in the UK back in the 90s (wasn't there similar in Australia a couple of years ago? I forget). Not in the US, no. The vacuous, asinine "Thoughts & prayers" floated across the lips of conversations with elegant practise, because even dead toddlers couldn't shift the stain. Alex Jones then planting seeds now flourishing in the minds of the likes of Taylor-Greene. As hyperbolic as it is to say, maybe America is beyond saving in some respects.

Sandy hook should have been the watershed moment when any nation on earth should maybe think six and seven year olds being slaughtered might be the moment where people would say “alright lads we might have a problem.” But yeah we had the dregs of American media spouting all manner of horse**** conspiracy theories going.

Is the one in Australia port Arthur ? I don’t remember a school shooting like that in dunblane.

amandstu

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I don’t remember a school shooting like that in dunblane.

1996

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jun/17/judy-murray-dunblane-massacre-just-left-car-and-ran

Itssoeasy

amandstu wrote: »

1996

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jun/17/judy-murray-dunblane-massacre-just-left-car-and-ran

Sorry I meant to say one comparable in Australia to dunblane. I know about dunblane but port Arthur is the one in Australia that came to mind.

aloyisious

Cant see this invite being accepted in a month of Sundays. The Democrat impeachment management team have invited Trump to testify under oath at his senate trial.

Itssoeasy

aloyisious wrote: »

Cant see this invite being accepted in a month of Sundays. The Democrat impeachment management team have invited Trump to testify under oath at his senate trial.

Oh please let him testify under oath. It would be complete and utter box office. I’ve seen some deposition video that was taken before he became president and it’s nuts. He’s a lawyers worst nightmare.

Tell me how

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Oh please let him testify under oath. It would be complete and utter box office. I’ve seen some deposition video that was taken before he became president and it’s nuts. He’s a lawyers worst nightmare.

He won't go near it. Well, he shouldn't. Although maybe he's just crazy enough to do so.

Roger Stone was another one that didn't come across well in deposition. Lawyers nightmare as you say. You'd be adding a zero to your price for dealing with them given the press that would come your way after it.

Itssoeasy

Tell me how wrote: »

He won't go near it. Well, he shouldn't. Although maybe he's just crazy enough to do so.

Roger Stone was another one that didn't come across well in deposition. Lawyers nightmare as you say. You'd be adding a zero to your price for dealing with them given the press that would come your way after it.

If there’s any shred of cop on between his legal team he won’t be near it but maybe the point could be made that president bill Clinton testified under oath and go for his ego.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

He won't go near it. Well, he shouldn't. Although maybe he's just crazy enough to do so.

Roger Stone was another one that didn't come across well in deposition. Lawyers nightmare as you say. You'd be adding a zero to your price for dealing with them given the press that would come your way after it.

Speaking of which.

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1357420852460089346

This could be interesting. Stone is well capable of turning rogue I feel if he thinks he is at risk.

Itssoeasy

Tell me how wrote: »

Speaking of which.

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1357420852460089346

This could be interesting. Stone is well capable of turning rogue I feel if he thinks he is at risk.

Can I just clarify that a pardon removes a persons fifth amendment rights of self incrimination so he can sing like a canary and know he’s under no legal trouble ?

Lithium93_

So Smartmatic (Voting equipment maker) have filed a defamation suit against those mentioned in the attached tweet, and the opening line of the suit is quiet possibly the best opening line in any sort of lawsuit.

https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1357392242785333249

Lithium93_

Per Reuters, just now..

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1357439824597299207

spacecoyote

Lithium93_ wrote: »

Per Reuters, just now..

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1357439824597299207

Tweet appears to be gone, what was it?

Itssoeasy

Lithium93_ wrote: »

Per Reuters, just now..

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1357439824597299207

Tweets gone.

banie01

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Can I just clarify that a pardon removes a persons fifth amendment rights of self incrimination so he can sing like a canary and know he’s under no legal trouble ?

Only in regards to the offence they were pardoned for.
It's not a blanket removal of one's 5th amendment right.

Itssoeasy

https://twitter.com/acosta/status/1357411918919700491?s=21

The former president resigned from the screen actors guild(SAG) in a way only he could. With grace and humility... of course he did none of those things and his letter which is in the tweet above was par for the course and nasty and undignified.

Itssoeasy

Itssoeasy wrote: »

https://twitter.com/acosta/status/1357411918919700491?s=21

The former president resigned from the screen actors guild(SAG) in a way only he could. With grace and humility... of course he did none of those things and his letter which is in the tweet above was par for the course and nasty and undignified.

Easy to see why some rightly consider him a man child

Itssoeasy

Itssoeasy wrote: »

If there’s any shred of cop on between his legal team he won’t be near it but maybe the point could be made that president bill Clinton testified under oath and go for his ego.

I wonder if his legal team will last without any more changes before it's done and dusted. As for his ego, yeah it'd be bruised, but at the back of it all he's a coward and prefers to have/put someone else in the firing line. It's not like a press conference where he can walk away when the questions get to hard, so I don't think that he will go. Could be wrong of course, but would be surprised if he does.

robinph

Itssoeasy wrote: »

https://twitter.com/acosta/status/1357411918919700491?s=21

The former president resigned from the screen actors guild(SAG) in a way only he could. With grace and humility... of course he did none of those things and his letter which is in the tweet above was par for the course and nasty and undignified.

If that is genuine the they absolutely have to get him into the impeachment trial and speaking to "defend" himself. The letter unfortunately reads a bit too perfectly like Trump ranting though, I suspect it's fake.

Professor Moriarty

robinph wrote: »

If that is genuine the they absolutely have to get him into the impeachment trial and speaking to "defend" himself. The letter unfortunately reads a bit too perfectly like Trump ranting though, I suspect it's fake.

It's true. The guild thanked him for resigning.

Headshot

Great to see Greene removed from committees

Nasty piece of work

BonnieSituation

pixelburp wrote: »

We can all have a wry chuckle at the outlandish idiocy of believing in space lasers starting bushfires, but it takes an especially depraved mind that would fictionalise dead children rather than confront the horrific reality of widespread gun ownership. That's a cognitive gordian knot.

Particularly as, if indeed school shootings WERE faked, the conspiracy clearly isn't working given shootings continue to be a common fact of American life, while legislation stalls within legislative bodies. It's a terrible strategy by all accounts; surely it'd be cheaper to bribe the senators needed.

Mind you. I've said it before, but in any other civilised country, Sandy Hook WOULD have been the watershed moment. That wake-up call that the issue had trailed long enough and required intervention - see Dunblane in the UK back in the 90s (wasn't there similar in Australia a couple of years ago? I forget). Not in the US, no. The vacuous, asinine "Thoughts & prayers" floated across the lips of conversations with elegant practise, because even dead toddlers couldn't shift the stain. Alex Jones then planting seeds now flourishing in the minds of the likes of Taylor-Greene. As hyperbolic as it is to say, maybe America is beyond saving in some respects.

Australia's watershed moment was Port Arthur massacre in 1996.

It was a truly chilling horror.

But yeah, I thought Sandy Hook would be the US's moment... Then parkland or LV or Orlando...

BonnieSituation

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Australia's watershed moment was Port Arthur massacre in 1996.

It was a truly chilling horror.

But yeah, I thought Sandy Hook would be the US's moment... Then parkland or LV or Orlando...

Nothing is ever going to change the relationship with guns in America. Even hope for more control and bans on specific types is an impossibility. To much money to be made from them and they appeal to the usual mentally challenged wing nuts with their cold dead hands mantra among other bs.

Sparko

Headshot wrote: »

Great to see Greene removed from committees

Nasty piece of work

Only 11 Republicans had the backbone to support removing her, which is a shame. Good for the ones who put common sense and the greater good ahead of party politics.

AlmightyCushion

Lithium93_ wrote: »

So Smartmatic (Voting equipment maker) have filed a defamation suit against those mentioned in the attached tweet, and the opening line of the suit is quiet possibly the best opening line in any sort of lawsuit.

https://twitter.com/ZoeTillman/status/1357392242785333249

Two plus two equals four. Don't tell me you're one of those sheep that believes everything MSM (mainstream maths) tells you.

Buford T Justice

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Two plus two equals four. Don't tell me you're one of those sheep that believes everything MSM (mainstream maths) tells you.

Did you just assume my beliefs?

Itssoeasy

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Australia's watershed moment was Port Arthur massacre in 1996.

It was a truly chilling horror.

But yeah, I thought Sandy Hook would be the US's moment... Then parkland or LV or Orlando...

Even reading the description of what happened in port Arthur is chilling. The matter of fact ness of it was weird.


A great point made my Nicole Wallace last night was that if by some miracle Donald trump did testify, the first question should be “Did Joe Biden win the election ?” and you’d see him have to decide between bluster and perjury. I know he didn’t sit for an interview with mueller in person but he(with massive help) did submit written answers which were evasive and not complete.

Field east

Leroy42 wrote: »

It isn't really. They firmly believe that guns are inherently safe. That is only crazy people that cause the problem.

Thus is is perfectly right to check kids going into school as they don't know who the crazies are, but they themselves are not crazy and so far from needing to be checked they are actually there to protect people from the crazies.

Labeling those who shoot people dead - or that is the intention when the trigger is pulled- as crazy , is an extremely simplistic way of looking at the issue because:-
(1) America is a trigger happy nation in general
(2) given the presence of a certain environment/circumstances a lot of gun holders would pull the trigger. Eg that couple that stood outside their house with gun cocked, in , I think ,a gated estate as a BLM protest group passed by.
(3) the police seem to be quiet happy to shoot to kill rather than shoot to maim. They seem to use the gun first and then to ask questions afterwards. And quiet often they massively escalate a situation that leads to the use of guns rather than backing off a bit and trying another strategy

salmocab

Field east wrote: »

Labeling those who shoot people dead - or that is the intention when the trigger is pulled- as crazy , is an extremely simplistic way of looking at the issue because:-
(1) America is a trigger happy nation in general
(2) given the presence of a certain environment/circumstances a lot of gun holders would pull the trigger. Eg that couple that stood outside their house with gun cocked, in , I think ,a gated estate as a BLM protest group passed by.
(3) the police seem to be quiet happy to shoot to kill rather than shoot to maim. They seem to use the gun first and then to ask questions afterwards. And quiet often they massively escalate a situation that leads to the use of guns rather than backing off a bit and trying another strategy

Your 3 points are the sort of thing that in the end perpetuates the gun violence particularly the first two. It’s constant finding of reasons to have guns that normalises it.

listermint

Field east wrote: »

Labeling those who shoot people dead - or that is the intention when the trigger is pulled- as crazy , is an extremely simplistic way of looking at the issue because:-
(1) America is a trigger happy nation in general
(2) given the presence of a certain environment/circumstances a lot of gun holders would pull the trigger. Eg that couple that stood outside their house with gun cocked, in , I think ,a gated estate as a BLM protest group passed by.
(3) the police seem to be quiet happy to shoot to kill rather than shoot to maim. They seem to use the gun first and then to ask questions afterwards. And quiet often they massively escalate a situation that leads to the use of guns rather than backing off a bit and trying another strategy

Ya that neighbour who shot the other two neighbours over shoveling snow onto his sidewalk that wasnt bizarre at all. Both sides in that argument pointed guns at each other and shouted for ten minutes arguing.

Without the guns. They'd all still be here

Leroy42

Field east wrote: »

Labeling those who shoot people dead - or that is the intention when the trigger is pulled- as crazy , is an extremely simplistic way of looking at the issue because:-
(1) America is a trigger happy nation in general
(2) given the presence of a certain environment/circumstances a lot of gun holders would pull the trigger. Eg that couple that stood outside their house with gun cocked, in , I think ,a gated estate as a BLM protest group passed by.
(3) the police seem to be quiet happy to shoot to kill rather than shoot to maim. They seem to use the gun first and then to ask questions afterwards. And quiet often they massively escalate a situation that leads to the use of guns rather than backing off a bit and trying another strategy

Just to clarify. my post was pointing out how gun advocates, and it was replying to a post about Reps refusing to use metal detectors at congress but happy for them to be installed at schools, use that simplistic way to make themselves feel rational.

Why should they have to be checked, they are not crazy and know how to handle their guns. They all believe that the best way to deal with a bad person with a gun, is a good person with a gun.

They absolutely believe, despite all the evidence, that a gun is the answer.