Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 177

oojason said:

TV’s Frink said:

I’ll repeat this one last time. And it’s not directed at Fo because that’s clearly a dead end.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/23/politics/adam-schiff-trump-russia-grand-jury/

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee is claiming that he has been presented with new information on collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and Russia that would merit a grand jury investigation.

Rep. Adam Schiff told CNN Thursday that he had seen additional evidence, but would not specify what it was.

“We continue to get new information that, I think, paints a more complete picture of at least what we know at the outset of our investigation,” Schiff said.

Asked to explain his comments earlier in the week when he said there was more than just “circumstantial evidence of collusion,” Schiff said, "I do think that it’s appropriate to say that it’s the kind of evidence that you would submit to a grand jury at the beginning of an investigation.

“It’s not the kind of evidence that you take to a trial jury when you’re trying to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. But we’re at the beginning of an investigation, and given the gravity of the subject matter, I think that the evidence certainly warrants us doing a thorough investigation.”

If anyone can point out the bias and inaccuracy in this, feel free.

No-one will or can - as there is no bias or inaccuracy in there.

We are seemingly in an age where people and organisations are trying to present their opinion as fact possibly more than ever before - and when those same people are questioned on it they often cannot come up with facts/evidence to make their point - they generally then claim it as opinion (often under ‘free speech’), or deflect or obfuscate.

What’s even stranger is, like in this case, when factual reporting (literally nothing more than what someone said) is somehow painted as either opinion or a falsehood. It kind of boggles the mind.

Reminds me of how Spicey operates.

This is great. Trump’s insane TIME interview, with everything that can’t be verified redacted.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/we-redacted-everything-thats-not-a-verifiably-true-stat-1793571837

JEDIT: Here’s Politifact’s entry on it.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/mar/23/fact-checking-trumps-time-interview-truths-and-fal/

TV’s Frink said:

oojason said:

TV’s Frink said:

I’ll repeat this one last time. And it’s not directed at Fo because that’s clearly a dead end.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/23/politics/adam-schiff-trump-russia-grand-jury/

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee is claiming that he has been presented with new information on collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and Russia that would merit a grand jury investigation.

Rep. Adam Schiff told CNN Thursday that he had seen additional evidence, but would not specify what it was.

“We continue to get new information that, I think, paints a more complete picture of at least what we know at the outset of our investigation,” Schiff said.

Asked to explain his comments earlier in the week when he said there was more than just “circumstantial evidence of collusion,” Schiff said, "I do think that it’s appropriate to say that it’s the kind of evidence that you would submit to a grand jury at the beginning of an investigation.

“It’s not the kind of evidence that you take to a trial jury when you’re trying to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. But we’re at the beginning of an investigation, and given the gravity of the subject matter, I think that the evidence certainly warrants us doing a thorough investigation.”

If anyone can point out the bias and inaccuracy in this, feel free.

No-one will or can - as there is no bias or inaccuracy in there.

We are seemingly in an age where people and organisations are trying to present their opinion as fact possibly more than ever before - and when those same people are questioned on it they often cannot come up with facts/evidence to make their point - they generally then claim it as opinion (often under ‘free speech’), or deflect or obfuscate.

What’s even stranger is, like in this case, when factual reporting (literally nothing more than what someone said) is somehow painted as either opinion or a falsehood. It kind of boggles the mind.

When anyone can just regurgitate everything from the echo chamber instead of actually using their own mind, words, and feelings to present “facts”, I tend to agree with you.

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

oojason said:

TV’s Frink said:

I’ll repeat this one last time. And it’s not directed at Fo because that’s clearly a dead end.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/23/politics/adam-schiff-trump-russia-grand-jury/

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee is claiming that he has been presented with new information on collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and Russia that would merit a grand jury investigation.

Rep. Adam Schiff told CNN Thursday that he had seen additional evidence, but would not specify what it was.

“We continue to get new information that, I think, paints a more complete picture of at least what we know at the outset of our investigation,” Schiff said.

Asked to explain his comments earlier in the week when he said there was more than just “circumstantial evidence of collusion,” Schiff said, "I do think that it’s appropriate to say that it’s the kind of evidence that you would submit to a grand jury at the beginning of an investigation.

“It’s not the kind of evidence that you take to a trial jury when you’re trying to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. But we’re at the beginning of an investigation, and given the gravity of the subject matter, I think that the evidence certainly warrants us doing a thorough investigation.”

If anyone can point out the bias and inaccuracy in this, feel free.

No-one will or can - as there is no bias or inaccuracy in there.

We are seemingly in an age where people and organisations are trying to present their opinion as fact possibly more than ever before - and when those same people are questioned on it they often cannot come up with facts/evidence to make their point - they generally then claim it as opinion (often under ‘free speech’), or deflect or obfuscate.

What’s even stranger is, like in this case, when factual reporting (literally nothing more than what someone said) is somehow painted as either opinion or a falsehood. It kind of boggles the mind.

When anyone can just regurgitate everything from the echo chamber instead of actually using their own mind, words, and feelings to present “facts”, I tend to agree with you.

CNN simply reported what Schiff told them, and only presented it as what they were told by Schiff. That’s called journalism. There are other articles that interpret what Schiff told them. That’s called opinion and/or analysis. Both are perfectly valid but they are two completely different things.

Should the Republicans remove maternity services requirements from their health care bill? Let’s ask the women.

I know, let’s ask the girls at the first annual Girls Council in Saudia Arabia.

Hmmm, it’s gonna be harder than I thought.

The AHCA is a mass murder law. Even though nearly every American opposes it, it WILL be passed into law in spite of all our hopes.

Neil Gorsuch is going to be on the Supreme Court, even though he is the most right-wing justice ever installed in American history. He will be there until the 2050s at the earliest, and the human rights of hundreds of millions of Americans will suffer for decades afterwards as more right-wing cronies are appointed to the court.

Vladimir Putin murdered another Russian journalist yesterday. He is the true leader of the United States now, and he rules indirectly through Donald Trump. How much longer until the same horrors of Putin’s Russia end up happening to Journalists here stateside? Putin will run the world until he over a hundred years old.

By then the United States will not only be worse than the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and Red China combined, it will also be the poorest nation ever seen in human history.

oojason said:

TV’s Frink said:

oojason said:

TV’s Frink said:

I’ll repeat this one last time. And it’s not directed at Fo because that’s clearly a dead end.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/23/politics/adam-schiff-trump-russia-grand-jury/

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee is claiming that he has been presented with new information on collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and Russia that would merit a grand jury investigation.

Rep. Adam Schiff told CNN Thursday that he had seen additional evidence, but would not specify what it was.

“We continue to get new information that, I think, paints a more complete picture of at least what we know at the outset of our investigation,” Schiff said.

Asked to explain his comments earlier in the week when he said there was more than just “circumstantial evidence of collusion,” Schiff said, "I do think that it’s appropriate to say that it’s the kind of evidence that you would submit to a grand jury at the beginning of an investigation.

“It’s not the kind of evidence that you take to a trial jury when you’re trying to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. But we’re at the beginning of an investigation, and given the gravity of the subject matter, I think that the evidence certainly warrants us doing a thorough investigation.”

If anyone can point out the bias and inaccuracy in this, feel free.

No-one will or can - as there is no bias or inaccuracy in there.

We are seemingly in an age where people and organisations are trying to present their opinion as fact possibly more than ever before - and when those same people are questioned on it they often cannot come up with facts/evidence to make their point - they generally then claim it as opinion (often under ‘free speech’), or deflect or obfuscate.

What’s even stranger is, like in this case, when factual reporting (literally nothing more than what someone said) is somehow painted as either opinion or a falsehood. It kind of boggles the mind.

Reminds me of how Spicey operates.

Fully agree.

It leads to questioning the mentality/intelligence of the people who say that about factual reporting - or questioning whether they are trying to erode trust in the media - and to what end and purpose (usually to attack a media outlet that may not share values or editorial stance, or perhaps feel that they doing too much of an effective job against them on other matters? etc)

It also gives a ‘free ride’ and diverts attention/focus away from other media that peddle lies, misinformation, hate and intolerance - that do share their ‘values’ etc or want/need their support…

Perhaps this is a subject you and I should not engage in discussion about. I have no qualms with you but since you are not a licensed physician (as far as I know) I take offense to your accusation of my mental status. It is a personal attack and they are against the rules.

TV’s Frink said:

Jetrell Fo said:

TV’s Frink said:

oojason said:

TV’s Frink said:

I’ll repeat this one last time. And it’s not directed at Fo because that’s clearly a dead end.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/23/politics/adam-schiff-trump-russia-grand-jury/

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee is claiming that he has been presented with new information on collusion between associates of President Donald Trump and Russia that would merit a grand jury investigation.

Rep. Adam Schiff told CNN Thursday that he had seen additional evidence, but would not specify what it was.

“We continue to get new information that, I think, paints a more complete picture of at least what we know at the outset of our investigation,” Schiff said.

Asked to explain his comments earlier in the week when he said there was more than just “circumstantial evidence of collusion,” Schiff said, "I do think that it’s appropriate to say that it’s the kind of evidence that you would submit to a grand jury at the beginning of an investigation.

“It’s not the kind of evidence that you take to a trial jury when you’re trying to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. But we’re at the beginning of an investigation, and given the gravity of the subject matter, I think that the evidence certainly warrants us doing a thorough investigation.”

If anyone can point out the bias and inaccuracy in this, feel free.

No-one will or can - as there is no bias or inaccuracy in there.

We are seemingly in an age where people and organisations are trying to present their opinion as fact possibly more than ever before - and when those same people are questioned on it they often cannot come up with facts/evidence to make their point - they generally then claim it as opinion (often under ‘free speech’), or deflect or obfuscate.

What’s even stranger is, like in this case, when factual reporting (literally nothing more than what someone said) is somehow painted as either opinion or a falsehood. It kind of boggles the mind.

When anyone can just regurgitate everything from the echo chamber instead of actually using their own mind, words, and feelings to present “facts”, I tend to agree with you.

CNN simply reported what Schiff told them, and only presented it as what they were told by Schiff. That’s called journalism. There are other articles that interpret what Schiff told them. That’s called opinion and/or analysis. Both are perfectly valid but they are two completely different things.

Your condescension aside, again you fail to understand, I spoke of CNN as a whole. I did not site your precious article as proof of anything other than old news being whitewashed to make it look like new news, nothing more.

Ok. You’re right, I still do not understand your posts at all but I said I would drop it, and though I failed to do so, I will try again.

There was no condescension intended.

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Lol!

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-healthcare-pass-ahca-obamacare-2017-3

President Donald Trump is giving House Republicans an ultimatum: Pass the American Health Care Act on Friday, or Obamacare stays.

Mick Mulvaney, the Office of Budget and Management director, made clear to Republicans on Thursday night that Trump wants a vote Friday and that he is done negotiating on the bill to overhaul healthcare. If it is not passed, the president will move on from the bill, reports said.

This is kind of brilliant, in a way. Republican’s want to repeal and replace, so if it doesn’t happen he’s shifted the blame entirely. Meanwhile, they will continue to benefit from all the Obamacare things they would have otherwise lost. So this is pretty much the only way to ensure this bill doesn’t irreparably damage Trump in the eyes of his voters (which is why Dems will need to start leaning in even harder on calling it “Trumpcare” and making it clear this is his failure).

It will be interesting to see how the vote plays out. Either way some Republicans aren’t going to make it out alive. The Dems lost a lot of seats because of the ACA in 2010, and it wasn’t nearly as unpopular as this.

Of course, we should know by now that nothing he says matters regarding decisions he may or may not make.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-leaders-prepare-to-vote-friday-on-health-care-reform/2017/03/24/736f1cd6-1081-11e7-9d5a-a83e627dc120_story.html?utm_term=.883016e57cc6

Asked by a reporter Friday morning what he would do if the bill fails, Trump — seated at his Oval Office desk — shrugged and said: “We’ll see what happens.”

Ok then.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/24/politics/house-health-care-vote/

GOP source: Ryan telling Trump they don’t have votes on health care

House Speaker Paul Ryan is at the White House to tell President Donald Trump that Republicans don’t have the votes to pass the GOP health care bill.

Ryan is showing Trump the numbers, and asking what the President wants the speaker to do.

Efforts on Capitol Hill to sway members are ongoing, but things aren’t heading in the right direction.

“Not good. Not good at all,” the source said.

A risk to Republicans: if members are fully aware that the bill is going down, there’s a real risk that that undecideds, undeclared and even some yes votes would flee.

“The risk is it wouldn’t just be a loss, but a big loss,” a source said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/24/us/politics/health-care-affordable-care-act.html

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, facing a revolt among conservative and moderate Republicans, rushed to the White House Friday afternoon to inform President Trump he did not have the votes to pass legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act and to decide whether to pull the bill from consideration.

The president and the speaker faced the humiliating prospect of a major defeat on legislation promised for seven years, since the landmark health legislation was signed into law. President Trump had demanded a vote regardless, which has been scheduled for Friday afternoon. But House leaders were leaning against such a public loss.

SilverWook said:

Oh man! DisneyWorld had better keep the animatronic Trumpy and Obama far apart. It could turn into Westworld overnight! 😉

In addition, if there are female Presidents in the future(and I am sure it will happen eventually) they better keep them away from the animatronic Trump. The animatronic Trump, might try to “grab them”.

How can the Republican Party be this evil? They have rigged three presidential elections, gerrymandered their way to victory in congress, are going to install seven right-wing demagogues in the Supreme Court, and do everything in their power to prevent all nonwhite citizens from voting ever again in the foreseeable future.

The body count hasn’t even started and they have proven themselves to be the worst political party in human history.

generalfrevious said:

The body count hasn’t even started and they have proven themselves to be the worst political party in human history.

LET THE BODIES HIT THE FLOOR LET THE BODIES HIT THE FLOOR

A reminder to generalfrevious and Alderaan:

DuracellEnergizer said:

• No crazy conspiracy theories (aliens killed JFK, Elvis did 911, Moon Landing was faked, 911 was an inside job)
• No ridiculous doom saying (like all non-Trump supporters will be rounded up and executed)

The next time I see either of you violate those rules, I will report you.

DuracellEnergizer said:

• No Frink vs Jetrell

Just a reminder.

Warbler said:

A reminder to generalfrevious and Alderaan:

DuracellEnergizer said:

• No crazy conspiracy theories (aliens killed JFK, Elvis did 911, Moon Landing was faked, 911 was an inside job)
• No ridiculous doom saying (like all non-Trump supporters will be rounded up and executed)

The next time I see either of you violate those rules, I will report you.

If this health care bill passes 24 million people will be without health insurance within ten years. That is not a fringe conspiracy theory or pointless doomsaying; it comes from the congressional budget office.

generalfrevious said:

The AHCA is a mass murder law. Even though nearly every American opposes it, it WILL be passed into law in spite of all our hopes.

Neil Gorsuch is going to be on the Supreme Court, even though he is the most right-wing justice ever installed in American history. He will be there until the 2050s at the earliest, and the human rights of hundreds of millions of Americans will suffer for decades afterwards as more right-wing cronies are appointed to the court.

Vladimir Putin murdered another Russian journalist yesterday. He is the true leader of the United States now, and he rules indirectly through Donald Trump. How much longer until the same horrors of Putin’s Russia end up happening to Journalists here stateside? Putin will run the world until he over a hundred years old.

By then the United States will not only be worse than the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and Red China combined, it will also be the poorest nation ever seen in human history.

AHCA is mass murder? Putim is the true leader of the United States? This sounds like doomsaying and crazy conspiracy theories.

Warbler said:

generalfrevious said:

The AHCA is a mass murder law. Even though nearly every American opposes it, it WILL be passed into law in spite of all our hopes.

Neil Gorsuch is going to be on the Supreme Court, even though he is the most right-wing justice ever installed in American history. He will be there until the 2050s at the earliest, and the human rights of hundreds of millions of Americans will suffer for decades afterwards as more right-wing cronies are appointed to the court.

Vladimir Putin murdered another Russian journalist yesterday. He is the true leader of the United States now, and he rules indirectly through Donald Trump. How much longer until the same horrors of Putin’s Russia end up happening to Journalists here stateside? Putin will run the world until he over a hundred years old.

By then the United States will not only be worse than the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and Red China combined, it will also be the poorest nation ever seen in human history.

AHCA is mass murder? Putim is the true leader of the United States? This sounds like doomsaying and crazy conspiracy theories.

People without insurance will not get medical attention when needed and die as a result, unless they want to be in hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. The AHCA deliberately takes away health insurance from the people who need it the most. This is murder, plain and simple.

Russia definitely interfered in the last election so they could have a pro-Russia lackey in the White House who would be soft on NATO. This is, again, not a conspiracy, but widely reported news from reliable mainstream outlets, and backed by the FBI. Putin has murdered journalists ever since he came into power almost twenty years ago. Again, the deaths of Russian journalists is not a fringe conspiracy distributed by “SJWs” on college campuses. These are facts, period.

Well you keep it up and we will see what the mods think.

Warbler said:

A reminder to generalfrevious and Alderaan:

DuracellEnergizer said:

• No crazy conspiracy theories (aliens killed JFK, Elvis did 911, Moon Landing was faked, 911 was an inside job)
• No ridiculous doom saying (like all non-Trump supporters will be rounded up and executed)

The next time I see either of you violate those rules, I will report you.

I disagree completely with Alderaan but I don’t remember him doing anything like that.

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

A reminder to generalfrevious and Alderaan:

DuracellEnergizer said:

• No crazy conspiracy theories (aliens killed JFK, Elvis did 911, Moon Landing was faked, 911 was an inside job)
• No ridiculous doom saying (like all non-Trump supporters will be rounded up and executed)

The next time I see either of you violate those rules, I will report you.

I disagree completely with Alderaan but I don’t remember him doing anything like that.

You don’t think he violated the no crazy conspiracy theories rule? Well, maybe I was wrong.