US politics general thread

[Temujin]

O so they were suppose to do their job in line with certain scopes. Just like any other investigation. So instead of investigating if he had a gambling problem or a history of road rage, they were specifically to investigate the sexual assault claims.

Who would have thought huh?

More Libtard spinning

Yarp... what he actually said

"As is standard, the investigation was very specific in scope limited in scope and that that is the usual process and my folks have assured me that the usual process was followed"

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

You know - and apropos of absolutely nothing - I've noticed a marked uptick in the hysterical defence of the trump administration just recently.

It's very marked here in this thread, for example.

This is a strong indication that even trump's supporters are starting to realise subconciously that they have been had by a second-rate con man.

 

[Temujin]

You know - and apropos of absolutely nothing - I've noticed a marked uptick in the hysterical defence of the trump administration just recently.

It's very marked here in this thread, for example.

This is a strong indication that even trump's supporters are starting to realise subconciously that they have been had by a second-rate con man.

 

[Seriously]

You know - and apropos of absolutely nothing - I've noticed a marked uptick in the hysterical defence of the trump administration just recently.

It's very marked here in this thread, for example.

This is a strong indication that even trump's supporters are starting to realise subconciously that they have been had by a second-rate con man.

LOL. What a subconcious con post.

 

[rietrot]

You know - and apropos of absolutely nothing - I've noticed a marked uptick in the hysterical defence of the trump administration just recently.

It's very marked here in this thread, for example.

This is a strong indication that even trump's supporters are starting to realise subconciously that they have been had by a second-rate con man.

Do you apply this logic both ways or is it only the Trump supporters that can get conned?

 

[Pitbull]

Do you apply this logic both ways or is it only the Trump supporters that can get conned?

Lol, it's funny.

The Conservatives have left the Libtards to have their little circle jerk for a while. Now that we're sick of it and pointing out the flaws, lies and deceit there is an "uptick in the hysterical defence of the Trump administration"

They just can't handle being challenged on their lies, dishonesty and deceit

 

[Emjay]

You know - and apropos of absolutely nothing - I've noticed a marked uptick in the hysterical defence of the trump administration just recently.

It's very marked here in this thread, for example.

This is a strong indication that even trump's supporters are starting to realise subconciously that they have been had by a second-rate con man.

Apropos of nothing? That is funny. The Democrat's handling of the Kavanaugh situation, and how the Democratic supporters have polarised this issue is not "apropos of nothing". The mob mentality from the Left and heavily perceived media bias is also helping driving more extreme behaviour from the Right. The likes of Clinton and Hirono are almost tacitly endorsing mob behaviour, and believe there is "no civility".

Your type of reasoning and beliefs are also abundant in this thread. You think that the people here who don't agree with mainstream views have been hoodwinked, and don't think that there are rational and logical people making decisions. Your views and opinions are not the only right ones.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

You know - and apropos of absolutely nothing - I've noticed a marked uptick in the hysterical defence of the trump administration just recently.

You'd be wrong on two fronts then:
1 - read properly, people are defending truth and justice much more so than Trump himself
2 - the number of posts in that style is about the same, the deluded lefty posts have just dropped a bit after being handed a large dose of humble pie in watching the senate not play their virtue signalling contest, so the other posts seem to be more now that the "opposition" are licking wounds, it'll go back to normal soon enough

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

Apropos of nothing? That is funny. The Democrat's handling of the Kavanaugh situation, and how the Democratic supporters have polarised this issue is not "apropos of nothing". The mob mentality from the Left and heavily perceived media bias is also helping driving more extreme behaviour from the Right. The likes of Clinton and Hirono are almost tacitly endorsing mob behaviour, and believe there is "no civility".

Your type of reasoning and beliefs are also abundant in this thread. You think that the people here who don't agree with mainstream views have been hoodwinked, and don't think that there are rational and logical people making decisions. Your views and opinions are not the only right ones.

"apropos of nothing" refers to my remarking on the phenomenon.

Jeez.

 

[Emjay]

"apropos of nothing" refers to my remarking on the phenomenon.

Jeez.

Your post is ambiguous.

I didn't respond to many posts as it's quite frankly boring, and not worth it in most cases. It was a very bad echo chamber in here for quite some time. I am sure many people don't post in this thread as it's just too much.

 

[Mephisto_Helix]

Your post is ambiguous.

I didn't respond to many posts as it's quite frankly boring, and not worth it in most cases. It was a very bad echo chamber in here for quite some time. I am sure many people don't post in this thread as it's just too much.

You'd be right, I think lots don't bother because of the hysteria in here. I follow it from time to time when I'm bored and it always amazes me when the same one side goes into victim mode (can't debate, insults, circle jerk, wah wah wah) .... both sides have hysterical idiots, both sides throw around insults, grow some damn balls and stop playing the victim when it doesn't go your way. You're not better, no matter how many participation trophies mommy dished out

 

[cerebus]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/steved...gate-kavanaugh-ethics-questions/#3eac19661877

Chief Justice Roberts Requests Tenth Circuit To Investigate Kavanaugh Ethics Questions


The complaints were not made without legal basis. More than 2,400 law professors have determined that Kavanaugh has “displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court.”


Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens also stated that Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated bias and is “not fit for the Supreme Court.” Former Justice Stevens, in remarks to retirees in Boca Raton, Fla, declared that Kavanaugh’s statements on September 27 revealed prejudices that would make it impossible for him to do the court’s work. “They suggest that he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities.”

 

[buka001]

Best thing in this thread over the past few weeks, has been watching just how triggered noted "Centrist" Emjay is over anything OD posts.

 

[Emjay]

Best thing in this thread over the past few weeks, has been watching just how triggered noted "Centrist" Emjay is over anything OD posts.

Do you have anything of value to add? You seem to be oddly fixated on my posts and responses.

 

[cerebus]

Do you have anything of value to add? You seem to be oddly fixated on my posts and responses.

You must be talking about @Seriously

 

[Emjay]

You must be talking about @Seriously

I could name some others in this thread that do the exact same thing, but I think this thread has enough cheap swipes as it is.

And, no. buka's only responses in here have been to tell me I am suffering from cognitive dissonance, then trying to educate me on the definition thereof, then trying to educate me on the definition of a straw man argument and ad hominem attacks. Then he accused me of using an ad hominem attack against him, which had merit to a degree, but does not even talk to anything to do with the thread or specifics we are discussing...

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/steved...gate-kavanaugh-ethics-questions/#3eac19661877

Chief Justice Roberts Requests Tenth Circuit To Investigate Kavanaugh Ethics Questions


The complaints were not made without legal basis. More than 2,400 law professors have determined that Kavanaugh has “displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court.”


Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens also stated that Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated bias and is “not fit for the Supreme Court.” Former Justice Stevens, in remarks to retirees in Boca Raton, Fla, declared that Kavanaugh’s statements on September 27 revealed prejudices that would make it impossible for him to do the court’s work. “They suggest that he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities.”

This is interesting.

I wonder if the general public would have seen his unfit temperament if he hadn't been such an angry man on 27th September?

 

[greg0205]

I could name some others in this thread that do the exact same thing, but I think this thread has enough cheap swipes as it is.

And, no. buka's only responses in here have been to tell me I am suffering from cognitive dissonance, then trying to educate me on the definition thereof, then trying to educate me on the definition of a straw man argument and ad hominem attacks. Then he accused me of using an ad hominem attack against him, which had merit to a degree, but does not even talk to anything to do with the thread or specifics we are discussing...

Did someone call?

Just for clarity Emjay, are "cheap swipes" the same as, let's say, "snarky observations"? Seems to me they're pretty close... Lucky no-one can point at the two of us making snarky observations as we take a swipe at cheap swipes, dontcha think?

 

[cerebus]

This is interesting.

I wonder if the general public would have seen his unfit temperament if he hadn't been such an angry man on 27th September?

Frankly his unfit temperament is the least of the problems I have with him. His obvious lying and evasiveness when questioned, and the list of credible sexual assault allegations are much worse than losing his temper and letting the partisan mask slip. But I'll take what I can get.

 

[Cray]

This is interesting.
I wonder if the general public would have seen his unfit temperament if he hadn't been such an angry man on 27th September?

I think the sexual assault remains unproven and shouldn't have affected his chances, his testimony and his partisan digs about a Clinton witch hunt are more than a little concerning given the kind of impartiality he is supposed to exhibit as a Supreme Court Justice.