|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Dec 10, 2020 19:27:50 GMT -5
Yeah, I remember that. I did so because sexual and domestic violence is something I genuinely care about and don't want to ever make light of, and also because ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ why would I attack you for something you didn't do/say when I can attack you for something you actually said? I'm apparently not going to change your mind with facts and arguments, but I am EVEN LESS likely to change your mind with lies and baseless attacks.
By the way, having an election where BOTH candidates were accused of rape really, really sucks and I wish the Democrats (and the Republicans but I have no expectations of them ever doing the right thing) had nominated someone else with a clean record.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 10, 2020 19:49:31 GMT -5
That's some quality both sides-ism there. I have a family friend who's a Nobel laureate. He was part of the Swedish UN contingent in Kosovo and thus got it alongside the rest of the UN for that. Just like the statement that both Trump and Biden have been accused of rape is true, my statement that a family friend is a Nobel laureate is true but missing a metric shit-tonne of context.
|
|
|
Post by lonestarr777 on Dec 10, 2020 19:53:02 GMT -5
I'm mentally unstable and tired of dealing with unrepentant Trumptards 24/7 working in a job where I'm at constant risk of exposure cause of 'My Freedumbs' cause my governor is a fucking pussy. I'm an asshole who's standing on the brink and dealing with some serious shit that I won't bring up here. But even I apologized to Whembly and a few times we had decent conversations as long as we never brought up politics. I don't like a lot of what he does say but we can find common ground.
Carlos I hope is dead.
So yes, I'm a fucking asshole.
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Dec 10, 2020 19:58:05 GMT -5
That's some quality both sides-ism there. Well that's not something I'm accused of doing often. Especially when it comes to republicans and democrats. Congrats on your family friend being a nominee, even if it's not a personal nomination.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 10, 2020 20:00:45 GMT -5
That's some quality both sides-ism there. Well that's not something I'm accused of doing often. Especially when it comes to republicans and democrats.
I mean, that's what it effectively is though. In an ideal world I'd also like someone other than Biden, but just mentioning that both him and Trump have been accused of rape without mentioning the context surrounding those accusations is effectively either whitewashing Trump or trying to equate Biden to Trump (or a mistake).
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Dec 10, 2020 20:17:08 GMT -5
It's definitely not whitewashing Trump or trying to equate Biden with Trump. It's just really annoying that even the least bad option is still someone accused of rape. But I'm not familiar with the context surrounding those accusations, I admit.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 10, 2020 20:48:31 GMT -5
There's more on Wikipedia (link below), but Tara Reade, who made the allegations against Biden, is currently under investigation for perjury for lying about her educational credentials. Meanwhile, you've got Trump's infamous "grab them by the pussy" tape which, while not rape in the US definition, is so close to it that it'd probably count in several European countries. There's also the part about Ivana Trump and whether what Trump did to her was rape or not (link to Time article below). Plus the whole "walking into dressing rooms with underage girls and then bragging about it" schtick. There's a lot more circumstantial evidence suggesting that Trump would be capable of something like that than there is Biden. time.com/3974560/donald-trump-rape-ivana-michael-cohen/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden_sexual_assault_allegation
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 10, 2020 22:51:43 GMT -5
Just as a followup I absolutely believe that efforts should be made to ascertain that there was no improper behaviour on Biden's part. I also believe that the allegations against Biden are far less reliable than those against Trump, given Trump's own words in the "grab them by the pussy" tape. Biden called for a full investigation into the allegations while denying them; Trump's lawyer tried arguing that it's not rape if you do it to your spouse. The differences are staggering.
|
|
Great Cthulhu Himself
OT Cowboy
TEMPORARY TITLE
In the house of Ry'leh, Great Cthulu lies sleeping...
Posts: 448
|
Post by Great Cthulhu Himself on Dec 11, 2020 2:37:33 GMT -5
The mere fact that House Democrats chose NOT to use the Mueller report during Impeachment should tell you a lot about the veracity of the Mueller report. That word, I do not think it means what you think it means? You're absolutely correct about the report in at least one respect. It asked and answered three questions - 1) Did Russia attempt to screw with our elections (yes, in a massive way) , 2) Did Trump/his campaign knowingly conspire with the Russians in this (No), and 3) did Trump obstruct justice by impeding investigations into 1 and 2 (no, he sort of half-heartedly tried at best). No one was actually happy with the report's conclusions - the Democrats didn't get the smoking gun they wanted, and the Republicans got a lot of egg on their faces after arguing Russia did nothing at all. The impeachment charges had nothing to do with the election, though, which I find a lot of people forgetting. It was regarding the Ukraine situation, and Trump's alleged abuse of power by threatening to put a freeze on the military aid we promised. So whether or not the Democrats had ulterior motives in impeachment, the Mueller report would have been useless at best (irrelevant to the charges) and actively harmful at worst (by exposing their sinister intent). Ultimately, shouldn't you be supporting the report's veracity, as it exonerated Trump from literal treason charges?
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Dec 11, 2020 2:41:51 GMT -5
The mere fact that House Democrats chose NOT to use the Mueller report during Impeachment should tell you a lot about the veracity of the Mueller report. That word, I do not think it means what you think it means? You're absolutely correct about the report in at least one respect. It asked and answered three questions - 1) Did Russia attempt to screw with our elections (yes, in a massive way) , 2) Did Trump/his campaign knowingly conspire with the Russians in this (No), and 3) did Trump obstruct justice by impeding investigations into 1 and 2 (no, he sort of half-heartedly tried at best). No one was actually happy with the report's conclusions - the Democrats didn't get the smoking gun they wanted, and the Republicans got a lot of egg on their faces after arguing Russia did nothing at all. The impeachment charges had nothing to do with the election, though, which I find a lot of people forgetting. It was regarding the Ukraine situation, and Trump's alleged abuse of power by threatening to put a freeze on the military aid we promised. So whether or not the Democrats had ulterior motives in impeachment, the Mueller report would have been useless at best (irrelevant to the charges) and actively harmful at worst (by exposing their sinister intent). Ultimately, shouldn't you be supporting the report's veracity, as it exonerated Trump from literal treason charges? Having been down this rabbit hole with him, my advice is don't. He doesn't subscribe to the same reality as you or I, he subscribes to whatever fox or OANN or Breitbart tell him. He isn't interested in facts. It's an exercise in futility, and it'll last however long your patience does and then some because he has no shame. There's a reason some of us call him despic.
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Dec 11, 2020 7:48:58 GMT -5
There's more on Wikipedia (link below), but Tara Reade, who made the allegations against Biden, is currently under investigation for perjury for lying about her educational credentials. That doesn't have any relevance to the rape allegation, unless she said the rape occurred during her graduation ceremony or something. Unrelated character assassination of the victim is a staple of rape accusations. Meanwhile, you've got Trump's infamous "grab them by the pussy" tape which, while not rape in the US definition, is so close to it that it'd probably count in several European countries. There's also the part about Ivana Trump and whether what Trump did to her was rape or not (link to Time article below). Plus the whole "walking into dressing rooms with underage girls and then bragging about it" schtick. There's a lot more circumstantial evidence suggesting that Trump would be capable of something like that than there is Biden. You won't see me defend Trump. Just not gonna happen. He definitely seems like the kind of guy who would commit sexual assault and/or rape. But that doesn't mean that nominating Biden was the right choice.
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Dec 11, 2020 7:54:17 GMT -5
He isn't interested in facts. It's an exercise in futility, and it'll last however long your patience does and then some because he has no shame. This. I remember trying to get the discussions we had on Iran fact-based. He denied facts. I asked him if he wanted sources. He said yes. I gave him sources. He said "Okay I still won't change my mind" and just ignored the whole thing. But, you can count on it, every time, EVERY TIME he has the occasion to misrepresent what I say as me defending the IRI regime, he will. Every time he will defend the sanctions as morally justified "because the regime is bad", no matter how many time I tell him again how the sanctions don't make the regime less bad, quite the opposite, AND they hurt everyone else in the process. Bad faith despic.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 11, 2020 8:10:09 GMT -5
There's more on Wikipedia (link below), but Tara Reade, who made the allegations against Biden, is currently under investigation for perjury for lying about her educational credentials. That doesn't have any relevance to the rape allegation, unless she said the rape occurred during her graduation ceremony or something. Unrelated character assassination of the victim is a staple of rape accusations. Fair point, at the same time it's not Biden trying to smear her or anything, if anyone is in this context I guess it's me. I guess the point I should've argued is that in the case of Biden there's one accuser with a story that's changed over time (which doesn't on its own means it's not legit) , whereas in the case of Trump he's a character witness against himself. I would, however, argue that pointing out that someone is under suspicion of committing perjury arguably isn't character assassination because it is directly related to her credibility. If I'd tried to paint her as a crackhead that'd be unrelated and thus character assassination, but when the question is "is she credible? ", or more bluntly "is she lying?", a previous history of lying under oath is directly relevant to the line of inquiry. Do I make sense, or am I just trying to justify by mistake doing the same thing as so many before me? I have no issue believing Biden was being his usual self and being bad at respecting people's personal space, something multiple people have called him out on and which he's acknowledged and apologised for. The actual rape part is a lot less credible for a host of reasons.
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Dec 11, 2020 10:50:52 GMT -5
I know what a process crime is, I was pointing out that the only people that make a point of calling them that for no particular reason are Republican partisans. Using that particular choice of words while insisting that you do not parrot conservative talking points is a bold strategy. If you would notice, I'm not denying they didn't break any laws (the Flynn one is debatable tho). Engaging in process crimes is a big deal and I'm not trying to minimize that. I hope my point is getting through, but there *is* a difference between whether or not Mueller charges/convicts someone on actual conspiracy to collaborate with the Russian government to steal an election (as described by most Democrats/Media) to convicting folks for either obstructing that investigation and/or get convicted on "low hanging fruits" that had nothing to do with the election. I knew I liked you!
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Dec 11, 2020 10:55:10 GMT -5
Yeah, I remember that. I did so because sexual and domestic violence is something I genuinely care about and don't want to ever make light of, and also because ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ why would I attack you for something you didn't do/say when I can attack you for something you actually said? I'm apparently not going to change your mind with facts and arguments, but I am EVEN LESS likely to change your mind with lies and baseless attacks. Yeah, that was my bad and I still feel bad about it. You, me both. I didn't support Trump in 2016 (I voted for 3rd party Ron Johnson). But, finding a politician with a "clean record" is going to be a tall order. I think the best we can do is find someone better than Biden/Trump. Hell, I'd prefer Kamala Harris over Biden, even though I despise her politics she doesn't have near as much baggage as Biden has.
|
|