President Biden thread

2 minutes ago, Cclm said:

Well the same could be said about prison sentences between races and weed possession couldn't it? 

What’s your point?

6 minutes ago, heron said:

Nope … don’t buy it. If you were as innocent and intellectually honest as you want us to think you are, you would not be parroting so many of the trollish deflections so popular with right-wingnuts: semantic hair-splitting, “both-sides-ism”, Marxist nazis (!) to name a few I’ve seen just in the last page or so.

Sorry … I obviously don’t know you, but that particular cover story doesn’t pass the smell test.

Well I really don't care what you think and I'm not trying to make you think anything. . I don't agree with allot of what you say but don't have a need to call you democrat stereotypes either. 

22 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

I've threatened no one.  You just don't like my language.  

Never said you did???....

18 minutes ago, Cclm said:

I'm not scarred of those words. I most certainly do not like being called them. Some people may be intimidated by being called those names so they stop talking. In my opinion, that's exactly what you did/do. Whatever, free speech. However those names have lost their seriousness.  They are thrown out so much it really isn't worse than being called an a-hole these days. Which is unfortunate because there have been horrible act committed by people who are truly those things. T

I never called you a Marxist yet pointed out parallels in your content. I also never said you were lying. I don't understand what you mean by "the real reason. 

You then reference to "right wind radio etc. like it's a bad thing. Maybe bad because you say but almost half the country voted for Trump. Are they all right wing,  nazi conspiracy white supremacists idiots? Seriously? Now that's conspiracy material if I ever heard. 

So what is the problem? See, you are comfortable with all manner of name calling and labeling...as long as you don't feel excluded. 

I told you that I label people with like thinking for ease of discussion.  You tell me that I'm doing it for other reasons.  Maybe you don't remember posting those words.  

I'm guessing that you listen to right wing radio from the tenor of your response. I listened to those conservative commentaries everyday for years.  Would you like to talk about how factual versus how emotional they are in their content?

1 hour ago, Cclm said:

Okay. Didn't want to go here but the Republicans, Trumpers (still not sure what that is) did not burn and loot and entire country for over a year in the name of "justice" for a poor man that was killed. Nor walk up and shoot someone point blank in the head for being a Trump supporter. 

The capital wasn't an insurrection even the beloved very non bias FBI said. Nobody has been charged with insurrection. Yet nobody is really being charge with rioting or violence or the get out of jail  immediately with no cash bail. However the evil horned insurrectionists amoung others have been in jail since January, no bail, no criminal record and held on trespassing... 

You think Conservatives or whatever have not been threatened or received death threats? What about the republican convention? A person in a gorilla mask threw an egg at Larry Elder, a black man but apparently a white supremacists. 

See a-holes both sides. Anyone, ANYONE no matter what political affiliation who engages in that type of behavior for any reason needs to be charged and convicted fairly in a court of law. Can you somehow agree with that or is some violence okay for certain reasons? 

Nope can't agree. 

BLM didn't burn and loot the entire country for a year...looters and excelerationists burned and looted wherever there were peaceful protests. 

January 6 was an attack on the capitol intended to halt the certification of the election for the purpose of seizing lost power for a man.  There was violence and destruction of public property costing millions of dollars.  All of that occurred because of the lies from one man. 

Yeah...we're familiar with that "good people on both sides" defense.  We've heard it before. We heard it from the guy who is famous for dividing people up into groups and finding names to assign to the groups as labels...that's a practice that's upsetting to you isn't it?

By the way...how long do you think that we can hold people who engage in terrorist behaviors...asking for some people at gitmo...

52 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Nope can't agree. 

BLM didn't burn and loot the entire country for a year...looters and excelerationists burned and looted wherever there were peaceful protests. 

January 6 was an attack on the capitol intended to halt the certification of the election for the purpose of seizing lost power for a man.  There was violence and destruction of public property costing millions of dollars.  All of that occurred because of the lies from one man. 

Yeah...we're familiar with that "good people on both sides" defense.  We've heard it before. We heard it from the guy who is famous for dividing people up into groups and finding names to assign to the groups as labels...that's a practice that's upsetting to you isn't it?

By the way...how long do you think that we can hold people who engage in terrorist behaviors...asking for some people at gitmo...

It could also be said that Republicans, Trump supporters or whatever at the capital were mostly peaceful too. A group of individuals chose the wrong path. It was an attack on the capital. So would it have been better to do it to private property and businesses?Do Republicans not have a right to peacefull protest?  

Was Hillary lying when she said the election was stolen from her? Or AL Gore? They all say that. The capital building has been breached before as well. Why wasn't it an "insurrection" then? With Kavanagh (might be spelt wrong)Because you agreed with them? 

The double standard is remarkable. Tell me what would gave happened if an unarmed black woman was shot at a BLM "protest?. Or an egg thrown at Maxine Waters by a white women wearing a gorilla mask? 

Yes I know you hate Trump. There is litterally nothing he could do, no matter how good that some people would even consider. 

I mean I don't like my Prime Minister at all bit I don't want him to fail just because I don't like him. I'll also give him acknowledgment when deserved. 

1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

So what is the problem? See, you are comfortable with all manner of name calling and labeling...as long as you don't feel excluded. 

I told you that I label people with like thinking for ease of discussion.  You tell me that I'm doing it for other reasons.  Maybe you don't remember posting those words.  

I'm guessing that you listen to right wing radio from the tenor of your response. I listened to those conservative commentaries everyday for years.  Would you like to talk about how factual versus how emotional they are in their content?

Sure. Would you like to discuss factual vs emotional contact if democrats? 

2 hours ago, Cclm said:

It could also be said that Republicans, Trump supporters or whatever at the capital were mostly peaceful too. A group of individuals chose the wrong path. It was an attack on the capital. So would it have been better to do it to private property and businesses?Do Republicans not have a right to peacefull protest?  

Was Hillary lying when she said the election was stolen from her? Or AL Gore? They all say that. The capital building has been breached before as well. Why wasn't it an "insurrection" then? With Kavanagh (might be spelt wrong)Because you agreed with them? 

The double standard is remarkable. Tell me what would gave happened if an unarmed black woman was shot at a BLM "protest?. Or an egg thrown at Maxine Waters by a white women wearing a gorilla mask? 

Yes I know you hate Trump. There is litterally nothing he could do, no matter how good that some people would even consider. 

I mean I don't like my Prime Minister at all bit I don't want him to fail just because I don't like him. I'll also give him acknowledgment when deserved. 

Sure. Would you like to discuss factual vs emotional contact if democrats? 

Yep. Conservative pundits say all manner of things about liberals everyday. Some of them insist that it was antifa that stormed the capitol on January 6th too. We all know that's a big lie.  

Now you want to project Trump'selection lies onto others, but especially onto Clinton. That's not surprising.  What is surprising is that no conservative has managed to produce any believable evidence that Hillary should be "locked up" but they sure can get Trump voters animated worth that language...can't they? I mean, it was your first deflection when confronted worth the dishonesty and lies of republican political leadership and the media outlets who promote them. 

Your imagined double standard is noteworthy.  Was young Kyle Rittenhouse part of BLM when he shot and killed protesters at the rally? It sounds like tippy swallowed the right wing media narrative about the BLM protests without any question.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/26/almost-none-deaths-linked-recent-protests-are-known-have-been-committed-by-protesters/

You haven't demonstrated that it's possible to have a factually based discussion about politics.  So far you have offered up emotionally based political rhetoric but not much in the way of facts.  

Fact: Trump is a liar.  Fact: the 2020 election was free and fair. Fact: the Trump supporters stormed the capitol on January 6 based upon a lie that the election was stolen.  Fact: republican legislators at the state level are changing election laws because of fealty to a lie about election security and imagined fraud.  

The dishonesty of modern republican politicians is stunning and dangerous. 

8 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Yep. Conservative pundits say all manner of things about liberals everyday. Some of them insist that it was antifa that stormed the capitol on January 6th too. We all know that's a big lie.  

Now you want to project Trump'selection lies onto others, but especially onto Clinton. That's not surprising.  What is surprising is that no conservative has managed to produce any believable evidence that Hillary should be "locked up" but they sure can get Trump voters animated worth that language...can't they? I mean, it was your first deflection when confronted worth the dishonesty and lies of republican political leadership and the media outlets who promote them. 

Your imagined double standard is noteworthy.  Was young Kyle Rittenhouse part of BLM when he shot and killed protesters at the rally? It sounds like tippy swallowed the right wing media narrative about the BLM protests without any question.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/26/almost-none-deaths-linked-recent-protests-are-known-have-been-committed-by-protesters/

You haven't demonstrated that it's possible to have a factually based discussion about politics.  So far you have offered up emotionally based political rhetoric but not much in the way of facts.  

Fact: Trump is a liar.  Fact: the 2020 election was free and fair. Fact: the Trump supporters stormed the capitol on January 6 based upon a lie that the election was stolen.  Fact: republican legislators at the state level are changing election laws because of fealty to a lie about election security and imagined fraud.  

The dishonesty of modern republican politicians is stunning and dangerous. 

And no government agency has ever brang any believable evidence including the FBI  that Trump broke the law either!! So there's that. 

And tell me what would have happened at a BLM riot if  a unarmed black was woman shot in the neck? 

There's ypur double standard crystal clear.....

10 hours ago, Cclm said:

And no government agency has ever brang any believable evidence including the FBI  that Trump broke the law either!! So there's that. 

And tell me what would have happened at a BLM riot if  a unarmed black was woman shot in the neck? 

There's ypur double standard crystal clear.....

You sound impatient...

You'll have to be more specific about your angst over an unarmed black woman.  It's difficult for you to be crystal clear in such a nameless and mysterious way. 

3 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

You sound impatient...

You'll have to be more specific about your angst over an unarmed black woman.  It's difficult for you to be crystal clear in such a nameless and mysterious way. 

I know I'm shallow, but I'm still hun-up on "brang."

3 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

You sound impatient...

You'll have to be more specific about your angst over an unarmed black woman.  It's difficult for you to be crystal clear in such a nameless and mysterious way. 

On Jan 6 during the "insurrection " an unarmed woman(white because apparently that matters) was shot in the neck and killed by a until recently an un named police officer(black, again appetently that matters too). 

Now if a white police 0fficer shot and killed an unarmed black woman at a BLM "peaceful protest", and the city witheld information on it for months, what do you think would be happening right now? A whole lot of peaceful but fiery protest I imagine. Probably some fires up here in Canada too. 

That's the double standard. Is that clear enough for you? 

14 hours ago, NRSKarenRN said:

Please re-read the U.S Department of Justice Mueller 

Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election

Pg.220

 

Well it doesn't convict him either does it? Hillary didn't have the privilege of an investigation did she?