What do you think about with current News and Opinions?

Justlookingfornow · Jun 10, 2022

1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

LOL

You seem desperate to prop up some strawman argument that I approve of or an trying to justify that violent fool... is that nefarious or a reading comprehension problem?

Now we're on to the "both sides"argument when it was only one side that tried to overthrow the government, eh? Why not watch the hearing so you know what Trump did and why.

"Strawman", "propaganda" ,"white nationalist"........

I will watch as much as I can stand of a committee with only 2 Republicans that conveniently hate Trump and pretend it's is "objective". Especially if the fact that the National Guard was refused by Pelosi isn't evaluated

Yes! Both sides! This is a means of unity and coming together with a common goal of making our country better,for everyone. I'm sorry you are so desperate absolved in your divisive that you cannot do this.

Do you not remember? Conflict resolution happens when both sides come together for a common goal. Listening, accountability and compromise. Sometimes this involves acknowledging your weakness and faults. You don't believe the Democrat's do anything aventitious or play common political tactics,the only think I've heard you say is"I think Biden is too old".

It doesn't really matter tho, even if this committee found Tump did nothing wrong, you will find a way to spin it just like "Russian collusion".

However you were successful in deflecting away from the crime almost committed against a Supreme Court Justice, while claiming "deflection " at the sametime. Good job.

Home Health Columnist / Guide · Jun 10, 2022

1 hour ago, Justlookingfornow said:

It doesn't really matter tho, even if this committee found Tump did nothing wrong, you will find a way to spin it just like "Russian collusion".

Re "Russian Collusion:

Newsweek 4/18/19

Robert Mueller did not absolve Donald Trump of collusion in his report

Quote

The Mueller report does not exonerate the president. Although the term "exonerate" appears three times in Mueller's report, the word is used to say "while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

https://www.justice.gov/storage/report_volume2.pdf Page 187

Full report: Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The2016 Presidential Election

Quote

As set forth in detail in this report, the Special Counsel’s investigation established that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations. First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J.
Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released stolen documents. The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. ....

toomuchbaloney · Jun 10, 2022

52 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

"Strawman", "propaganda" ,"white nationalist"........

I will watch as much as I can stand of a committee with only 2 Republicans that conveniently hate Trump and pretend it's is "objective". Especially if the fact that the National Guard was refused by Pelosi isn't evaluated

Yes! Both sides! This is a means of unity and coming together with a common goal of making our country better,for everyone. I'm sorry you are so desperate absolved in your divisive that you cannot do this.

Do you not remember? Conflict resolution happens when both sides come together for a common goal. Listening, accountability and compromise. Sometimes this involves acknowledging your weakness and faults. You don't believe the Democrat's do anything aventitious or play common political tactics,the only think I've heard you say is"I think Biden is too old".

It doesn't really matter tho, even if this committee found Tump did nothing wrong, you will find a way to spin it just like "Russian collusion".

However you were successful in deflecting away from the crime almost committed against a Supreme Court Justice, while claiming "deflection " at the sametime. Good job.

Did you manage to watch the whole thing?

Clearly this committee hasn't found that Trump did nothing wrong. Barr was the individual with the biggest spin on the Russian collusion question.

In this "conflict resolution" there needs to be some truth telling and accountability before any "common goals" can be identified. It's difficult to find common goals with liars, cheats and traitors.

So if acknowleding weakness is necessary, how come Trump doesn't ever do that? Why can't the House GOP leadership admit the truth about what happened? Did you watch their press conference before the hearing today?

How am I deflecting from the almost crime against Kavanaugh? What the heck?

Tweety, BSN, RN · Jun 10, 2022

6 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

How am I deflecting from the almost crime against Kavanaugh? What the heck?

You were addressing what the poster said about Schumer with "Do you think that there are constitutional remedies for bad justices? " which wasn't a deflection.

Apparently though you didn't condemn the attempt murder enough.

Justlookingfornow · Jun 10, 2022

4 hours ago, Tweety said:

You were addressing what the poster said about Schumer with "Do you think that there are constitutional remedies for bad justices? " which wasn't a deflection.

Apparently though you didn't condemn the attempt murder enough.

It's not about enough, it more like barely at all. If I misinterpreted I aploligize however asking about what to do about bad Jusices when discussing an attempted murder plot on one, leaves to suggestion that perhaps that there is some lack of human empathy at least.

Kind of like, discussing a rape case then someone asked, "do you think there should be fashion remedies for women who wear sexy clothes"?

Justlookingfornow · Jun 10, 2022

Just now, Justlookingfornow said:

It's not about enough, it more like barely at all. If I misinterpreted I aploligize however asking about what to do about bad Jusices when discussing an attempted murder plot on one, leaves to suggestion that perhaps that there is some lack of human empathy at the least. Or perhaps not in the right context to be discussing that. Worthy of a discussion? Yes! When talking about an attempted murder charge against a Supreme Court Justice? Absolutely not. Somewhat implies that he deserved it

Kind of like, discussing a rape case then someone asked, "do you think there should be fashion remedies for women who wear sexy clothes"?

. I know you hate this Tweety however if this Justice was of another political persuasion, some members comments would be allot different. It is a general assumption made from a pattern of behavior being my point. Not making up scenarios that haven't happened to get mad at.

toomuchbaloney · Jun 10, 2022

20 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

It's not about enough, it more like barely at all. If I misinterpreted I aploligize however asking about what to do about bad Jusices when discussing an attempted murder plot on one, leaves to suggestion that perhaps that there is some lack of human empathy at least.

Kind of like, discussing a rape case then someone asked, "do you think there should be fashion remedies for women who wear sexy clothes"?

Ohhhh. "Barely at all" can be translated into "until I'm personally satisfied" and I don't play that game. My apologies for not meeting your previously unexpressed standards for that plotting violence and murder are not acceptable. You should probably get in the habit of publishing your expectations before holding people accountable for meeting them... especially if you do that in real life and not just in digital interactions. IMV

The last analogy was terrible. Just terrible.

Justlookingfornow · Jun 10, 2022

11 hours ago, NRSKarenRN said:

Re "Russian Collusion:

Newsweek 4/18/19

Robert Mueller did not absolve Donald Trump of collusion in his report

Full report: Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The2016 Presidential Election

Yes, I know. Did not "absolve " can be said of any allegation not proven onecway or another. However they most certainly did find an abundance of Russian collusion in which they claimed they had evidence for.

Did not "absolve" doesn't mean proved culpability either.

toomuchbaloney · Jun 10, 2022

28 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

...if this Justice was...some members would be...

Haven't you noticed that your claim is not provable, contradicted by a ton of readily available evidence and is a broad generalization reflecting assumptions on your part? Should I characterize that as a pattern of behavior?

Justlookingfornow · Jun 10, 2022

2 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Ohhhh. "Barely at all" can be translated into "until I'm personally satisfied" and I don't play that game. My apologies for not meeting your previously unexpressed standards for that plotting violence and murder are not acceptable. You should probably get in the habit of publishing your expectations before holding people accountable for meeting them... especially if you do that in real life and not just in digital interactions. IMV

The last analogy was terrible. Just terrible.

You don't have to reply to me. Yes it is terrible to suggest a woman is somehow culpable in her own assault and just as terrible to light foot suggest that a "bad Justice" was somehow culpable in a plot to murder him.

My apploigies I didn't notice your condemnation of violence better. Perhaps you should get into the habit of being transparent in what you feel is acceptable or isn't, without asking about what do dobwith "bad Justices" when discussing a planned act of violence against them.

toomuchbaloney · Jun 10, 2022

Just now, Justlookingfornow said:

You don't have to reply to me. Yes it is terrible to suggest a woman is somehow culpable in her own assault and just as terrible to light foot suggest that a "bad Justice" was somehow culpable in a plot to murder him.

My apploigies I didn't notice your condemnation of violence better. Perhaps you should get into the habit of being transparent in what you feel is acceptable or isn't, without asking about what do dobwith "bad Justices" when discussing a planned act of violence against them.

I reply to whom I prefer.

There's that strawman argument again... you should copy and paste the words where I suggested that the judge "was somehow culpable in a plot to murder him".

Once again you've ended your comments with a very troubled paragraph. I don't think it conveyed the message or impression that you intended.

Tweety, BSN, RN · Jun 10, 2022

49 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:

Yep, I get it. If it were one of the liberal judges you might be hearing more outrage from the liberals. I think this is natural. Kind of like when the assassination attempt of the Michigan governor was uncovered people went "well she shouldn't have locked them down like that".

But like I said, shouldn't it be a given that attempted murder of a judge is something to be condemned? TMG said so and you were the one that brought up Schumer and he responded. Then you accused him of deflecting. What am I missing?