*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10640 on: July 07, 2023, 09:47:25 PM »
Looks like another historic federal indictment against a former President of the United States is coming.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/07/donald-trump-jack-smith-martial-law-voting-machines

Let us nevar forget how disgraceful our former President acted during that period.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2872
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10641 on: July 08, 2023, 03:17:16 PM »
Looks like another historic federal indictment against a former President of the United States is coming.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/07/donald-trump-jack-smith-martial-law-voting-machines

Let us nevar forget how disgraceful our former President acted during that period.
Never knew how terrible a dart player you are, Roundy.
To be honest I am getting pretty bored of this place.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7724
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10642 on: July 18, 2023, 03:44:43 PM »
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10199
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10643 on: July 18, 2023, 08:16:49 PM »
two more weeks

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10644 on: July 18, 2023, 08:21:11 PM »
Looks like Trump's interpretation of the PRA applies to other countries' antiquities as well.
https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-struggling-artifacts-back-donald-trump-mar-a-lago-report-2023-7
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7724
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10645 on: July 19, 2023, 03:39:07 AM »
Looks like Trump's interpretation of the PRA applies to other countries' antiquities as well.
https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-struggling-artifacts-back-donald-trump-mar-a-lago-report-2023-7

As I'm sure Tom will remind us: As president, Trump could do anything and was above the law.  If he felt his home was the best location to store and display ancient israelie artifacts, thats his right, not Israel's.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7724
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10646 on: July 28, 2023, 02:51:42 PM »
Hey, remember how Tom and Action claimed the Iran documents not being part of the indictment proved this was a sham?

Guess what got added in.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/27/feds-add-new-charges-against-trump-in-classified-documents-case-00108667
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10647 on: July 28, 2023, 04:15:09 PM »
That other indictment that Action80 is in denial about is coming soon!
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10648 on: August 01, 2023, 09:08:58 PM »
I wonder if the Trump campaign can afford another indictment.
WASHINGTON, July 30 (Reuters) - Former U.S. President Donald Trump's political action committee is expected to report on Monday that it has spent about $40 million in legal fees in the first half of 2023 to defend Trump and his advisers, among others, the Washington Post reported.

The New York Times separately reported that the PAC has sought the return of $60 million it made to another group supporting Trump, a candidate for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7724
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10649 on: August 01, 2023, 09:52:00 PM »
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10650 on: August 01, 2023, 11:47:49 PM »
Looks like another historic federal indictment against a former President of the United States is coming.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/07/donald-trump-jack-smith-martial-law-voting-machines

Let us nevar forget how disgraceful our former President acted during that period.
Never knew how terrible a dart player you are, Roundy.

Well that comment has aged like Limburger sitting out on the porch during a climate change induced heatwave.

Of the three federal indictments against our disgraceful former president this one is by far the most interesting. Let's hope it's not all sound and fury etc etc.

There is also this.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4130582-judge-rules-trump-false-election-claims-while-in-office-covered-by-presidential-immunity/
« Last Edit: August 01, 2023, 11:51:09 PM by Roundy »
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7724
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10651 on: August 02, 2023, 04:25:54 AM »
Looks like another historic federal indictment against a former President of the United States is coming.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/07/donald-trump-jack-smith-martial-law-voting-machines

Let us nevar forget how disgraceful our former President acted during that period.
Never knew how terrible a dart player you are, Roundy.

Well that comment has aged like Limburger sitting out on the porch during a climate change induced heatwave.

Of the three federal indictments against our disgraceful former president this one is by far the most interesting. Let's hope it's not all sound and fury etc etc.

There is also this.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4130582-judge-rules-trump-false-election-claims-while-in-office-covered-by-presidential-immunity/
I guess presidents are above the law.
Joe should totally make alot of statements bashing people he hates while he can.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2872
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10652 on: August 02, 2023, 12:33:36 PM »
Looks like another historic federal indictment against a former President of the United States is coming.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/07/donald-trump-jack-smith-martial-law-voting-machines

Let us nevar forget how disgraceful our former President acted during that period.
Never knew how terrible a dart player you are, Roundy.

Well that comment has aged like Limburger sitting out on the porch during a climate change induced heatwave.

Of the three federal indictments against our disgraceful former president this one is by far the most interesting. Let's hope it's not all sound and fury etc etc.

There is also this.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4130582-judge-rules-trump-false-election-claims-while-in-office-covered-by-presidential-immunity/
Rather, it is aging like fine wine, as these new indictments look like "oops...missed a spot!!!" (i.e., an attempt to fill a starving news cycle of OMB-mania)...Gadflies will gadfly...
« Last Edit: August 02, 2023, 12:44:44 PM by Action80 »
To be honest I am getting pretty bored of this place.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10697
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10653 on: August 03, 2023, 01:33:26 AM »
It seems like the New York Times has finally figured it out.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/02/opinion/trump-meritocracy-educated.html


*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3395
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10654 on: August 03, 2023, 02:38:26 AM »
We've been over the difference between an editorial and an op-ed before, and in any case, the article's title is referring to what the author argues is the creation of an "elite" professional culture that left enough people feeling isolated and left behind to rally behind someone like Trump, who positioned himself as standing in opposition to that culture. He's explicit about not supporting Trump and wanting to see him go to jail.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10697
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10655 on: August 03, 2023, 02:56:39 AM »
Quote from: honk
We've been over the difference between an editorial and an op-ed before

Yes, we have been over it. If I can't write my own New York Times opinion piece on the reality of Dinosaur Earth, then those articles are sanctioned by the paper.

The bio of the person who wrote it says that he has been an Op-Ed columnist since 2003 ffs. Ed stands for Editor. An editor is someone who writes or edits on behalf of the paper.

Quote from: honk
He's explicit about not supporting Trump and wanting to see him go to jail.

Yes, he has a lot of raging liberal biases and explores the realization that he may be the bad guy in the situation. It's in the title of the article. The article isn't about him changing his tune and defecting to the other side. At the end of the article he is still a a member of the pinko liberal club who hates Trump and loves Cuties and Drag Queen Story Hour.

He basically admits that the whole liberal movement is off its rocker and led by a few deranged 'elites' -



And that's the crux of the article: Liberals are deranged. This answers the premise question in the first few sentences of the article of why Trump remains strong. It explains why Trump is stronger than ever even though in the liberal mind he tried to overthrow the government, is a terrible dictator person, and should be on the level of a Mob Boss, or perhaps even something approaching a Mussolini incarnate.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2023, 03:27:05 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3395
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10656 on: August 03, 2023, 04:16:15 AM »
If I can't write my own New York Times opinion piece on the reality of Dinosaur Earth, then those articles are sanctioned by the paper.

Newspapers can and do publish opinion pieces that argue completely different perspectives all the time. That's how it works. You can argue with me about it all you want, you can spin analogies to your heart's content, but at the end of the day, newspapers will continue to publish opinion pieces that argue completely different perspectives with or without your approval.

Quote
The bio of the person who wrote it says that he has been an Op-Ed columnist since 2003 ffs. Ed stands for Editor. An editor is someone who writes or edits on behalf of the paper.

Op-ed stands for "opposite the editorial page." You already know this, and you already know that of course not every opinion piece that a newspaper publishes is meant to represent the newspaper's official opinion.

Quote
Yes, he has a lot of raging liberal biases and explores the realization that he may be the bad guy in the situation. It's in the title of the article. The article isn't about him changing his tune and defecting to the other side. At the end of the article he is still a a member of the pinko liberal club who hates Trump and loves Cuties and Drag Queen Story Hour.

He basically admits that the whole liberal movement is off its rocker and led by a few deranged 'elites' -

As you undoubtedly already know (because otherwise I'm sure you wouldn't be putting so much focus on how liberal the author supposedly is), David Brooks is a conservative and not a disaffected liberal. I wouldn't go so far as to call this article concern-trolling or otherwise insincere, but his criticisms of progressive culture can be better understood as accusations rather than admissions.

Quote
And that's the crux of the article: Liberals are deranged. This answers the premise question in the first few sentences of the article of why Trump remains strong. It explains why Trump is stronger than ever even though in the liberal mind he tried to overthrow the government, is a terrible dictator person, and should be on the level of a Mob Boss, or perhaps even something approaching a Mussolini incarnate.

No, that's not the crux of the article; it's just one paragraph. The bulk of the article discusses, like I said, the creation of of an "elite" professional culture that left enough people feeling isolated and left behind to rally behind someone like Trump, who positioned himself as standing in opposition to that culture. If you want to argue that, no, the real issues facing our country are drag queens or whatever, feel free, but don't pretend that either Brooks or the NYT are arguing that.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10697
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10657 on: August 03, 2023, 05:26:35 AM »
Op-Eds are not different than editorials. They are editorials. The term "Opposite from Editorials" is an antiquated term that the New York Times admitted is antiquated and wishes to discontinue, and originally referenced the geographic position of the article in the newspaper and its relation to what was previously classified as 'editorials'.

Today Op-Ed is colloquially known as 'opinions and editorials' -

Covering Your Campus: A Guide for Student Newspapers



https://lmtimes.ca/glossary



In this case, however, the author of the article is affiliated to the publication. The author in question has had his own column in the New York Times for the last 20 years since 2003, so it can hardly be said that he is not affiliated with with the paper:

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/ref/opinion/BROOKS-BIO.html?pagewanted=all



Quote from: honk
You already know this, and you already know that of course not every opinion piece that a newspaper publishes is meant to represent the newspaper's official opinion.

Since it is going through the editors, what is published are the positions of the newspaper. They won't publish my Flat Earth Dinosaur stuff, so they obviously are picking and choosing what they want to present and are policing the positions that they want you to think about. This argument that you can filter and select a selection of opinions for your newspaper and then pretend that it is not your selection is a ridiculous and flawed take. It obviously and directly is your selection that you are presenting to the public under your brand.

Quote from: honk
No, that's not the crux of the article; it's just one paragraph. The bulk of the article discusses, like I said, the creation of of an "elite" professional culture that left enough people feeling isolated and left behind to rally behind someone like Trump, who positioned himself as standing in opposition to that culture.

What you are describing there is some liberals trying to push beliefs onto people who don't really believe it, which is bad. This is evidenced by firing and canceling people who don't act a certain way. That makes liberals the 'bad guys', as stated in the article. The author's point is clearly that the movement is full of contradictions, close-mindedness, and derangement.

The author also further suggests that the above is why the liberals who have bought into the movement can't understand why Trump is not universally hated as a dictator and bad person.

Quote from: honk
As you undoubtedly already know (because otherwise I'm sure you wouldn't be putting so much focus on how liberal the author supposedly is), David Brooks is a conservative and not a disaffected liberal.

He has his own personal definition of conservative which involves taking many liberal positions and not backing any Republican candidate:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brooks_(commentator)

    When asked what he thinks of charges that he's "not a real conservative" or "squishy", Brooks has said that "if you define conservative by support for the Republican candidate or the belief that tax cuts are the correct answer to all problems, I guess I don't fit that agenda. But I do think that I'm part of a long-standing conservative tradition that has to do with Edmund Burke ... and Alexander Hamilton."

On the same page he also says that he's actually in the "Democrat Party":

    In December 2021, he wrote that he placed himself "on the rightward edge of the leftward tendency—in the more promising soil of the moderate wing of the Democratic Party."

In the NYT article in question he is clearly acting as a liberal/democrat and is criticizing the liberal movement. He is criticizing liberals from the position of a liberal.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2023, 06:39:16 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10658 on: August 03, 2023, 12:12:54 PM »
Tom, they won't publish your flat Earth dinosaur stuff because it's insane, not because it goes against the view of their newspaper.

And yes, newspapers publish opinion pieces that go against their views all the time. Please stop pretending this is such an unusual concept. I hate to accuse someone of trolling, of course, but when you're being so obviously disingenuous it's difficult to see it as anything but.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

Re: Trump
« Reply #10659 on: August 03, 2023, 02:42:48 PM »
if the candidate i'd been hyping for the last eight years just got indicted for attempting to overthrow american democracy, i'd probably wanna change the subject to some meaningless david brooks column, too.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.