|
Post by urbanpatrician on Dec 21, 2019 3:10:05 GMT
But isn't that the difference here... the fact that you believe that diatribe and I don't? It isn't as much as "it's no big deal" as I don't believe the main source your brain has linked to. We all have a basis for something and your basis is that long thesis. But no, this overall thing is still no big deal anyways. I was just wondering if you can admit that your entire spectrum of thoughts here are just your opinion. And maybe the opinion of the other 3 or (maybe 4) people on this thread - clearly left-wing and anti-Trump to begin with. But overall, I guess my main question is.... why should anyone entertain your opinions and interpretations? Of course I understand this is just a discussion, but are you saying your thoughts are to be taken seriously and something the legal panel should look at? (I'm not saying mine should be either, btw)
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Dec 21, 2019 3:28:01 GMT
But isn't that the difference here... the fact that you believe that diatribe and I don't? It isn't as much as "it's no big deal" as I don't believe the main source your brain has linked to. We all have a basis for something and your basis is that long thesis. But no, this overall thing is still no big deal anyways. I was just wondering if you can admit that your entire spectrum of thoughts here are just your opinion. And maybe the opinion of the other 3 or (maybe 4) people on this thread, clearly left-wing and anti-Trump to begin with. But even besides that, why should anyone entertain your opinions and interpretations? Of course I understand the concept of a discussion, but are you saying your thoughts are to be taken seriously? (I'm not saying mine should be either, btw) Isn't that a form of the grade school idea of nihilism, to think that facts do not matter because they can only be grounded through interpretation and therefore invite subjectivity (hence "alternative facts")? If that is what you are proposing, I reject it, because reality exists and banal nihilism should not be weaponized to allow people to exploit their powers under the guise of "lol, nothing matters."
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Dec 21, 2019 3:43:43 GMT
But isn't that the difference here... the fact that you believe that diatribe and I don't? It isn't as much as "it's no big deal" as I don't believe the main source your brain has linked to. We all have a basis for something and your basis is that long thesis. But no, this overall thing is still no big deal anyways. I was just wondering if you can admit that your entire spectrum of thoughts here are just your opinion. And maybe the opinion of the other 3 or (maybe 4) people on this thread, clearly left-wing and anti-Trump to begin with. But even besides that, why should anyone entertain your opinions and interpretations? Of course I understand the concept of a discussion, but are you saying your thoughts are to be taken seriously? (I'm not saying mine should be either, btw) Isn't that a form of the grade school idea of nihilism, to think that facts do not matter because they can only be grounded through interpretation and therefore invite subjectivity (hence "alternative facts")? If that is what you are proposing, I reject it, because reality exists and banal nihilism should not be weaponized to allow people to exploit their powers under the guise of "lol, nothing matters." So now you're trying to say that your opinion is fact? Lol. And simply because you thought about this matter so much and went mental overload in your free time, your opinion is suddenly a way of saying: "I'm right and I know it." Even facts have different shades of interpretation to it, and I'm not that egotastic to suggest there isn't shades of subjective interpretation to it. And you try to divert from that. Has nothing to do with nihilism. I'm just saying I'm not alone in my thoughts here, pretty sure lots of people share my views. I've also never heard of this case spun in a way that you and countjohn and Tyler have done so. You guys have put quite a lot of thought to this, and I simply see this as solely the opinion of 3 stray people here and nothing more. Also, you have to look at it historically. I just don't think this can be compared to Nixon if his crime is to be considered the barometer measure for impeachment. What Nixon did was a direct attempt to reassure himself in power. Through a break in, a direct crime, and a cover up. Of course you'll try to spin it in a way that that applies to Trump too, but again I simply don't think his case is anything like Nixon's. Is it a bigger matter than Clinton? I dunno. But I personally didn't think Clinton should be impeached so I guess I'm just overall a lenient guy, and by nature I'm not quick to vilify.
|
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,682
Likes: 2,114
|
Post by cherry68 on Dec 21, 2019 7:19:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on Dec 21, 2019 13:06:37 GMT
urbanpatrician - I really have no idea how to respond to this, other than to think that you are obviously not aware of the facts of the situation. Trump may be re-elected, sure, but to believe that this Impeachment vote was some sort of biased political coup is to be totally misinformed. I think Trump's a gobshite and shouldn't be there but they've got nothing. With Clinton they brought actual charges to the impeachment. It's obvious it's partisan.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Dec 21, 2019 13:37:15 GMT
Isn't that a form of the grade school idea of nihilism, to think that facts do not matter because they can only be grounded through interpretation and therefore invite subjectivity (hence "alternative facts")? If that is what you are proposing, I reject it, because reality exists and banal nihilism should not be weaponized to allow people to exploit their powers under the guise of "lol, nothing matters." So now you're trying to say that your opinion is fact? Lol. And simply because you thought about this matter so much and went mental overload in your free time, your opinion is suddenly a way of saying: "I'm right and I know it." Even facts have different shades of interpretation to it, and I'm not that egotastic to suggest there isn't shades of subjective interpretation to it. And you try to divert from that. Has nothing to do with nihilism. I'm just saying I'm not alone in my thoughts here, pretty sure lots of people share my views. I've also never heard of this case spun in a way that you and countjohn and Tyler have done so. You guys have put quite a lot of thought to this, and I simply see this as solely the opinion of 3 stray people here and nothing more. I don't see my opinion as absolute fact (the fuck?), but an interpretation of facts that I am willing to support because life does not come with simple and obvious answers and requires some interpretation. I wasn't saying subjectivity doesn't exist (again, the fuck?), but saying that I don't dismiss discussion because they are grounded on subjectivity. I am always open to discussing opinions and willing to bend to whatever makes the most sense. I also don't see what countjohn, Tyler, and I are saying that is so unique. We've been saying that Trump uses Congressionally mandated military aid to Ukraine to try to bribe them into announcing an investigation into Biden, who happens to be a 2020 candidate. We've all said that we think bribery is a crime and soliciting a foreign government to mess with a political opponent for an upcoming election is a crime. I don't see what's scandalous about that opinion, and if you have an opposing one then fine but don't act like we're talking some bizzaro shit you cannot possibly comprehend just because you don't think Trump did a crime and you think the Bidens are dirty anyway.
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Dec 21, 2019 14:44:20 GMT
So now you're trying to say that your opinion is fact? Lol. And simply because you thought about this matter so much and went mental overload in your free time, your opinion is suddenly a way of saying: "I'm right and I know it." Even facts have different shades of interpretation to it, and I'm not that egotastic to suggest there isn't shades of subjective interpretation to it. And you try to divert from that. Has nothing to do with nihilism. I'm just saying I'm not alone in my thoughts here, pretty sure lots of people share my views. I've also never heard of this case spun in a way that you and countjohn and Tyler have done so. You guys have put quite a lot of thought to this, and I simply see this as solely the opinion of 3 stray people here and nothing more. I don't see my opinion as absolute fact (the fuck?), but an interpretation of facts that I am willing to support because life does not come with simple and obvious answers and requires some interpretation. I wasn't saying subjectivity doesn't exist (again, the fuck?), but saying that I don't dismiss discussion because they are grounded on subjectivity. I am always open to discussing opinions and willing to bend to whatever makes the most sense. I also don't see what countjohn, Tyler, and I are saying that is so unique. We've been saying that Trump uses Congressionally mandated military aid to Ukraine to try to bribe them into announcing an investigation into Biden, who happens to be a 2020 candidate. We've all said that we think bribery is a crime and soliciting a foreign government to mess with a political opponent for an upcoming election is a crime. I don't see what's scandalous about that opinion, and if you have an opposing one then fine but don't act like we're talking some bizzaro shit you cannot possibly comprehend just because you don't think Trump did a crime and you think the Bidens are dirty anyway. I'm not saying you're talking bizarro shit, but just saying you stretched your brain pretty far out to come up with the stuff you did. I've noticed that and pointed it out. And it seems you're pretty intent on drilling a hole on the wall here, and pushing it in deeply. Anyways it seems primarily 3 (or 4) people taking one side to a vast extreme - and it's the same 3 or 4 guys so there's hardly anything substantial here. And then there's the others (though it seems to be only me posting) that don't think they have much of a case here. It seems to me that there are quite a few people here who don't he did anything egregious. While you're fluffing it down to "it's no big deal," I do believe it's a legitimate stance to conclude that what he did wasn't anything punishable by impeachment. It's just not an open and shut case.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Dec 21, 2019 15:10:04 GMT
I don't see my opinion as absolute fact (the fuck?), but an interpretation of facts that I am willing to support because life does not come with simple and obvious answers and requires some interpretation. I wasn't saying subjectivity doesn't exist (again, the fuck?), but saying that I don't dismiss discussion because they are grounded on subjectivity. I am always open to discussing opinions and willing to bend to whatever makes the most sense. I also don't see what countjohn, Tyler, and I are saying that is so unique. We've been saying that Trump uses Congressionally mandated military aid to Ukraine to try to bribe them into announcing an investigation into Biden, who happens to be a 2020 candidate. We've all said that we think bribery is a crime and soliciting a foreign government to mess with a political opponent for an upcoming election is a crime. I don't see what's scandalous about that opinion, and if you have an opposing one then fine but don't act like we're talking some bizzaro shit you cannot possibly comprehend just because you don't think Trump did a crime and you think the Bidens are dirty anyway. I'm not saying you're talking bizarro shit, but just saying you stretched your brain pretty far out to come up with the stuff you did. I've noticed that and pointed it out. And it seems you're pretty intent on drilling a hole on the wall here, and pushing it in deeply. Anyways it seems primarily 3 (or 4) people taking one side to a vast extreme - and it's the same 3 or 4 guys so there's hardly anything substantial here. And then there's the others (though it seems to be only me posting) that don't think they have much of a case here. It seems to me that there are quite a few people here who don't he did anything egregious. While you're fluffing it down to "it's no big deal," I do believe it's a legitimate stance to conclude that what he did wasn't anything punishable by impeachment. It's just not an open and shut case. Again, you can think it isn't impeachment-worthy, I've never had a problem with that, all I ever pointed out was how it seemed like you were dismissive of any counter-argument countjohn had by what appeared to me to be moving the goalposts from bribery wasn't a crime to it wasn't serious to it's fine because of his position but if you think the first (that Trump's bribery wasn't a crime) then that is that and you can support it as you wish. I am curious what kind of mental gymnastics you think I'm doing. I've restated the initial whistleblower complaint and say that Trump tried to use military aid to bribe Ukraine into announcing a Biden investigation, which not an interpretation, but a fact that Trump's own team supported with their White House transcript and has been further supported by multiple testimonies of those in the know. Interpretation only comes into play with whether that action is worth impeaching, which I think it is as an abuse of power to bribe a foreign government for help in damaging a political opponent (things I previously said) and you think it is not because you don't think Trump's bribery is a crime, let alone a high crime. That seems to be where we stand, did I get anything wrong? If not, where am I stretching?
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Dec 21, 2019 15:24:04 GMT
I'm not saying you're talking bizarro shit, but just saying you stretched your brain pretty far out to come up with the stuff you did. I've noticed that and pointed it out. And it seems you're pretty intent on drilling a hole on the wall here, and pushing it in deeply. Anyways it seems primarily 3 (or 4) people taking one side to a vast extreme - and it's the same 3 or 4 guys so there's hardly anything substantial here. And then there's the others (though it seems to be only me posting) that don't think they have much of a case here. It seems to me that there are quite a few people here who don't he did anything egregious. While you're fluffing it down to "it's no big deal," I do believe it's a legitimate stance to conclude that what he did wasn't anything punishable by impeachment. It's just not an open and shut case. Again, you can think it isn't impeachment-worthy, I've never had a problem with that, all I ever pointed out was how it seemed like you were dismissive of any counter-argument countjohn had by what appeared to me to be moving the goalposts from bribery wasn't a crime to it wasn't serious to it's fine because of his position but if you think the first (that Trump's bribery wasn't a crime) then that is that and you can support it as you wish. I am curious what kind of mental gymnastics you think I'm doing. I've restated the initial whistleblower complaint and say that Trump tried to use military aid to bribe Ukraine into announcing a Biden investigation, which not an interpretation, but a fact that Trump's own team supported with their White House transcript and has been further supported by multiple testimonies of those in the know. Interpretation only comes into play with whether that action is worth impeaching, which I think it is as an abuse of power to bribe a foreign government for help in damaging a political opponent (things I previously said) and you think it is not because you don't think Trump's bribery is a crime, let alone a high crime. That seems to be where we stand, did I get anything wrong? If not, where am I stretching? Countjohn made a counter-point for every point I made, so I made another one. I'm not exactly taking 3 different stances here. You should follow the discussion. Not seeing what I'm doing that's particularly all over the place. Every argument that's made by him follows with another one by me. I'm not exactly taking stances here (you two are doing that more than me) as much as I'm responding to what he's saying. I never argued Trump did what he did. I'm just saying that given that Biden can be construed as a crook, and that Trump is trying to win an election through weakening his opponent (which is legitimate) - he has quite a case to counter the House of Representative's accusations. Trump is obviously using his powers to strong-arm Ukraine. I don't think he abused his power; I simply think he used it to his advantage. Perhaps it wasn't you doing mental gymnastics and I just lumped you and countjohn together, but equating Trump's actions to that of an ordinary citizen's is a false equivalency and saying "some random joe got 2 years because of a weak crime, and Trump gets nothing" is just dumb. I've checked and saw that it wasn't you who said that, but point still remains.
|
|
The-Havok
Badass
Doing pretty good so far
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 552
|
Post by The-Havok on Jan 11, 2020 18:19:47 GMT
Next week will Pelosi reveal she embarrassed herself for painting a bad picture of Trump? The Iran saga has overshadowed any faux Machiavelian plot from the dumbass democrats. It's worthy of a sitcom by now
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jan 11, 2020 20:39:01 GMT
Next week will Pelosi reveal she embarrassed herself for painting a bad picture of Trump? The Iran saga has overshadowed any faux Machiavelian plot from the dumbass democrats. It's worthy of a sitcom by now No one needs to paint a bad picture of Trump, he's perfectly able to do that himself (it's really all he's capable of doing) and has done so for his entire administration. The impeachment stalling just means that he's become such a cult figure to the GOP that he could get away with anything like he insinuated in his 2016 run and the voterbase will still call his piss rain. Fifty years from now he'll be remembered as a profound embarrassment at best and relegated to history's garbage heap along with Andrew Jackson, Jim Crow and George Wallace, or maybe that's being too optimistic since these last few years have shown us that we really haven't progressed much at all over the last few decades. Pelosi and the Democrats could have proven that Trump slaughtered babies and his see-no-evil useful idiot sycophant followers would deflect and complain. Trump is untouchable (and ironically) unimpeachable in this partisan climate. He literally could get away with murder, and has.
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on Jan 11, 2020 21:09:00 GMT
Next week will Pelosi reveal she embarrassed herself for painting a bad picture of Trump? The Iran saga has overshadowed any faux Machiavelian plot from the dumbass democrats. It's worthy of a sitcom by now No one needs to paint a bad picture of Trump, he's perfectly able to do that himself (it's really all he's capable of doing) and has done so for his entire administration. The impeachment stalling just means that he's become such a cult figure to the GOP that he could get away with anything like he insinuated in his 2016 run and the voterbase will still call his piss rain. Fifty years from now he'll be remembered as a profound embarrassment at best and relegated to history's garbage heap along with Andrew Jackson, Jim Crow and George Wallace, or maybe that's being too optimistic since these last few years have shown us that we really haven't progressed much at all over the last few decades. Pelosi and the Democrats could have proven that Trump slaughtered babies and his see-no-evil useful idiot sycophant followers would deflect and complain. Trump is untouchable (and ironically) unimpeachable in this partisan climate. He literally could get away with murder, and has. I think the guy's a gobshite and can't string a proper sentence together to save his life but you're clearly unable to see reality. He hasn't done anything to put him in the company you mentioned, he hasn't started a war, he has openly worked to prevent, opened up channels to North Korea so they'd de-escalate and the economy is performing well under his administration (although I think that will collapse).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2020 12:58:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Feb 15, 2020 18:20:47 GMT
I feel like we need that True Detective meme where everything linked back to “None of it fucking matters.”
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on Apr 14, 2020 19:36:52 GMT
Just gonna leave this here
|
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,682
Likes: 2,114
|
Post by cherry68 on Apr 14, 2020 19:44:23 GMT
Just gonna leave this here Nice to have you back
|
|
|
Post by IceTruckDexter on Apr 15, 2020 10:38:36 GMT
Just gonna leave this here Nice to have you back Did I leave?
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Apr 15, 2020 10:42:06 GMT
Nobody gives a shit about this anymore in light of Covid-19. You can close this discussion.
|
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,682
Likes: 2,114
|
Post by cherry68 on Apr 15, 2020 11:19:33 GMT
Nice to have you back Did I leave? I can never know. You sounded devastated by premier league suspension, not to mention coronavirus.
|
|