Author Topic: The Shampeachement Follies  (Read 34930 times)

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #750 on: May 17, 2020, 02:34:38 PM »
...I saw the first 13 minutes of Molyneux video -- an utter waste of my time that says nothing relevant: except in the other direction, revealing that Trump first made his "He's Mexican" comments and only then did the Hispanic Bar Association speak against Trump's racism. So that actually shoots down your argument even more, if anything.

I should have realized you wouldn't even watch the total destruction of your claims that Judge Curiel was opposed because he was racially profiled. If you had started at the 12 minute mark and watched for that 15 minutes you claimed you did, you would be apologizing for your disinformation. Face it. Curiel was active in the San Diego La Rasa Lawyers Association and had a history of many activist actions centered on Mexican people in the USA. Trump was correct in his claim that Curiel was required to recuse himself (as Curiel had pledged to do), and Molyneux gave you chapter and verse. You didn't bother to see it, so don't hold yourself up as unbiased. The MSM at the time was totally involved in discrediting Trump, and almost anything that comes up first in Search Engines makes Trump look bad. You need to go farther and understand the truth, not just the spiel. At least go to the sum-up around the 40-min. mark. Trump does not have a racist bone in his body - but as Molyneux said, those that scream racism when there isn't any ARE the racists.

Curiel should have recused himself. Trump never called all illegal immigrants robbers and rapists. The lady who started the Trump University lawsuit was removed from the case by Judge Curiel over Trump's attorneys' protests, because she turned out to have supported the University. Curiel should have dropped the lawsuit, but he had more than just the appearance of partiality: his resumé proved that.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #751 on: May 17, 2020, 02:58:36 PM »
Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Donald Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Donald Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

Need I say more?  Okay,

Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #752 on: May 17, 2020, 03:01:55 PM »
...I saw the first 13 minutes of Molyneux video -- an utter waste of my time that says nothing relevant: except in the other direction, revealing that Trump first made his "He's Mexican" comments and only then did the Hispanic Bar Association speak against Trump's racism. So that actually shoots down your argument even more, if anything.

I should have realized you wouldn't even watch the total destruction of your claims that Judge Curiel was opposed because he was racially profiled. If you had started at the 12 minute mark and watched for that 15 minutes you claimed you did, you would be apologizing for your disinformation. Face it. Curiel was active in the San Diego La Rasa Lawyers Association and had a history of many activist actions centered on Mexican people in the USA. Trump was correct in his claim that Curiel was required to recuse himself (as Curiel had pledged to do), and Molyneux gave you chapter and verse. You didn't bother to see it, so don't hold yourself up as unbiased. The MSM at the time was totally involved in discrediting Trump, and almost anything that comes up first in Search Engines makes Trump look bad. You need to go farther and understand the truth, not just the spiel. At least go to the sum-up around the 40-min. mark. Trump does not have a racist bone in his body - but as Molyneux said, those that scream racism when there isn't any ARE the racists.

Curiel should have recused himself. Trump never called all illegal immigrants robbers and rapists. The lady who started the Trump University lawsuit was removed from the case by Judge Curiel over Trump's attorneys' protests, because she turned out to have supported the University. Curiel should have dropped the lawsuit, but he had more than just the appearance of partiality: his resumé proved that.

What, are you now repeating yourself?

Fine, let me repeat myself also:

You didn't bother to see it, so don't hold yourself up as unbiased.

Bull*censored*. Should I be forced to watch anything you like, no matter the length? That's a well-known tactic. I'm not obliged to waste my time. I watched from the start all the way up to the point you said (the 12 min mark), and the disinformation expert Molyneux hadn't even bothered to quote the Trump's statements that I quoted, the ones that made it clear that the thing was about Curiel being Mexican, Mexican and more Mexican. Obviously he'll try to make fun of people who react to the statements, without even bothering to quote what the actual Trump statement was, exactly because the Trump statement was so *censored*ing damning that it couldn't possibly be defended, except by pretending it didn't happen.,l

As for the rest of your statement, you again pretend that if you can find some perhaps valid reason for Curiel to need be recused, you will somehow delete from our memories how Trump emphasized that Curiel is Mexican, Mexican, MEXICAN.

Yeah, keep ignoring that stuff, keep substituting our actual reality with your own, and perhaps in that parallel universe you've created in your mind Trump isn't a racist. In our actual universe he is.

Also did I ever "hold up myself" as unbiased?

I gave you the quotes. The quotes are real. You want me to keep watching something that defends Trump without even bothering to list the quote that is being defended. No, I wasted enough of my time, Molyneux had nothing of value to add to the discussion, and neither do you.

---

And let me repeat, your obsessiveness with arguing about whether Curiel should have recused himself or not, COMPLETELY MISSES THE *censored*ING POINT, which is Trump repeatedly emphasizing the Mexican-ness of this Mexican who is incidentally a Mexican, and repeatedly giving that as the reason that Curiel should recuse himself.

Unfortunately for you you can't rewrite Trump's statements so that they would be saying something different instead, and any reason that you give after the fact have nothing to do with the reason that Trump gave, which is that Curiel was a Mexican, Mexican, Mexican.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #753 on: May 17, 2020, 05:21:26 PM »
Damn liberal media never has anything good to say about the Pinkertons breaking heads, and never has anything to say about coal mines except when they collapse and bury entire families alive.

Sometimes if you're press is always bad, it's because you deserve it.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #754 on: May 17, 2020, 05:53:26 PM »
Quote
Sometimes if you're press is always bad, it's because you deserve it.

Yes, Trump and his stooges are in the news a lot...a lot!

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #755 on: May 17, 2020, 06:58:56 PM »
...Should I be forced to watch anything you like, no matter the length? That's a well-known tactic. I'm not obliged to waste my time. I watched from the start all the way up to the point you said (the 12 min mark), and the disinformation expert Molyneux hadn't even bothered to quote the Trump's statements that I quoted, the ones that made it clear that the thing was about Curiel being Mexican, Mexican and more Mexican. Obviously he'll try to make fun of people who react to the statements, without even bothering to quote what the actual Trump statement was, exactly because the Trump statement was so *censored*ing damning that it couldn't possibly be defended, except by pretending it didn't happen.

Starting at the 12 minute mark Molyneux documented the real quotes and Curiel's resumé was documented. I did not say you had to watch the whole thing. I purposefully gave you the 12-minute start point so you could get past the introductory part where Molyneux documented the disinformation which was put out during the campaign. THEN, he went about disproving it all and proving Judge Curiel was on the wrong side of the law, and that Trump's actual statements were never racist. Do not pretend you are so above it all and too busy to discover how wrong you are.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #756 on: June 05, 2020, 08:51:26 AM »
Trump has begun to build new sections of his wall.  Now we see what was obvious to everyone who gave only a second's thought to how effective it would be:

Quote
[Title]People are sawing through and climbing over Trump’s border wall. Now contractors are being asked for ideas to make it less vulnerable.
...
U.S. Customs and Border Protection has asked contractors for help making President Trump’s border wall more difficult to climb over and cut through, an acknowledgment that the design currently being installed across hundreds of miles of the U.S.-Mexico boundary remains vulnerable.
...
“We have an adaptive adversary; regardless of materials, nothing is impenetrable if given unlimited time and tools,” the agency said. “Walls provide the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) the ability to slow and stop potential crossings. That means building wall will deter some people from attempting to cross, while slowing the efforts of those who still try.”

The public notice is the first indication CBP officials do not think the steel bollard design they selected from prototypes in 2017 is sufficiently formidable to achieve that goal.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #757 on: June 05, 2020, 11:12:05 AM »
]https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1UtphgTqEBA/Xo49NDGEgbI/AAAAAAAAk_0/ESJyLrdrWwAPYN7etCoR1b4XkdpGhiTlgCLcBGAsYHQ/s640/20.jpg

Donald Trump is the first racist in history to have:
...dated a black woman 
...deported an ex-Nazi 
...Upgraded MLK's birthplace to a national historic park 
...posthumously pardoned legendary boxer Jack Johnson 
...kissed the Western Wall 
...loved his Jewish grandchildren 
...established an Opportunity & Revitalization Council to
   restore insalubrious black neighborhoods 
...signed a major criminal reform bill 
...granted Alice Johnson clemency 
...loaned his personal jet to Nelson Mandela 
...declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel 
...moved the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem 
...overseen the lowest black employment in history 
...denounced David Duke over 20 years ago 
...been given a lifetime achievement award after paving a way for blacks to
    enter corporate America…

Worst.  Racist.  Ever.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #758 on: June 05, 2020, 11:50:53 AM »
Trump has begun to build new sections of his wall.  Now we see what was obvious to everyone who gave only a second's thought to how effective it would be:

Quote
[Title]People are sawing through and climbing over Trump’s border wall. Now contractors are being asked for ideas to make it less vulnerable.
...
U.S. Customs and Border Protection has asked contractors for help making President Trump’s border wall more difficult to climb over and cut through, an acknowledgment that the design currently being installed across hundreds of miles of the U.S.-Mexico boundary remains vulnerable.
...
“We have an adaptive adversary; regardless of materials, nothing is impenetrable if given unlimited time and tools,” the agency said. “Walls provide the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) the ability to slow and stop potential crossings. That means building wall will deter some people from attempting to cross, while slowing the efforts of those who still try.”

The public notice is the first indication CBP officials do not think the steel bollard design they selected from prototypes in 2017 is sufficiently formidable to achieve that goal.

I'm pretty sure nobody on here said the wall would be incapable of being defeated. It was expected that the wall would be defeated.

What the wall does do, is slow them down, and gives Border Patrol more ability to detect it, and more time to respond to the breach once it happens.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #759 on: June 05, 2020, 12:27:51 PM »
Quote
What the wall does do, is slow them down, and gives Border Patrol more ability to detect it, and more time to respond to the breach once it happens.

In other words, the wall doesn't work.

Winds can blow it over.
People can saw through it.
People can climb over it.
People can dig under it.

A wise man once said:

Quote
“If there’s a concrete wall in front of you, go through it, go over it, go around it,” Trump told graduates. “But get to the other side of that wall.”

Exactly right, Donald.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #760 on: June 05, 2020, 01:30:38 PM »
Quote
What the wall does do, is slow them down, and gives Border Patrol more ability to detect it, and more time to respond to the breach once it happens.

In other words, the wall doesn't work.

 ::)

Now you're just being obtuse. It does work, it just cannot be a 100% effective measure on its own. What it does do is enhance the effectiveness of every other layer of security along the border.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #761 on: June 05, 2020, 02:48:35 PM »
I think everyone can admit that a wall is more effective than no wall. The real discussion is whether it is cost effective. How many entries does it prevent per dollar spent?

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #762 on: June 05, 2020, 03:08:08 PM »
I'm still wondering why we can't field a thousand unarmed UAV, or even consumer drones, and actually total up how many people are crossing in unwalled areas. That would be the basis for a model that tells us if the delay provided by a wall would allow for N% more apprehensions.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #763 on: June 05, 2020, 03:10:26 PM »
I'm still wondering why we can't field a thousand unarmed UAV, or even consumer drones, and actually total up how many people are crossing in unwalled areas. That would be the basis for a model that tells us if the delay provided by a wall would allow for N% more apprehensions.

Because it's not about being cost effective, it's about posturing.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #764 on: June 05, 2020, 03:24:29 PM »
I'm still wondering why we can't field a thousand unarmed UAV, or even consumer drones, and actually total up how many people are crossing in unwalled areas. That would be the basis for a model that tells us if the delay provided by a wall would allow for N% more apprehensions.

Because it's not about being cost effective, it's about posturing.

What have you got to lose?  8)

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #765 on: June 05, 2020, 04:01:18 PM »
Oh, the smarm :).

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #766 on: June 05, 2020, 08:45:27 PM »
What the wall does do, is slow them down, and gives Border Patrol more ability to detect it, and more time to respond to the breach once it happens.

That is why we already had walls and barriers in the places we do - any place where a delay is benefecial - walls and barriers have been enacted many many years ago.  Other places are so far from population or such difficult terrain to cross that there is no marginal benefit to putting a wall there - the border patrol can pick them up at their leisure.  That is why Bush Jr. made a token effort than gave up.  He put a small amount of wall in a wilderness that already required significant expertise to cross.  There simply aren't any spots that it will be useful for illegal immigrants nor to dissuade asylum seekers.

A wall can only add about 5-10 minutes to crossing times.  So they are only beneficial when extremely close to a major city where the crosser can disappear.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #767 on: August 18, 2020, 12:37:48 PM »
Mueller report a 'hoax' or a 'witch-hunt'?  Republican-controlled senate report says "not so much, no".

G.O.P.-Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia

Quote
WASHINGTON — A sprawling report released Tuesday by a Republican-controlled Senate panel that spent three years investigating Russia’s 2016 election interference laid out an extensive web of contacts between Trump campaign advisers and Russian government officials and other Russians, including some with ties to the country’s intelligence services.

The report by the Senate Intelligence Committee, totaling nearly 1,000 pages, provided a bipartisan Senate imprimatur for an extraordinary set of facts: The Russian government undertook an extensive campaign to try to sabotage the 2016 American election to help Mr. Trump become president, and some members of Mr. Trump’s circle of advisers were open to the help from an American adversary.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #768 on: August 20, 2020, 12:01:19 PM »
At the risk of not starting a completely new thread... It's just staggering the number of Trump campaign and administration officials that have been indicted, pled guilty or have been convicted.  I've lost track of the rogues' gallery, which would likely fill a most-wanted wall at any police precinct, but here's the latest: Steve Bannon indicted for defrauding donors.

Quote
Steve Bannon, 'We Build the Wall' organizers arrested, charged with defrauding donors

Steve Bannon, a former adviser to President Trump, was among four suspects arrested Thursday and indicted in connection with an online fundraising campaign that allegedly defrauded donors of hundreds of thousands of dollars, the Justice Department announced.

I know we've come to expect Trump associates to be criminals, but it's getting to the point where we expect someone to be voted off the island every week.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #769 on: August 21, 2020, 09:40:55 PM »
Mueller report a 'hoax' or a 'witch-hunt'?  Republican-controlled senate report says "not so much, no".

G.O.P.-Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia

Colour me unsurprised, but it's been 3 days since this report dropped, it details probably 10 times as many problematic actions as were uncovered in the 8 Benghazi investigations, not to mention that the pattern of concerning activities on the part of Trump towards Russia have continued over the succeeding 4 years, and yet... radio silence from those who thought misrepresenting the motivations for the Benghazi attack for less than a week rose to the level of censuring the Obama administration for several years.

The report details, among other things, how Russia took advantage of Trump's team's inexperience, how several members of the team worked closely with people who turned out to be Russian intelligence agents, how a member of the team worked with Russian intelligence agents to promote the idea that Ukraine, and not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election - basically, extensive cooperation between the Trump campaign and transition team and Russian intelligence agents and people with "significant connections" to the Russian government and Russian intelligence.

I'm simply incredulous that so many conservatives simply do not care that the Trump admin has effectively advanced Russian foreign policy at the expense of US security.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« Reply #770 on: September 02, 2020, 11:07:48 AM »
At this point, you would think that the Trump administration would bend over backwards to avoid any possible association with Russian election interference.

Yet DHS withheld July intelligence bulletin calling out Russian attack on Biden’s mental health. Coincidentally of course, this is the same tack that the Trump campaign is using to attack Biden. 

WTF?  Invariably, Trump seems to avoid calling out Russia even when it would seem to be in his best interest, and he's been doing it for 4 years now.