oh i think most of the stuff I post is pretty damn easy to understand. I really have no interest in reading articles that you post. i 'm wearing mine but for you to claim that you are not politicizing this issue is ridiculous. I'm not much of a name caller. It seems to be a bit judgmental but I would say that I have as little patience for hypocrites as you do for non-mask wearers.Originally Posted by FredLynn
The only difference being one side (conservatives) protested peaceably while the left looted, burned, pillaged and injured.
Well said!!!!
Yes, it's interesting that the conservative protests are the ones that didn't get hijacked by any bad actors...
Championships since purchase by John Henry group: Red Sox 4 Yankees 1
The Red Sox are 8-1 in their last 9 postseason games against the Yankees.
NYT Opinion Editor resigns in protest. Says she has been consistently bullied, harrassed, & treated to a hostile work environment...
* As though we didn't know this already. The totalitarian Liberal Progressive Left is out of control, enjoy absolute power in the msm, and are bent on turning this country into a truly Orwellian culture.
Remember when the Left used to castigate, vilify, and demonize conservative Christians and other conservatives for their "narrow minded" views, and their often obnoxious, offensive, and INTOLLERANT views?
Well, my have times changed. Just when the nation finally got to the point where most Christians finally figured out that MOST, even most Christians, understood that intolerance is inherently wrong... Even MORALLY WRONG! In fact, most Christians now get that hammering people with their moralizing views is simply wrong and counterproductive. It turns people off, and people see the inherent hypocrisy in HATING & BERATING your neighbor.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the new Liberal Progressives are the new haters. I've never in my life seen such intolerance! In fact, it is this intolerance of other views that led to the shut down of our first Jacko Covid thread. The hatred and disdain is palpable. It's obvious. Through the last presidential election, and for years before, Liberal Progressives learned how to better demonize and marginalize their political enemies.
They truly hate Republicans and Conservatives, the public is quickly learning that lesson. It's not just Trump they hate! They hated Romney, McCain, GWB, Bush sr., Dole, Reagan, and any other Republican near piwer
https://www.washingtonpost.com/media...ew-york-times/
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...resigns-360730
https://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...es-resignation
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/14/media...mes/index.html
* need you read more with this PREDICTABLE CNN HEADLINE?
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...155524356.html
https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/bar...es-1234706072/
https://www.foxnews.com/media/bari-w...times-bullying
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/5...rk-environment
Weiss wrote:
"But the lessons that ought to have followed the election—lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society—have not been learned,” Weiss wrote. “Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few ...
Weiss then wrote that “Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times,” but social media acts as the ultimate editor.
https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter
If we don't wake up soon, and speak out on the INCREDIBLE INTOLLERANCE on the Left, especially with most new Liberal Progressives, we are going to wake up one day in a very terrifying Orwellian Totalitarian Far-Left socialist America.
RedSoxDirtdog 19
Calm down. I've been tamed.
BETTER!
Poetry, or "an economy of words," has never been my strong suit!
So simple! So obvious! So illustrative!
The juxtaposition of what outraged R's, vs. what outrages D's is PERFECT! PRICELESS! It honestly says all that needs to be said about both points of view.
One side is willing to push for political change through peaceful protest and real civil disobedience. The other side, Dems, are willing to force political change by any means necessary, and it becomes obvious that the protesters truly HATE THIS COUNTRY, AND ALL IT HAS EVER STOOD FOR.
Profound!
+10
RedSoxDirtdog 19
Calm down. I've been tamed.
I don't much care if you read articles that I post or not, tbh. I was simply trying to document facts I posted. If you are interested in that proof, fine; if not, fine too. No one is mandated to read anything here.
I also don't care if you believe that masks, to me, are a public health issue that OTHERS have turned into a political issue. Wearing masks decrease the amount of time we will all have to deal with this. This virus is neither left or right leaning. Its dumb that others have turned it into a political football......counterproductive. The countries that have been the most successful in dealing with the pandemic have avoided it.
Last edited by FredLynn; 07-14-2020 at 02:11 PM.
The evidence was insufficient to "charge" which is a very low bar, essentially they had no evidence against Trump or the campaign of conspiracy. If there was, feel free to list it. Suspicion is not evidence.
The King of TalkSox has Spoken.
And the NY Times calls itself the Paper of Record. They give themselves these titles. Sort of like America's Most Beloved Ballpark. LOL!!
The King of TalkSox has Spoken.
I never said the Dem care more. You implied that.
Not thinking masks help is not an example of not caring; it's an example of ignorance. Now, before you start accusing me of calling Repubs more ignorant, I'm not, maybe on this issue, but not over all, and that is assuming the study was accurate.
I do feel like the study is accurate, because the people protesting mask mandates and stay at home orders are mostly right-wingers. I don't think the view this as a health issue but as a liberty issue.
When you say it's gonna happen now
When exactly do you mean?
No offense - it is all tiring me out. I'm pretty sure that I am capable of finding as many articles written these days by people that counter some of which you can post that come also from reliable sources. i'm not sure that documenting facts based on much that is happening these days is particularly sensible either. FTR - I'm a mask wearer by choice not because someone is forcing me to wear one nor am I particularly concerned about myself. Others on both sides have certainly turned it into a political football. Donald Trump and his believers do not have the market cornered on the stupidity either. there is more than enough for both sides. If I was into counting jackasses, i'd say it's a pretty even gig no matter how mush people hate and want to blame anything and everything on this President. Once again - stupidity personified.
bullshit - I implied nothing of the sort!
i think that your first sentence a pretty clear implication of what I said to you. I didn't write that. The implication clearly being that Democrats just care a bit more about society in general. That is just ridiculous.
I do NOT think that Republicans care less (or more) about the country than Democrats. They just care differently; they have different priorities, obviously. Wearing a mask is not a political issue for me. I just want to get rid of this plague as quickly as possible and those who value "personal liberty" over public health are impediments to making that happen. There are times you have to sacrifice a little person freedom for the good of society-like not driving drunk. Asian countries understand this and do it a LOT better than we do; most countries do.
I understand that you will not agree with this, but if someone makes the decision that their personal freedom is worth more than public health (and, by the way, the economy of the nation) that is not as *good* a decision as sacrificing a little freedom for a little while. You have made that personal decision, and I think its the correct one. Just today the head of the CDC said that if everyone wore masks we could get rid of this in 4-8 weeks. ITS NOT THAT TOUGH TO DO!
1) The DOJ believes it cannot charge a sitting president.
2) The "bar" for conspiracy is very high due to the need for proving intent and the "value" of some of the things the Russians gave the campaign.
3) Much was left out of the report, but the report does mention several events that are "evidence" of "collusion" but apparently insufficient for "conspiracy:'
Here are some I found from the link provided below:
1. Trump was receptive to a Campaign national security adviser’s (George Papadopoulos) pursuit of a back channel to Putin.
2. Kremlin operatives provided the Campaign a preview of the Russian plan to distribute stolen emails.
3. The Trump Campaign chairman and deputy chairman (Paul Manafort and Rick Gates) knowingly shared internal polling data and information on battleground states with a Russian spy; and the Campaign chairman worked with the Russian spy on a pro-Russia “peace” plan for Ukraine.
4. The Trump Campaign chairman periodically shared internal polling data with the Russian spy with the expectation it would be shared with Putin-linked oligarch, Oleg Deripaska.
5. Trump Campaign chairman Manafort expected Trump’s winning the presidency would mean Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance Deripaska’s interests in the United States and elsewhere.
6. Trump Tower meeting: (1) On receiving an email offering derogatory information on Clinton coming from a Russian government official, Donald Trump Jr. “appears to have accepted that offer;” (2) members of the Campaign discussed the Trump Tower meeting beforehand; (3) Donald Trump Jr. told the Russians during the meeting that Trump could revisit the issue of the Magnitsky Act if elected.
7. A Trump Campaign official told the Special Counsel he “felt obliged to object” to a GOP Platform change on Ukraine because it contradicted Trump’s wishes; however, the investigation did not establish that Gordon was directed by Trump.
8. Russian military hackers may have followed Trump’s July 27, 2016 public statement “Russia if you’re listening …” within hours by targeting Clinton’s personal office for the first time.
9. Trump requested campaign affiliates to get Clinton’s emails, which resulted in an individual apparently acting in coordination with the Campaign claiming to have successfully contacted Russian hackers.
10. The Trump Campaign—and Trump personally—appeared to have advanced knowledge of future WikiLeaks releases.
11. The Trump Campaign coordinated campaign-related public communications based on future WikiLeaks releases.
12. Michael Cohen, on behalf of the Trump Organization, brokered a secret deal for a Trump Tower Moscow project directly involving Putin’s inner circle, at least until June 2016.
13. During the presidential transition, Jared Kushner and Eric Prince engaged in secret back channel communications with Russian agents. (1) Kushner suggested to the Russian Ambassador that they use a secure communication line from within the Russian Embassy to speak with Russian Generals; and (2) Prince and Kushner’s friend Rick Gerson conducted secret back channel meetings with a Putin agent to develop a plan for U.S.-Russian relations.
14. During the presidential transition, in coordination with other members of the Transition Team, Michael Flynn spoke with the Russian Ambassador to prevent a tit for tat Russian response to the Obama administration’s imposition of sanctions for election interference; the Russians agreed not to retaliate saying they wanted a good relationship with the incoming administration.
During the course of 2016, Trump Campaign associates failed to report any of the Russian/WikiLeaks overtures to federal law enforcement, publicly denied any contacts with Russians/WikiLeaks, and actively encouraged the public to doubt that Russia was behind the hacking and distribution of stolen emails.
One qualification before proceeding to the analysis in Part II: a significant amount of relevant information was unavailable to Mueller due to four factors. First, as the Report states, “several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the Office,” and “those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference.” Second, President Trump’s interference in the investigation also appears to have stymied the investigation. A key example is Paul Manafort’s failure to cooperate with the Special Counsel because he was apparently led to believe that President Trump would pardon him. Third, some individuals used encrypted communications or deleted their communications. Fourth, some of the individuals who “cooperated” with the investigation (e.g., Steve Bannon) appear to have been deceptive or not fully forthcoming in their dealings with the Special Counsel. Several individuals failed to recall the content of important conversations with Trump or other Campaign associates. The Report states, “Even when individuals testified or agreed to be interviewed, they sometimes provided information that was false or incomplete.”
Finally, some tips for reading the Mueller Report. It is important to keep in mind that the Report’s analysis is about whether or not to prosecute someone for a crime. Furthermore, statements that the investigation “did not establish” something occurred are not the same as saying there was “no evidence” that it occurred. The Report has clear ways of saying when the investigation found no evidence. It conveys the absence of any evidence when, for example, it states the investigation “did not identify evidence” or “did not uncover evidence” that something occurred. Even then, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. When there is “evidence of absence,” the Special Counsel was willing to say the investigation “established” effectively that something did not occur. For example, the Report states that the investigation “established” that interactions between the Russian Ambassador and Campaign officials at certain locations were “brief, public, and non-substantive.” That finding excludes the possibility that something more nefarious occurred in those particular interactions. A keen eye on these kinds of distinctions is important when reading the Report itself.
(see part 2 below)
When you say it's gonna happen now
When exactly do you mean?
Posting Permissions
