"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Impeach Trump now.
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
Indict the living shit out of all of them.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
They need to make one final attempt at passing the comically shitty tax "reform" bill and I will be disappointed with anything that doesn't land Trump, Kushner and Sessions in prison so I can wait a little bit longer.
Flynn flipping was expected but still interesting considering the discussion from a few months ago about Trump possibly trying to assure his cronies that he'd pardon them. Given Flynn's stature you'd have to wonder who they're expecting to be able to go after based on his testimonial. Consider Kushner's possible role in that business with the UNSC resolution for example.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
And there it is: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...contact-russia
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I can't even imagined the stupidity Trump will sink to when his own family gets legal problems. I wouldn't even be surprised if his reaction will cause him more problems than the actual investigation.
Then again, I'm not sure anything can surprise me at thise point.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Odds of one of the main players experiencing serious health problems in the coming three months increasing
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I have to wonder when he'll start firing off pardons.
Fuzzy/ Loki, does he have to wait until a conviction, or can he pardon Flynn right now so he won't feel compelled to help Mueller? And don't even say 'oh, he wouldn't do that, it would look really really bad' because he would. He is really really bad and he doesn't, apparently, try to hide it. (Maybe he is hiding how bad he truly is, but still appears way bad despite the efforts.)
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
The problem with Flynn is that if he's guilty of lying to the FBI it hardly makes him credible. Need a recorded conversation or some other physical evidence or its moot. And even if it isn't moot the partisan way the impeachment process works means Trump could be guilty as sin (like Clinton was) and still not get kicked out of office.
LOL at the 'but Clinton!' in there.
That's great.
I do wonder if the 'but he lied so he's not credible' line is something the GOP/Trump will try though.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
One professor pointed out that one advantage of charging him with just lying is that, if Trump were to pardon him, they'd still be able bring a number of other charges against him later. He can issue a general pardon but that's both dodgy and costly and wouldn't cover crimes at the state level either.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
He could use his pardon power now. It would constitute obstruction of justice but he could do it.
But that's been true for a while (I might ahve indicated otherwise back when Trump pardoned Arpaio. If so I was wrong then, one of the differences between the federal pardon and the more local state one here in CA)
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
It depends what the terms of the plea agreement are. It would very likely come with an immunity agreement about what he was providing other testimony on. Of course, a pardon could itself violate the terms of such an immunity agreement.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Lmao if Flynn gets pardoned and then has to try to politely turn it down
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Just to clarify - Bill Clinton was beyond any shadow of a doubt guilty of perjury but was not found guilty by the senate.
What was he perjuring himself about again?
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Benghazi. Bleachbit!
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
He lied under oath about having sexual relations with Monica in a sexual harassment case Paula Jones had filed against him.
The time for a pardon would have been before the plea agreement. And yes, he could pardon at any time.
Hope is the denial of reality
That was it.
And what's this Trump thing about again?
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Hope is the denial of reality
Supposedly collusion with Russia to influence an election. While it certainly wouldn't surprise me if elements of his campaign did I think its highly unlikely even he would have been that dumb.
That being said, the point of bringing up Clinton was to show that in American politics impeachment has nothing to do with guilt or innocence.
Wrong Clinton, do try to keep up.
That's quite a bit more serious than the Clinton thing, isn't it?
Say, what was the name of the other chap who was impeached, or did he resign before they could impeach him?
Sure it was.That being said, the point of bringing up Clinton was to show that in American politics impeachment has nothing to do with guilt or innocence.
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Yes, I have read that rant before and I found it to be deeply flawed, unlike the other critique to which I linked. Most of the text consists of ranting about Abramson's character flaws, the existence of which I haven't disputed. His dissection of the problems with Abramson's #russiagate tweets misses the mark, however, perhaps because he apparently spent 10 minutes on Google for that part of the rant.
Abramson's been consistent about one thing: traditional news-media--whether cable or newspapers or established news sites--have, he believes, been much slower to report/highlight things about #russiagate that he believes are important. Instead, he says that this information has first to a great extent been spread by freelance journalists and independent "reporters" of various kinds on social media. He alleges that traditional news media has always been behind the curve, reporting important things very late. In light of that, it isn't sufficient to reference a NYT story published just before he posted a list of things where he feels news media were slow, because he contends that organizations like NYT were slow compared to others who reported it long before they did. This is of course a question of fact that can be verified or refuted, but Weindling does not do so. Frankly, I would be surprised if it were not as Abramson says. If his primary activity is to peddle disparate poorly contextualized or poorly sourced information--irrelevant information, rumours etc--floating around on social media, then he and others like him SHOULD be faster than traditional news media such as NYT, who may have to sit on information for a longer time until they can corroborate it based on reports from multiple reliable sources.
I find it surprising that, of all the substantive criticisms of Abramson's tweeting that you could've brought to this discussion, you settled for this, the least persuasive. Your posts suggest that you haven't read these threads, which is perhaps the reason why you keep posting these gotchas that you apparently think I wasn't aware of.
Speaking of gotchas, this was funny:
Twitter Link
[...] No independent research that he does outside his job that he already (presumably) gets paid to do.
[...]
UPDATE: After publishing, Abramson reached out to Paste to clarify that he is not paid by either The Huffington Post or the Dallas Morning News.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I know which Clinton you meant. I was trying to help you update yourself on the current GOP line.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Your example does not prove this statement. Guilt/innocence may have an influence on impeachment greater than zero without being sufficient all on its own.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I'm surprised that you continue to stand up for someone who has repeatedly made shit up. Not as a one-off mistake, but consistently. Apparently, because you agree with the general most of what he says, you're willing to ignore the fact the guy peddles in lies and conspiracies.
Hope is the denial of reality
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote