SPYGATE; SMOKING GUN

[billisonboard]

Jun 19, 2018 17:55:43 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

... I wish you expressed the same unyielding support for moderation decisions.
...

I expressed support for nothing in the post. I simply pointed out a factual error.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 19, 2018 18:53:50 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 19, 2018 17:55:43 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

... I wish you expressed the same unyielding support for moderation decisions.
...

I expressed support for nothing in the post. I simply pointed out a factual error.

Perhaps I'm misreading you.

It seemed to me the idea Ms. Clinton committed no prosecutable crimes couldn't be blown out of your head with dynamite. Come statute or precedent, laptop or mobile, doctored language or tarmac meeting, bit bleach or purged e-mails, Fifth Amendment or destroyed backup, national security breach or special access program, you shall hold your ground. Mr. Comey said "we can't prosecute"; he knows best; issue resolved.

If I'm mistaken about this, my apologies.

If not, I hope I can count on your unwavering support for the verdicts I issue.

[billisonboard]

Jun 19, 2018 23:39:08 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jun 19, 2018 18:53:50 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

I expressed support for nothing in the post. I simply pointed out a factual error.

Perhaps I'm misreading you.

It seemed to me the idea Ms. Clinton committed no prosecutable crimes couldn't be blown out of your head with dynamite. Come statute or precedent, laptop or mobile, doctored language or tarmac meeting, bit bleach or purged e-mails, Fifth Amendment or destroyed backup, national security breach or special access program, you shall hold your ground. Mr. Comey said "we can't prosecute"; he knows best; issue resolved.

If I'm mistaken about this, my apologies.

If not, I hope I can count on your unwavering support for the verdicts I issue.

Not being an attorney nor a prosecutor, I can't determine what is a prosecutable crime. I do rely on professionals and experts to make good decisions in their areas of expertise. I remember a time I thought an audible notice of a new post in thread I had participated in would be cool. You informed me such things were not done here. I gave you unwavering support for your verdict. I don't think you have the same level of expertise in moderating.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 19, 2018 11:31:59 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I read a journal article about this, where two statistician looked at all the variables, returns, market factors, etc. at the time. Their conclusion was that a trader with no special inside information would have a 1-in-23-trillion chance at making the returns the Clintons did, which I believe was the most favourable estimate.

Reasonable observers during the 2016 election knew Ms. Clinton was crooked. But the character question in the election was: was she more crooked than Pres. Trump? Personally I didn't think so and still don't. The man lies, fabricates, misdirects, exploits, betrays, wastes money, punishes honesty, and errs in judgment on a weekly basis. I try to limit how much evil I speak of world leaders hence I'll leave it at that.

I was worried that Ms. Clinton would get into the White House and start WWIII. It remains to be seen whether Pres. Trump can manage to avoid the same during his tenure.

Money and power. Power and money.

well, sadly the article you read was full of horseshit, because Clinton did NONE of those trades.

they were done by a family friend named Blair.  Blair had considerable knowledge with these trades.  he was an expert.  and it was not a single trade, it was about half a dozen trades.  and, to be clear, the Clinton's were also DOWN $100k at one point.  edit: $40k was made on a SINGLE short trade.

i am not saying that nothing fishy happened.  having "friends" like Blair is suspicious enough.  but the fact that she was a novice was irrelevant.  she had so little capital at risk that the astronomical gains were all gravy to her and her husband. 

oh, and not to quibble, but the journal in question said 1:31 trillion, not 23. 

[Opti]

Jun 19, 2018 16:42:03 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

There's no question that Trump is the most transparent, and possibly the cleanest politician we've ever had. This is a reasonable conclusion because if there was ONE SPEC of dirt on him, we'd have seen it by now. And you know that I'm right about that.

In the meantime, over here in reality-- the dumpster fire that is the DOJ and FBI continues to rage...

Peter Strzok VERY quietly escorted from FBI building on FRIDAY (what day is today?) and not one bit of coverage-- the fake news is stuck on the fake "border crisis" which has been status quo since 1996 When Clinton signed the current law.

FBI Agent Peter Strzok Escorted Out Of Office Last Friday- Kept Hidden Until Today

theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/06/19/fbi-agent-peter-strzok-escorted-out-of-office-last-friday-kept-hidden-until-today/

Congratulations. That may be the most unaware statement I have seen in a long time.

You have to ignore a lot of what we have seen to even make that statement straight face or marketing game face pasted on. Trump showed questionable judgment even in the campaign when he seemingly inexplicably began promising Russia things like Crimea and the Ukraine. And it went on. His son publicly admitted he was seeking dirt on Clinton from the Russians. Trump himself leaked secret info to the Russians just days into office. Then there's the usual Trump stuff like cover up payments to Stormy and he can't quite decide what the story is. That's far from transparent. At best its confused and obstruction. Which leads to Trumps biggest dirty deeds. Obstruction. Firing people, slandering people, lying to the public, anything he can do so he can keep whatever adoring masses he can bamboozle.

He showed early on he was dirty and with questionable judgment. By promising things to Russia even before the election demonstrates he was either a naïve, unaware politician or a bought/paid for one. Neither is a good outcome, but the first could have been corrected for if true. He is a dirty politician with levers apparently being pulled by our number one rival government, Russia. That alone may make him the dirtiest and most questionable politician of our age. Then there is how he is handling China, North Korea.

[Opti]

Jun 20, 2018 0:35:31 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jun 19, 2018 11:31:59 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I read a journal article about this, where two statistician looked at all the variables, returns, market factors, etc. at the time. Their conclusion was that a trader with no special inside information would have a 1-in-23-trillion chance at making the returns the Clintons did, which I believe was the most favourable estimate.

Reasonable observers during the 2016 election knew Ms. Clinton was crooked. But the character question in the election was: was she more crooked than Pres. Trump? Personally I didn't think so and still don't. The man lies, fabricates, misdirects, exploits, betrays, wastes money, punishes honesty, and errs in judgment on a weekly basis. I try to limit how much evil I speak of world leaders hence I'll leave it at that.

I was worried that Ms. Clinton would get into the White House and start WWIII. It remains to be seen whether Pres. Trump can manage to avoid the same during his tenure.

Money and power. Power and money.

well, sadly the article you read was full of horseshit, because Clinton did NONE of those trades.

they were done by a family friend named Blair.  Blair had considerable knowledge with these trades.  he was an expert.  and it was not a single trade, it was about half a dozen trades.  and, to be clear, the Clinton's were also DOWN $100k at one point.  edit: $40k was made on a SINGLE short trade.

i am not saying that nothing fishy happened.  having "friends" like Blair is suspicious enough.  but the fact that she was a novice was irrelevant.  she had so little capital at risk that the astronomical gains were all gravy to her and her husband. 

oh, and not to quibble, but the journal in question said 1:31 trillion, not 23. 

Smart, educated observers know Hillary Clinton has a fascination with making money and a horrible tendency to leverage relationships to invest her own money. If she ever breaks the law doing this, she will deserve whatever penalties the law provides. Thus far, she seems to have been smart enough to remain on the correct side of the law.

Smart educated observers know that Trump has a history of not staying on the right side of the law. He has been known to use bribes after law-breaking in order to stay out of jail. This is not conjecture. His own father lent him money by placing a large bet at his casino and not taking it with him. This was all done to illegally circumvent paying debtors named in the BK settlement for that very casino. He has cozied up to ranking politicians in both NY and NJ to get his way.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 20, 2018 0:35:31 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jun 19, 2018 11:31:59 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I read a journal article about this, where two statistician looked at all the variables, returns, market factors, etc. at the time. Their conclusion was that a trader with no special inside information would have a 1-in-23-trillion chance at making the returns the Clintons did, which I believe was the most favourable estimate.

Reasonable observers during the 2016 election knew Ms. Clinton was crooked. But the character question in the election was: was she more crooked than Pres. Trump? Personally I didn't think so and still don't. The man lies, fabricates, misdirects, exploits, betrays, wastes money, punishes honesty, and errs in judgment on a weekly basis. I try to limit how much evil I speak of world leaders hence I'll leave it at that.

I was worried that Ms. Clinton would get into the White House and start WWIII. It remains to be seen whether Pres. Trump can manage to avoid the same during his tenure.

Money and power. Power and money.

well, sadly the article you read was full of horseshit, because Clinton did NONE of those trades.

they were done by a family friend named Blair.  Blair had considerable knowledge with these trades.  he was an expert.  and it was not a single trade, it was about half a dozen trades.  and, to be clear, the Clinton's were also DOWN $100k at one point.  edit: $40k was made on a SINGLE short trade.

i am not saying that nothing fishy happened.  having "friends" like Blair is suspicious enough.  but the fact that she was a novice was irrelevant.  she had so little capital at risk that the astronomical gains were all gravy to her and her husband. 

oh, and not to quibble, but the journal in question said 1:31 trillion, not 23. 

The odds pertained to "experts". The question asked by the paper was: what is the likelihood you'd make this kind of ROI in this time period if you were an "expert" but bound (as most experts are) by outside-only information, i.e. you have no insider info. The answer is: not bloody likely.

As for who's guilty--herself or the trader--let me put it this way: if you hand me $10K to trade in Bitcoin, and I hand you back $1M--a 10,000% return--12 months later in a year when the average return is 50% and a handful of extraordinarily lucky souls make 1,000%, I should hope the first thing you'd do is report your windfall and me to the SEC. You'd almost certainly forfeit your profits in the end, but it would be the responsible, moral thing to do. And unlike Bitcoin, the cattle futures market doesn't often see double-digit (let alone five-digit) returns in a year.

Thank you for correcting the figure.

[happyhoix]

Jun 19, 2018 16:42:03 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

There's no question that Trump is the most transparent, and possibly the cleanest politician we've ever had. This is a reasonable conclusion because if there was ONE SPEC of dirt on him, we'd have seen it by now. And you know that I'm right about that.

In the meantime, over here in reality-- the dumpster fire that is the DOJ and FBI continues to rage...

Peter Strzok VERY quietly escorted from FBI building on FRIDAY (what day is today?) and not one bit of coverage-- the fake news is stuck on the fake "border crisis" which has been status quo since 1996 When Clinton signed the current law.

FBI Agent Peter Strzok Escorted Out Of Office Last Friday- Kept Hidden Until Today

theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/06/19/fbi-agent-peter-strzok-escorted-out-of-office-last-friday-kept-hidden-until-today/

I'm not even going to bother anymore.

I already had a beer (a nice La Chouffe) and there is a heffeweizen chilling in the fridge. Bonne Soiree ya'll.

[Tennesseer]

Jun 20, 2018 19:10:53 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 19, 2018 16:42:03 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

There's no question that Trump is the most transparent, and possibly the cleanest politician we've ever had. This is a reasonable conclusion because if there was ONE SPEC of dirt on him, we'd have seen it by now. And you know that I'm right about that.

In the meantime, over here in reality-- the dumpster fire that is the DOJ and FBI continues to rage...

Peter Strzok VERY quietly escorted from FBI building on FRIDAY (what day is today?) and not one bit of coverage-- the fake news is stuck on the fake "border crisis" which has been status quo since 1996 When Clinton signed the current law.

Agent Peter Strzok Escorted Out Of Office Last Friday- Kept Hidden Until Today

theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/06/19/fbi-agent-peter-strzok-escorted-out-of-office-last-friday-kept-hidden-until-today/

I'm not even going to bother anymore.

I already had a beer (a nice La Chouffe) and there is a heffeweizen chilling in the fridge. Bonne Soiree ya'll.

Sometimes I wonder if posters are testing jokes here before they use it in a comedy club.

[happyhoix]

Jun 20, 2018 20:25:06 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Jun 20, 2018 19:10:53 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I'm not even going to bother anymore.

I already had a beer (a nice La Chouffe) and there is a heffeweizen chilling in the fridge. Bonne Soiree ya'll.

Sometimes I wonder if posters are testing jokes here before they use it in a comedy club.

My theory is we're part of a political science major's master's thesis experiment.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 20, 2018 20:42:58 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 20, 2018 20:25:06 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Sometimes I wonder if posters are testing jokes here before they use it in a comedy club.

My theory is we're part of a political science major's master's thesis experiment.

What's so "funny"?

It's true that the man was escorted out of the offices, that the media is fixated on immigration, and that nothing has changed in US immigration policy for at least a decade except a modest bump in the rate at which people are being deported. The practices of separating kids from parents, housing people in warehouses, etc. existed long before Pres. Trump ever came along.

Hence what, pray, are you laughing at?

[weltschmerz]

"There's no question that Trump is the most transparent, and possibly the cleanest politician we've ever had."

There's no question that this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

[happyhoix]

Jun 20, 2018 22:22:09 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

"There's no question that Trump is the most transparent, and possibly the cleanest politician we've ever had."

There's no question that this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Yep.

I'll tell you why the FBI agent being escorted out of work didn't get much attention in the media - the enormous, distracting shit show from the POTUS and his fine, handpicked assemblage of grifters drowns out any of the more minor events (which, with any other administration, would have been scandalous first page news).

You can't focus on the kitchen fire when the ship is sinking.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 21, 2018 9:58:17 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 20, 2018 22:22:09 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

"There's no question that Trump is the most transparent, and possibly the cleanest politician we've ever had."

There's no question that this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Yep.

I'll tell you why the FBI agent being escorted out of work didn't get much attention in the media - the enormous, distracting shit show from the POTUS and his fine, handpicked assemblage of grifters drowns out any of the more minor events (which, with any other administration, would have been scandalous first page news).

You can't focus on the kitchen fire when the ship is sinking.

The outcry du jour is about separation of families at the border. While I have my own serious misgivings about the practice, it isn't new, it's practiced in other OECD nations, and there's no logical reason for anyone to be more outraged about it now than five or even ten years ago.

Were you outraged about it five or ten years ago? Of course not.

Why not? Because ignorance is bliss.

Why were you ignorant? Because the media didn't care either. Not when the issue couldn't be wielded as a weapon against a hostile administration.

Why should "the enormous, distracting shit show from the POTUS and his fine, handpicked assemblage of grifters" mean anything to me when it refers to a "scandal" that wasn't a scandal until the media weaponized it? And how can you not feel like a tool being used and manipulated by an enterprise that demonstrably didn't give a damn about children being separated from parents at the border prior to November 2016? You're being played.

Advocating reform to the way the US detains immigrants is a noble cause, and more power to you for taking it up. But it isn't Pres. Trump's show. It's the reality you've been blind to for at least a decade. Put down your torch and pitchfork.

[happyhoix]

Jun 21, 2018 11:20:58 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jun 21, 2018 9:58:17 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Yep.

I'll tell you why the FBI agent being escorted out of work didn't get much attention in the media - the enormous, distracting shit show from the POTUS and his fine, handpicked assemblage of grifters drowns out any of the more minor events (which, with any other administration, would have been scandalous first page news).

You can't focus on the kitchen fire when the ship is sinking.

The outcry du jour is about separation of families at the border. While I have my own serious misgivings about the practice, it isn't new, it's practiced in other OECD nations, and there's no logical reason for anyone to be more outraged about it now than five or even ten years ago.

Were you outraged about it five or ten years ago? Of course not.

Why not? Because ignorance is bliss.

Why were you ignorant? Because the media didn't care either. Not when the issue couldn't be wielded as a weapon against a hostile administration.

Why should "the enormous, distracting shit show from the POTUS and his fine, handpicked assemblage of grifters" mean anything to me when it refers to a "scandal" that wasn't a scandal until the media weaponized it? And how can you not feel like a tool being used and manipulated by an enterprise that demonstrably didn't give a damn about children being separated from parents at the border prior to November 2016? You're being played.

Advocating reform to the way the US detains immigrants is a noble cause, and more power to you for taking it up. But it isn't Pres. Trump's show. It's the reality you've been blind to for at least a decade. Put down your torch and pitchfork.

Seriously, Virgil, you need to read more about this crisis. Many people have posted fact checking links on what is actually going on, so I'm not going to relink more articles, since you're ignoring them, but let me summarize for you - 1) this law has been on the books for a long while, BUT NOT ENFORCED because both the Bush Jr and Obama administrations felt it was inhumane. The kids that were picked up and put in camps prior to April of this year were UNACCOMPANIED MINORS. 2) Stephen Miller advised the Zero Tolerance policy that Sessions deployed JUST THIS APRIL - this policy said that they were going to enforce the existing law to it's fullest possible extent, which meant they would start picking up families that were traveling together, arrest the parent(s) for a federal misdemeanor, and take their kids away, to be held someplace else, for an indefinite amount of time. THIS IS A NEW POLICY JUST STARTED IN APRIL. 3) Trump and Sessions pushed the Zero Tolerance policy because Trump wanted to use this faux crisis to force Congress to approve the money he wants for his Wall (which Mexico mysteriously is still refusing to pay for).  So this is a manufactured crisis, and when it back fired, Trump and all his minions have been spinning as hard as possible to blame the Dems, blame Congress, blame the immigrants, blame Obama - blame anyone they can, even though they were the ones who began the Zero Tolerance policy in April.

Please, I know you're an intelligent guy, please go research Zero Tolerance Policy and see what you find. Read at least 10 different sources, split between the far right and far left, and throw in some international sources like the BBC, and then come back to lecture me on how stupid I am for ignoring a policy that only started this April. While you're at it, throw a glance over at the changes in our asylum policy that now prevent abused women from claiming they can't return home due to the violence there - that's another new change that Trump will attempt to pass off as 'business as usual' because he's a chronic liar.

Because this horrible tent fire is obscuring everything else in the news right now (even the Pope took time to condemn it) no one is paying attention to Paul's blackhat/dark hole conspiracy theory about the FBI agent getting escorted out of the building, even though that's something that would have been important front page news in any other administration.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 21, 2018 11:42:54 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 21, 2018 11:20:58 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

The outcry du jour is about separation of families at the border. While I have my own serious misgivings about the practice, it isn't new, it's practiced in other OECD nations, and there's no logical reason for anyone to be more outraged about it now than five or even ten years ago.

Were you outraged about it five or ten years ago? Of course not.

Why not? Because ignorance is bliss.

Why were you ignorant? Because the media didn't care either. Not when the issue couldn't be wielded as a weapon against a hostile administration.

Why should "the enormous, distracting shit show from the POTUS and his fine, handpicked assemblage of grifters" mean anything to me when it refers to a "scandal" that wasn't a scandal until the media weaponized it? And how can you not feel like a tool being used and manipulated by an enterprise that demonstrably didn't give a damn about children being separated from parents at the border prior to November 2016? You're being played.

Advocating reform to the way the US detains immigrants is a noble cause, and more power to you for taking it up. But it isn't Pres. Trump's show. It's the reality you've been blind to for at least a decade. Put down your torch and pitchfork.

Seriously, Virgil, you need to read more about this crisis. Many people have posted fact checking links on what is actually going on, so I'm not going to relink more articles, since you're ignoring them, but let me summarize for you - 1) this law has been on the books for a long while, BUT NOT ENFORCED because both the Bush Jr and Obama administrations felt it was inhumane. The kids that were picked up and put in camps prior to April of this year were UNACCOMPANIED MINORS. 2) Stephen Miller advised the Zero Tolerance policy that Sessions deployed JUST THIS APRIL - this policy said that they were going to enforce the existing law to it's fullest possible extent, which meant they would start picking up families that were traveling together, arrest the parent(s) for a federal misdemeanor, and take their kids away, to be held someplace else, for an indefinite amount of time. THIS IS A NEW POLICY JUST STARTED IN APRIL. 3) Trump and Sessions pushed the Zero Tolerance policy because Trump wanted to use this faux crisis to force Congress to approve the money he wants for his Wall (which Mexico mysteriously is still refusing to pay for).  So this is a manufactured crisis, and when it back fired, Trump and all his minions have been spinning as hard as possible to blame the Dems, blame Congress, blame the immigrants, blame Obama - blame anyone they can, even though they were the ones who began the Zero Tolerance policy in April.

Please, I know you're an intelligent guy, please go research Zero Tolerance Policy and see what you find. Read at least 10 different sources, split between the far right and far left, and throw in some international sources like the BBC, and then come back to lecture me on how stupid I am for ignoring a policy that only started this April. While you're at it, throw a glance over at the changes in our asylum policy that now prevent abused women from claiming they can't return home due to the violence there - that's another new change that Trump will attempt to pass off as 'business as usual' because he's a chronic liar.

Because this horrible tent fire is obscuring everything else in the news right now (even the Pope took time to condemn it) no one is paying attention to Paul's blackhat/dark hole conspiracy theory about the FBI agent getting escorted out of the building, even though that's something that would have been important front page news in any other administration.

Separating children from their families is nothing new, US has been doing it for decades

Mass detention camps are nothing new

Family detention, separating women and children are nothing new

I'll grant you the first link doesn't pertain to illegal migrants specifically.

You've acknowledged the laws have been on the books for decades. I don't need to post links for that. How much do you want to bet the evidence will support your "NOT ENFORCED" verdict when the RW media goes digging.

Why weren't you outraged about any of the above? Why wasn't the media outraged about it?

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jun 21, 2018 12:10:41 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jun 21, 2018 11:42:54 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Seriously, Virgil, you need to read more about this crisis. Many people have posted fact checking links on what is actually going on, so I'm not going to relink more articles, since you're ignoring them, but let me summarize for you - 1) this law has been on the books for a long while, BUT NOT ENFORCED because both the Bush Jr and Obama administrations felt it was inhumane. The kids that were picked up and put in camps prior to April of this year were UNACCOMPANIED MINORS. 2) Stephen Miller advised the Zero Tolerance policy that Sessions deployed JUST THIS APRIL - this policy said that they were going to enforce the existing law to it's fullest possible extent, which meant they would start picking up families that were traveling together, arrest the parent(s) for a federal misdemeanor, and take their kids away, to be held someplace else, for an indefinite amount of time. THIS IS A NEW POLICY JUST STARTED IN APRIL. 3) Trump and Sessions pushed the Zero Tolerance policy because Trump wanted to use this faux crisis to force Congress to approve the money he wants for his Wall (which Mexico mysteriously is still refusing to pay for).  So this is a manufactured crisis, and when it back fired, Trump and all his minions have been spinning as hard as possible to blame the Dems, blame Congress, blame the immigrants, blame Obama - blame anyone they can, even though they were the ones who began the Zero Tolerance policy in April.

Please, I know you're an intelligent guy, please go research Zero Tolerance Policy and see what you find. Read at least 10 different sources, split between the far right and far left, and throw in some international sources like the BBC, and then come back to lecture me on how stupid I am for ignoring a policy that only started this April. While you're at it, throw a glance over at the changes in our asylum policy that now prevent abused women from claiming they can't return home due to the violence there - that's another new change that Trump will attempt to pass off as 'business as usual' because he's a chronic liar.

Because this horrible tent fire is obscuring everything else in the news right now (even the Pope took time to condemn it) no one is paying attention to Paul's blackhat/dark hole conspiracy theory about the FBI agent getting escorted out of the building, even though that's something that would have been important front page news in any other administration.

Separating children from their families is nothing new, US has been doing it for decades

Mass detention camps are nothing new

Family detention, separating women and children are nothing new

I'll grant you the first link doesn't pertain to illegal migrants specifically.

You've acknowledged the laws have been on the books for decades. I don't need to post links for that. How much do you want to bet the evidence will support your "NOT ENFORCED" verdict when the RW media goes digging.

Why weren't you outraged about any of the above? Why wasn't the media outraged about it?

No.

You have still failed on due diligence in investigating the difference in implementation.

You are being intellectually lazy. Or- Makes me think you found something contrary to your supposition and are uninterested in admitting it.

Ball is still in your court. Put up or shut up.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 21, 2018 14:25:41 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

You have still failed on due diligence in investigating the difference in implementation.

The source code for the world has leaked.

const US_ATROCITIES = [
   { name: "separating kids from families in war",                originatingYear: 1990 },
   { name: "mass migrant detention facilities",                   originatingYear: 2010 },
   { name: "separating women and children as deterrent",          originatingYear: 2012 },
   { name: "laws requiring separation of children from families", originatingYear: 2006 },
   { name: "zero tolerance policy enforced",                      originatingYear: 2018 },
   ... ];

function media() {
   if( Date.currentWeekday().endsWith("y") )
       Trump.bash();

   US_ATROCITIES.forEach( atrocity => {
       if( atrocity.year < 2017 )
           MediaUtilities.totallyIgnore( atrocity ); // what, us worry?
       else {
           // bash time!
           MediaUtilities.runOn24HourNewsCycle( new Scandal( () => {
                   MediaUtilities.talkingHeads().bash( Trump );
                   MediaUtilities.anchors().bash( Trump );
                   MediaUtilities.inviteGuests( Guests.ANTI_TRUMP ).bash( Trump );

                   for( let i = 0; i < 10000; i++ )
                       MediaUtilities.virtueSignal();

                   // bring in the big guns
                   MediaUtilities.inviteGuests( Guests.DOG_THAT_HATES_TRUMP ).bash( Trump );
               } ), MediaUtilities.Pretenses.WE_ACTUALLY_CARE /* lol but not for the reason you think! ^___^ */ )
       }
   } );
}

YMAM.politicalLeft().addListener( { source: media, response: (left, atrocity_du_jour) => {
   left.memberList().forEach( member => {
      if( atrocity_du_jour.originator.name != "Trump" )
          return; // yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn!

      if( member.memory_hole == true || member.hypocrite == true ) {
          member.hysteria += 100;
          member.bash( atrocity_du_jour.originator );
          if( member.arguments == null ) {
              try {
                  member.invokeFallacy( Fallacies.FIXATE_ON_IMMATERIAL_DIFFERENCES );
                  member.post( "ball is in your court" );
              } catch( NonSequiturException ) {
                  // oh crap, they're onto us! >___<
                  member.bail( BailoutOptions.DECLARE_VICTORY_AND_RUN );
              }
          }
      }
  } );
} );


[Tennesseer]

Wall of text.  Wall of black.  

[djAdvocate]

Jun 21, 2018 11:20:58 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

The outcry du jour is about separation of families at the border. While I have my own serious misgivings about the practice, it isn't new, it's practiced in other OECD nations, and there's no logical reason for anyone to be more outraged about it now than five or even ten years ago.

Were you outraged about it five or ten years ago? Of course not.

Why not? Because ignorance is bliss.

no, that is not why not.

it is because those countries don't speak for us.

ours does.

please put down the shiny object that is distracting you.

it makes you seem ignorant.

[djAdvocate]

btw- i am beside myself that you guys are being waterboys for this administrations flack.

it's disgusting to try to gloss over this policy by blaming everyone other than those that implemented it. 

[weltschmerz]

Jun 22, 2018 0:11:49 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jun 21, 2018 11:20:58 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

The outcry du jour is about separation of families at the border. While I have my own serious misgivings about the practice, it isn't new, it's practiced in other OECD nations, and there's no logical reason for anyone to be more outraged about it now than five or even ten years ago.

Were you outraged about it five or ten years ago? Of course not.

Why not? Because ignorance is bliss.

no, that is not why not.

it is because those countries don't speak for us.

ours does.

please put down the shiny object that is distracting you.

it makes you seem ignorant.

Exactly.

It's kind of like saying that because FGM exists in other countries, we should turn a blind eye to it here.
Besides, FGM isn't new, so it's all good.

[Virgil Showlion]

I'm not condoning the practice. Nor am I saying people shouldn't be upset about it.

I'm saying it's not Pres. Trump's beast. It existed before him, roamed the world before him, devoured children before him. The world--and the media--slept. The fault is ours. In this, Pres. Trump is guilty of nothing more than enforcing existing laws with greater zeal than his predecessors.

I believe he's taking extraordinary action to end the practice of separating families specifically, is he not? Yet still I see nothing but condemnation.

Condemn yourselves. We're the ones who've slept through the past ten years. deminmaine : you in particular, in your defense of the US campaigns abroad in the past decade. You bemoan the separation of 5,000 children from their families here at the border. Where is/was your angst over the many tens of thousands of children separated from their parents, often permanently, by your nation's failed (often unlawful) campaigns in North Africa and the Middle East? I saw a lot of "Rah rah America" from you. Never a tear for parentless children.

Condemn yourselves.

ETA: Incidentally, if you don't trust my sources on the beast's long and sordid history leading up to Pres. Trump, perhaps you'll trust the US Senate Judiciary:

www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/KIND%20-%20Betraying%20Family%20Values.pdf

You'll find, among other things, reports from 2012 and earlier conducted to estimate the percentage (not just a handful of cases) of illegal immigration cases where children were separated from parents. Where were you then? Where was the media then?

[djAdvocate]

Jun 22, 2018 12:18:43 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

deminmaine : you in particular, in your defense of the US campaigns abroad in the past decade. You bemoan the separation of 5,000 children from their families here at the border. Where is/was your angst over the many tens of thousands of children separated from their parents, often permanently, by your nation's failed (often unlawful) campaigns in North Africa and the Middle East? I saw a lot of "Rah rah America" from you. Never a tear for parentless children.

Virgil Showlion - I think you may be a trifle confused- to say the least.  I think that if you check my posts you will find that I was a vociferous supporter of opposing Daesh (ISIS), and favored almost all means to do so.  For that I make no apology, and, btw, that policy has been largely successful.  I also pointed out (frequently) that the rise of ISIS was in large part due to our previous (failed) interventions in the Middle East.  And by "our" I mean the US and even Europe before us.  

Other than that, what American campaigns abroad have I been in favor of?  I was against Iraq from the start.  I have always said we needed to finish in Afghan and go the Hell home.  In fact, I favor going home almost everywhere.  Europe.  Korea.  Japan.  Etc.

Sorry, you be wrong.

And regarding the policy regarding kids.  It's one thing if Netanyahu does it.  It is something altogether different if WE do.

i guess when you live in a second fiddle, momma's boy country like Canada, you get used to thinking of the US first, even when it is not your policy to dictate or defend.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 20, 2018 20:53:15 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jun 20, 2018 20:42:58 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

My theory is we're part of a political science major's master's thesis experiment.

What's so "funny"?

It's true that the man was escorted out of the offices, that the media is fixated on immigration, and that nothing has changed in US immigration policy for at least a decade except a modest bump in the rate at which people are being deported. The practices of separating kids from parents, housing people in warehouses, etc. existed long before Pres. Trump ever came along.

Hence what, pray, are you laughing at?

A simple, truthful, rational post based upon information gathered from actually researching the issue... 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 22, 2018 12:18:43 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I think that if you check my posts you will find that I was a vociferous supporter of opposing Daesh (ISIS), and favored almost all means to do so.

...including separating tens of thousands of children from their innocent families. The price of getting the job done. I won't categorically condemn or approve of this here, simply state it as fact.

Jun 22, 2018 12:18:43 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

For that I make no apology, and, btw, that policy has been largely successful.

Not by any definition of "success" that counts costs or collateral damage, or looks forward even five years.

But let's suppose you're right and all the death, destruction, and children separated from families is the regrettable but necessary cost of winning a war and establishing order. (Indeed if I believed as you do that the US's campaign over in the Middle East would actually bring lasting peace, I'd agree the campaign was justified.)

But then why on Earth would I condemn Pres. Trump for taking the necessary steps to secure the US border, win the war (and make no mistake: the fight to secure the border is a war), and establish a lasting peace on US soil? At a tiny fraction of the cost and collateral damage of your campaigns in the Middle East, no less?

How can you call annihilation of families abroad the necessary cost of establishing order and then balk at atrocities a tiny fraction of the size back at home? You can't even fall back to the old standby, "the people suffering aren't Americans," because the families being torn asunder here indeed aren't Americans. By all rights you should be out there on Team Trump, chanting "Rah rah America" as he wins the war for you, using "almost all means to do so". Instead you're right here in the thick of things crying great crocodile tears.

I don't know about anybody else, but with you I'd bet a million dollars and a million snow leopard pelts that if this "kids separated from families" story had broken in June 2015 or June 2016, you'd be defending the measure as "tough but necessary" until your dying breath. You and another member whose name I won't mention because (s)he's not here but whose support for "tough but necessary" predictably flips on and off like a switch depending on who's in power.

The only thing worse than a bleeding heart is a bleeding heart that flips on and off like a switch.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

The large national association for my profession has just issued an official statement regarding the family separations, criticizing the practice and calling on the administration to reunite the affected families.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Jun 22, 2018 13:54:21 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jun 22, 2018 12:18:43 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I think that if you check my posts you will find that I was a vociferous supporter of opposing Daesh (ISIS), and favored almost all means to do so.

...including separating tens of thousands of children from their innocent families. The price of getting the job done. I won't categorically condemn or approve of this here, simply state it as fact.

Jun 22, 2018 12:18:43 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

For that I make no apology, and, btw, that policy has been largely successful.

Not by any definition of "success" that counts costs or collateral damage, or looks forward even five years.

But let's suppose you're right and all the death, destruction, and children separated from families is the regrettable but necessary cost of winning a war and establishing order. (Indeed if I believed as you do that the US's campaign over in the Middle East would actually bring lasting peace, I'd agree the campaign was justified.)

But then why on Earth would I condemn Pres. Trump for taking the necessary steps to secure the US border, win the war (and make no mistake: the fight to secure the border is a war), and establish a lasting peace on US soil? At a tiny fraction of the cost and collateral damage of your campaigns in the Middle East, no less?

How can you call annihilation of families abroad the necessary cost of establishing order and then balk at atrocities a tiny fraction of the size back at home? You can't even fall back to the old standby, "the people suffering aren't Americans," because the families being torn asunder here indeed aren't Americans. By all rights you should be out there on Team Trump, chanting "Rah rah America" as he wins the war for you, using "almost all means to do so". Instead you're right here in the thick of things crying great crocodile tears.

I don't know about anybody else, but with you I'd bet a million dollars and a million snow leopard pelts that if this "kids separated from families" story had broken in June 2015 or June 2016, you'd be defending the measure as "tough but necessary" until your dying breath. You and another member whose name I won't mention because (s)he's not here but whose support for "tough but necessary" predictably flips on and off like a switch depending on who's in power.

The only thing worse than a bleeding heart is a bleeding heart that flips on and off like a switch.

Again, no.

You continue to provide no support for your assertion that implementation of this policy did not change under trump.

You continue to philosophize and poeterise on the implications of an imagined state of affairs.

Provide a factual basis for your soapbox or remove yourself from it.

Aka:

Put up or shut up.

[happyhoix]

Jun 22, 2018 13:54:21 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jun 22, 2018 12:18:43 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I think that if you check my posts you will find that I was a vociferous supporter of opposing Daesh (ISIS), and favored almost all means to do so.

...including separating tens of thousands of children from their innocent families. The price of getting the job done. I won't categorically condemn or approve of this here, simply state it as fact.

Jun 22, 2018 12:18:43 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

For that I make no apology, and, btw, that policy has been largely successful.

Not by any definition of "success" that counts costs or collateral damage, or looks forward even five years.

But let's suppose you're right and all the death, destruction, and children separated from families is the regrettable but necessary cost of winning a war and establishing order. (Indeed if I believed as you do that the US's campaign over in the Middle East would actually bring lasting peace, I'd agree the campaign was justified.)

But then why on Earth would I condemn Pres. Trump for taking the necessary steps to secure the US border, win the war (and make no mistake: the fight to secure the border is a war), and establish a lasting peace on US soil? At a tiny fraction of the cost and collateral damage of your campaigns in the Middle East, no less?

How can you call annihilation of families abroad the necessary cost of establishing order and then balk at atrocities a tiny fraction of the size back at home? You can't even fall back to the old standby, "the people suffering aren't Americans," because the families being torn asunder here indeed aren't Americans. By all rights you should be out there on Team Trump, chanting "Rah rah America" as he wins the war for you, using "almost all means to do so". Instead you're right here in the thick of things crying great crocodile tears.

I don't know about anybody else, but with you I'd bet a million dollars and a million snow leopard pelts that if this "kids separated from families" story had broken in June 2015 or June 2016, you'd be defending the measure as "tough but necessary" until your dying breath. You and another member whose name I won't mention because (s)he's not here but whose support for "tough but necessary" predictably flips on and off like a switch depending on who's in power.

The only thing worse than a bleeding heart is a bleeding heart that flips on and off like a switch.

Virgil can you really not see the difference between families separated as a consequence of war and what's currently happening to families on our southern border?

Shitty things happen in wars, and I will be the first to admit the US has been in the forefront of doing shitty things during conflicts, which can't be totally excused with an 'end justifies the means' argument.

However, Trump made a decision to generate a crisis on the border in order to galvanize support from his base. To create the faux crisis, he had DHS enforce a law that was on the books but not previously enforced because previous administrations deemed it too inhumane. Not too inhumane for Trump, however.  The definition of ''evil" is to treat kids like stage props in a game to get your Trumpettes excited about the midterms.