Current events discussion

[RobGMN Premium Member]

What you are arguing is in the past. You are saying Trump lied. You are not discussing current events. Why not?

Who was Trump being when he lied? Pretty sure he was being Trump. His lies are an example of him BEING himself.

Trump BEING Trump is a statement of present tense.

An interesting philosophical argument, since nothing is ever really present, because there really is only the past or the future.
The microsecond that the ireeent is the present, it becomes the past.

What do you care? If you think he is a liar and that has already been proved then WHAT DO YOU CARE what other people think. You are not going to change ANYONE'S mind by arguing with them.

And yet you insist on arguing that his words that have been proved to be lies are actually truths.
Do you think arguing will change history?
It IS possible to get someone to change their mind.
Good luck trying to alter history, Doc.

Discuss him till your hearts content if you want to but that is not what you are doing. You are just arguing. You are the one trying to make every topic you talk about a fact thread. If you want to TALK about Trump then do it!!!!! There are plenty of things to talk about currently. Christ.

Again, you seem to be trolling to get the thread closed. Or maybe you don't understand the thread title. Not sure.

I mentioned a Trump issue from TODAY, and you didn't speak a word of it. Yet you complain that I am bringing up Trump history.

Do you just want to avoid anything negative about Trump? It seems that's where you might be headed.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Who was Trump being when he lied? Pretty sure he was being Trump. His lies are an example of him BEING himself.


An interesting philosophical argument, since nothing is ever really present, because there really is only the past or the future.
The microsecond that the ireeent is the present, it becomes the past.

Always an argument. I don't think you are capable of an actual conversation. One where views from any side can be discussed without RobGMN being RobGMN.

And yet you insist on arguing that his words that have been proved to be lies are actually truths.
Do you think arguing will change history?
It IS possible to get someone to change their mind.
Good luck trying to alter history, Doc.

I followed your "demands" and I found 3 alleged lies and proved they were not lies. What did you do, argued.

Again, you seem to be trolling to get the thread closed. Or maybe you don't understand the thread title. Not sure.

It's not up to me if the thread gets closed and I don't care if it does. The only person affected by it will be you.

I mentioned a Trump issue from TODAY, and you didn't speak a word of it. Yet you complain that I am bringing up Trump history.

Do you just want to avoid anything negative about Trump? It seems that's where you might be headed.

No, I just don't hang on your every word. Do you think everyone is just waiting for you to speak?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Always an argument. I don't think you are capable of an actual conversation. One where views from any side can be discussed without RobGMN being RobGMN.

Conversation is about sharing news and ideas. Posting a lie and then expecting to be patted on the back for a great job is not "conversation", and lies do not foster "conversation". They foster debate and argument.
If you want conversation, then commit to not posting any more lies, and get others to do the same.
A very simple solution.

I followed your "demands" and I found 3 alleged lies and proved they were not lies. What did you do, argued.

You have repeated this multiple times, but your only "proof" offered was an excuse that Trump's lies were just an issue of "semantics". That doesn't prove anything. Even a child would know this.
Proving his words true requires verifiable evidence.
Here, I'l; show you how it works:
The lie: "I took the money out, we built 571 miles of border wall, and that's what made our border so good."
The truth: "Less than 69 of these miles—or about 15 percent—were for completed barrier system as of January 2021."
The source: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-106893 A report on the construction of the border wall, prepared by the Government Accountability Office. "The U.S. Government Accountability Office is an independent, nonpartisan government agency within the legislative branch that provides auditing, evaluative, and investigative services for the United States Congress. It is the supreme audit institution of the federal government of the United States."
That is the proof of his lie.
If you want to say he didn't lie, then you have to show some proof of the 571 miles of wall that you believe was actually built from 2017-2020.

It's not up to me if the thread gets closed and I don't care if it does. The only person affected by it will be you.

It CAN be up to you if you choose to ignore the moderator's commands and we all get punished for it.
Given your constant participation in the thread, I think it's very likely a lock would affect you too.

No, I just don't hang on your every word. Do you think everyone is just waiting for you to speak?

Definitely not. But it is kind of funny how I hadn't posted for over two weeks and then within hours of my return, you were here to comment on my post.
It almost felt like you missed me and wanted to give me a welcome back party, hahahaha.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Conversation is about sharing news and ideas. Posting a lie and then expecting to be patted on the back for a great job is not "conversation", and lies do not foster "conversation". They foster debate and argument.
If you want conversation, then commit to not posting any more lies, and get others to do the same.
A very simple solution.

You have repeated this multiple times, but your only "proof" offered was an excuse that Trump's lies were just an issue of "semantics". That doesn't prove anything. Even a child would know this.
Proving his words true requires verifiable evidence.
Here, I'l; show you how it works:
The lie: "I took the money out, we built 571 miles of border wall, and that's what made our border so good."
The truth: "Less than 69 of these miles—or about 15 percent—were for completed barrier system as of January 2021."
The source: https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-106893 A report on the construction of the border wall, prepared by the Government Accountability Office. "The U.S. Government Accountability Office is an independent, nonpartisan government agency within the legislative branch that provides auditing, evaluative, and investigative services for the United States Congress. It is the supreme audit institution of the federal government of the United States."
That is the proof of his lie.
If you want to say he didn't lie, then you have to show some proof of the 571 miles of wall that you believe was actually built from 2017-2020.

It CAN be up to you if you choose to ignore the moderator's commands and we all get punished for it.
Given your constant participation in the thread, I think it's very likely a lock would affect you too.

Definitely not. But it is kind of funny how I hadn't posted for over two weeks and then within hours of my return, you were here to comment on my post.
It almost felt like you missed me and wanted to give me a welcome back party, hahahaha.

Thanks for proving my point. You think this thread getting locked is a punishment? What are you, 6. It's a political thread... who cares.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

It CAN be up to you if you choose to ignore the moderator's commands and we all get punished for it.
Given your constant participation in the thread, I think it's very likely a lock would affect you too.

Threads get locked all the time on forums...it's not a life changing event...for most people anyways

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

It CAN be up to you if you choose to ignore the moderator's commands and we all get punished for it.
Given your constant participation in the thread, I think it's very likely a lock would affect you too.

The mod is not "commanding" us, the mod is asking us to respect the forum. Which isn't a problem really. I hope that isn't your mindset though going through life that everything is demands and commands though it would explain a few things.

As far as Trump goes, I think there may be some people who have eyes on some of his property. What does he have that is worth almost half a billion dollars? NY? Vegas? Fl? Honestly, I don't see this hurting him too much.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

The mod is not "commanding" us, the mod is asking us to respect the forum. Which isn't a problem really. I hope that isn't your mindset though going through life that everything is demands and commands though it would explain a few things.

As far as Trump goes, I think there may be some people who have eyes on some of his property. What does he have that is worth almost half a billion dollars? NY? Vegas? Fl? Honestly, I don't see this hurting him too much.

And yet you refuse to even do that, and keep spinning off on tangents instead of speaking to the Trump lies.
This is their forum to run. I consider an "ask" to be a command when they have the power to close stuff or ban members for not doing what they "ask".

As for his bond, yes, he seems to be having a heckuva time coming up with the scratch. Odd, considering that he values just a single property (Mara Lago) at a billion dollars or more, but is begging to get a 75% discount on his bond.
That says a lot.

'Interesting that the insurers who Trumpers claim were not hurt in any way by his fraudulent activities are not willing to accept the risk of the bond.
That says a lot, too.

And before the cries of "it's an unfair bond" start ringing out, let's remember that it's proportionately low when considering his self-proclaimed worth Compared to the bail or bond of other criminals who have been busted and don't have a pot to piss in but get $100k bail, this is nothing.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

And yet you refuse to even do that, and keep spinning off on tangents instead of speaking to the Trump lies.
This is their forum to run. I consider an "ask" to be a command when they have the power to close stuff or ban members for not doing what they "ask".

So go on and live in fear that you may not get to post all your repetitious "history" and hatred for Trump on a car audio forum.

As for his bond, yes, he seems to be having a heckuva time coming up with the scratch. Odd, considering that he values just a single property (Mara Lago) at a billion dollars or more, but is begging to get a 75% discount on his bond.
That says a lot.

I think they knew that bonds of that size most likely won't happen... probably why they set it so high.

'Interesting that the insurers who Trumpers claim were not hurt in any way by his fraudulent activities are not willing to accept the risk of the bond.
That says a lot, too.

Business is business... they may be able to buy some of his property cheaper if it is seized. Smart business.

And before the cries of "it's an unfair bond" start ringing out, let's remember that it's proportionately low when considering his self-proclaimed worth Compared to the bail or bond of other criminals who have been busted and don't have a pot to piss in but get $100k bail, this is nothing.

A high bail is to help insure the accused doesn't take off. This high bond is most likely to insure he will lose some assets. Like I said, so he loses some property, big deal. If he gets back in office he can do some good for the country, do like Biden and make millions or more back. Might as well right. If the Biden's can do it then so can Trump.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

So go on and live in fear that you may not get to post all your repetitious "history" and hatred for Trump on a car audio forum.

I think they knew that bonds of that size most likely won't happen... probably why they set it so high.

Business is business... they may be able to buy some of his property cheaper if it is seized. Smart business.

A high bail is to help insure the accused doesn't take off. This high bond is most likely to insure he will lose some assets. Like I said, so he loses some property, big deal. If he gets back in office he can do some good for the country, do like Biden and make millions or more back. Might as well right. If the Biden's can do it then so can Trump.

We're kind of comparing apples to oranges b/c this wasn't a jail issue for him, but a disgorgement. The underlying theme is the same, though.
The judge already ruled against him, so he should be paying that now, and then it gets reversed if his appeal is accepted and he wins.

Look at it from the perspective of someone who IS jailed because they have been found guilty of a crime. Do they get set free when they file an appeal of the decision? No. They remain incarcerated as there is already a decision on the books.
If they win the appeal, do they get compensated for the time they were incarcerated? Nope. They get released and sent on their way.

Trump was found guilty and the punishment established. Just because he chooses to file an appeal doesn't mean the original conviction just goes away. Where he DOES benefit is that the money gets "held" during the appeal. Oversimplified, but it's like having the money in escrow so that neither party can get hurt in a major transaction.

If he wins the appeal, the bond comes back. If he loses the appeal, the bond gats paid out. Big money? Yes. But when you take big risks and you place big bets as a big player, you should be prepared to pay up.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

We're kind of comparing apples to oranges b/c this wasn't a jail issue for him, but a disgorgement. The underlying theme is the same, though.
The judge already ruled against him, so he should be paying that now, and then it gets reversed if his appeal is accepted and he wins.

Look at it from the perspective of someone who IS jailed because they have been found guilty of a crime. Do they get set free when they file an appeal of the decision? No. They remain incarcerated as there is already a decision on the books.
If they win the appeal, do they get compensated for the time they were incarcerated? Nope. They get released and sent on their way.

Trump was found guilty and the punishment established. Just because he chooses to file an appeal doesn't mean the original conviction just goes away. Where he DOES benefit is that the money gets "held" during the appeal. Oversimplified, but it's like having the money in escrow so that neither party can get hurt in a major transaction.

If he wins the appeal, the bond comes back. If he loses the appeal, the bond gats paid out. Big money? Yes. But when you take big risks and you place big bets as a big player, you should be prepared to pay up.

Being this close to Monday, I don't see him getting out of it that is for sure. I think his legal team may have not been up to the challenge for this case.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Being this close to Monday, I don't see him getting out of it that is for sure. I think his legal team may have not been up to the challenge for this case.

It seems bad choices in legal defense happen to him. Or maybe the teams are dealing with stuff that is indefensible.

It's like the guy who has been fired from five jobs, and it's every "employer's fault". Maybe it's the other way around.

In current news, some Trumpers being Trumpers. Tony Bobulinski says that he believes "all the evidence" against Biden is absolutely enough to impeach Biden. Rep Moskowitz demands that if there is so much evidence after 15 months of dancing around, Comer and crew vote for impeachment.

(paraphrased) "Why continue to waste millions of dollars of taxpayer money? Vote to impeach now"
(paraphrased) "We don't have evidence"

FIFTEEN months of stating they want to impeach Biden, but have no evidence yet?
That sounds like an actual witch hunt. They want to impeach and THEN will try to find a reason.
Interesting how they already HAD a reason to impeach Trump and did so, yet his was called the witch hunt.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

It seems bad choices in legal defense happen to him. Or maybe the teams are dealing with stuff that is indefensible.

It's like the guy who has been fired from five jobs, and it's every "employer's fault". Maybe it's the other way around.

In current news, some Trumpers being Trumpers. Tony Bobulinski says that he believes "all the evidence" against Biden is absolutely enough to impeach Biden. Rep Moskowitz demands that if there is so much evidence after 15 months of dancing around, Comer and crew vote for impeachment.

(paraphrased) "Why continue to waste millions of dollars of taxpayer money? Vote to impeach now"
(paraphrased) "We don't have evidence"

FIFTEEN months of stating they want to impeach Biden, but have no evidence yet?
That sounds like an actual witch hunt. They want to impeach and THEN will try to find a reason.
Interesting how they already HAD a reason to impeach Trump and did so, yet his was called the witch hunt.

15 months for Biden, 3 years for Trump. I think both sides treat the other unfairly. They have been testifying on the record about Biden though. I wouldn't be surprised if something comes of it sooner than later.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

15 months for Biden, 3 years for Trump. I think both sides treat the other unfairly. They have been testifying on the record about Biden though. I wouldn't be surprised if something comes of it sooner than later.

Trump's first impeachment was in December of 2019, 3 months after they announced it, and with all the evidence in hand.
Comer and crew have been talking about it for 15 months, and admit they still do not have the evidence to impeach. Stating that you are going to impeach and then having to admit you have no evidence to do it FIFTEEN months later tells a whole lot about putting the cart before the horse.
"We're going to impeach you. We don't know why, and we don't have any evidence, but we're going to do it."
It's like reading a David Morrell novel.

They need to shi*t or get off the pot, if it's actually costing that much money to keep dancing around it.

 

[Eggs 5,000+ posts]

Memory hole

Decade in review: Justice Antonin Scalia’s death and the Republican delay in filling the seat - SCOTUSblog

On February 13, 2016, 79-year-old Justice Antonin Scalia died at a ranch in Marfa, Texas. That night, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who was then the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., both declared that the Senate should not act on any new

www.scotusblog.com

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Trump's first impeachment was in December of 2019, 3 months after they announced it, and with all the evidence in hand.
Comer and crew have been talking about it for 15 months, and admit they still do not have the evidence to impeach. Stating that you are going to impeach and then having to admit you have no evidence to do it FIFTEEN months later tells a whole lot about putting the cart before the horse.
"We're going to impeach you. We don't know why, and we don't have any evidence, but we're going to do it."
It's like reading a David Morrell novel.

They need to shi*t or get off the pot, if it's actually costing that much money to keep dancing around it.

So because they aren't doing it fast enough for the left, they shouldn't do it?