The Mueller Report thread

[GMDino]

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The fact that this is an apples and oranges comparison aside, I'm wondering why you brought it up in this thread as it's completely off the subject and nothing to do with the post you're responding to.

Because you complete me. " "

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Trump did do something shady, in this case before his election.  This was a known quantity prior to his election, ergo one can logically conclude that the voters, while aware of it, elected him POTUS regardless.

Oh!  So voters "knew" he paid off the pornstar?  Weird how the first story about it was January, 2018 then. (Note: Even then DJT denied it ever happened and he had an evolving story until it just that yeah it happened but there was no crime committed.)


Did they all have time machines to read about it and then decide that they didn't care and go back and vote for him?  

Maybe you meant they all knew he did shady things?  Perhaps.  Would this incident have been a little different?  We'll never know because there was a cover up (there's that phrase again) until after the election.

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Hence, it is a non-factor to  me.

Yes....you.  One voter.  

(Who also apparently owned a time machine?)

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Apologies, not 9/11, the "Holy Land Foundation" case.  Funding terrorism not directly related to 9/11 is better.

Not better.  Accurate.  And less "touch an american nervey" and less "racist implicationsy"

(05-23-2019, 01:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: "It was indeed named as an “unindicted co-conspirator or joint venturer” in the Holy Land Foundation case--an Islamic charity that in 2008 was convicted of funding Islamic militant groups"

federal Judge Jorge A. Solis denied CAIR’s request that its name be publicly striken from the list. He said that the government “has produced ample evidence” to establish the association of CAIR and other organizations with entities such as the Holy Land Foundation, the Islamic Association for Palestine and with the Hamas militant group.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-king-hearings-is-cair-a-terrorist-organization/2011/03/10/AB3AdTQ_blog.html?utm_term=.097ae0d8bf9a

Still looking for that consistency.

Quickly before I answer you (repeated) plea for consistency:  They did appeal and the appeals panel said the ruling "went too far" but didn't change anything.  FWIW.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2010/11/judges-ruling-on-islamic-groups-as-unindicted-co-conspirators-made-public-030922

So let's talk "consistency".

In the apple bin we have a case when the one group you brought up is named as unindicted co-conspirators to funnelling money to a terrorist group (Hamas) in a report where there were 300 (yes, bolded for emphasis) unindicted co-conspirators named as possible contributors.

(I'm not defending CAIR.  I'm pointing out what the story is.)

In the orange cart (see what I did there) we have one person who actually did the thing (we have the check and his signature) that he is accused of and where the other guy involved went to jail.  While his unindicted co-conspirator is in a position where it is believed he cannot even be indicted.

And you HAVE defended Trump by saying "voters don't care".  Whether he can be indicted or is guilty of something or not...you don't care.

"Consistency"

In a thread about an investigation into the actions of the sitting POTUS you want to talk about Muslims.  Interesting consistency. 

[Belsnickel]

(05-23-2019, 02:39 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: We have a different opinion on the validity of the campaign finance violation charge.  No need to rehash it here.  I do agree with your assessment of Trump, but I've never really cared about the sexual proclivities of adults as long as they occur between consenting adults or don't hurt anyone.

Well, this is why I said "potential." I'm not even saying he is guilty of it, just that it is a part of the conversation. As for an adult's sexual proclivities, would a spouse that had been cheated on not be someone that was hurt? His stated reason for keeping it quiet wasn't the campaign, but keeping it from his wife, which implies her lack of knowledge and consent of the activity occurring. I have no problem if you want to sleep around, but if your partner does not know of it and consent to it, then you are harming them and breaking your trust with them.

[Vas Deferens]

(05-23-2019, 02:39 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A valid argument can be made that he was sticking to the NDA that Daniels violated when he denied the affair.  I know some will scoff at that assertion, but insisting nothing happened when you agreed to not speak about it is not the same as lying about an incident in which there was no NDA.  In any event, I find Daniels' whole story as revealing of her character as Trumps.  She took his money willingly and then violated a legal agreement.  She's reaping the rewards of that now as the left has moved on and she's no longer the hero of the moment.  Plus she has to pay Trump's legal fees.  She lost on pretty much all fronts.

I believe from a legal standpoint, once the NDA is broken by a party (stormy first), the NDA is no longer enforceable upon the other party (daddy).  I would have to read this specific NDA, but I don't see how a court could rule against him for disclosing what was already made public...  

He was lying for the sake of daddy and daddy only.  Same motivation he has for everything he does.   

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-23-2019, 02:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: Because you complete me. " "



Oh!  So voters "knew" he paid off the pornstar?  Weird how the first story about it was January, 2018 then. (Note: Even then DJT denied it ever happened and he had an evolving story until it just that yeah it happened but there was no crime committed.)


Did they all have time machines to read about it and then decide that they didn't care and go back and vote for him?  

Maybe you meant they all knew he did shady things?  Perhaps.  Would this incident have been a little different?  We'll never know because there was a cover up (there's that phrase again) until after the election.

Actually the affair was first published at the end of 2011.
The affair was from 2006, so it's not like it was something recent that happened right before his Election. Yes he married Melania in 2005, so shame on him. Rich celebrities that have affairs typically pay off the other person to keep them quiet. Many will lie about those affairs so as to not damage their Spouse. Nothing really new here. he's not the first nor will he be the last to that, and has nothing to do with his ability/inability to do his Job as POTUS. It's nothing more than a bitching point for you all to make,, it's like the birther thing with Obama.

[Bengalzona]

(05-23-2019, 01:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: I disagree for the same reasons I stated above.  Plus DJT WANTS the publicity.  He WANTS To be the story...even if he has to lie about it to make himself look good.

This isn't the 60's...or even the 90's anymore.  Women are more vocal and involved and the "strong man seducing women" trope doesn't carry the weight it did.

Obviously pop culture has it's exceptions.

But as a famous meme put it:  



Women won't swoon over DJT like they did JFK and even Clinton back in the day.

"Real men" will still dig it.  Decent people won't.  They never did.

Besides, it's not the affair.  It's not even the payment.  It's the cover up (that Trump claims he doesn't do).

Same thing that got Nixon.  And Donald ain't as smart or shrewd as Richard was.

You are expressing your views and probably the views of a lot of people in your circle. But I don't think that fully reflects the 'national' view (i.e. there are just a lot folks out there that view it solely as a sex scandal and really don't care about it. ). Not saying they love it. They just don't care.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-23-2019, 02:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: Because you complete me. " "

Just got douchechills from that one.

Quote:Oh!  So voters "knew" he paid off the pornstar?  Weird how the first story about it was January, 2018 then. (Note: Even then DJT denied it ever happened and he had an evolving story until it just that yeah it happened but there was no crime committed.)


Did they all have time machines to read about it and then decide that they didn't care and go back and vote for him?  

Ruh roh.  The story came out well before 2018, a bit of a wikifail there for you.

Quote:Maybe you meant they all knew he did shady things?  Perhaps.  Would this incident have been a little different?  We'll never know because there was a cover up (there's that phrase again) until after the election.

That he was a philanderer, yes.  That's been well known for quite some time.

Quote:Yes....you.  One voter.  

(Who also apparently owned a time machine?)

This quip didn't age well.

Quote:Not better.  Accurate.  And less "touch an american nervey" and less "racist implicationsy"

Like I said, I confused being involved in 9/11 with funding terrorists post 9/11.  I'm glad you feel better about it.

Quote:Quickly before I answer you (repeated) plea for consistency:  They did appeal and the appeals panel said the ruling "went too far" but didn't change anything.  FWIW.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2010/11/judges-ruling-on-islamic-groups-as-unindicted-co-conspirators-made-public-030922

So let's talk "consistency".

You know, except for the direct quote from a federal judge in the post you responded to.

Quote:In the apple bin we have a case when the one group you brought up is named as unindicted co-conspirators to funnelling money to a terrorist group (Hamas) in a report where there were 300 (yes, bolded for emphasis) unindicted co-conspirators named as possible contributors.

Yeah, they were one of many groups funding terrorism.  I'm pleased to see the "everyone else is doing it" defense is alive and well.

Quote:(I'm not defending CAIR.  I'm pointing out what the story is.)

While suspiciously sounding like you're defending CAIR.  You have a problem with Omar speaking before a group that funded terrorism btw?

Quote:In the orange cart (see what I did there) we have one person who actually did the thing (we have the check and his signature) that he is accused of and where the other guy involved went to jail.  While his unindicted co-conspirator is in a position where it is believed he cannot even be indicted.

Bel and I had a very interesting discussion on this, you should look it up.

Quote:And you HAVE defended Trump by saying "voters don't care".  Whether he can be indicted or is guilty of something or not...you don't care.

"Consistency"

Don't care about his philandering?  Clearly not as they elected him whilst knowing of it.

Quote:In a thread about an investigation into the actions of the sitting POTUS you want to talk about Muslims.  Interesting consistency. 

Hahaha, look at you tying yourself in knots  You know why it got brought up Dino, why be so deliberately disingenuous?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-23-2019, 02:57 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, this is why I said "potential." I'm not even saying he is guilty of it, just that it is a part of the conversation. As for an adult's sexual proclivities, would a spouse that had been cheated on not be someone that was hurt? His stated reason for keeping it quiet wasn't the campaign, but keeping it from his wife, which implies her lack of knowledge and consent of the activity occurring. I have no problem if you want to sleep around, but if your partner does not know of it and consent to it, then you are harming them and breaking your trust with them.

Eh, that's a bit of a stretch.  While I get the point you're trying to make that's between him and his wife.  I had the exact same position about Clinton.

(05-23-2019, 02:58 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: I believe from a legal standpoint, once the NDA is broken by a party (stormy first), the NDA is no longer enforceable upon the other party (daddy).  I would have to read this specific NDA, but I don't see how a court could rule against him for disclosing what was already made public...  

He was lying for the sake of daddy and daddy only.  Same motivation he has for everything he does.   

Not sure as I haven't seen the NDA.  I think he'd still lie about it, he clearly has not problems with doing so.

(05-23-2019, 06:26 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: You are expressing your views and probably the views of a lot of people in your circle. But I don't think that fully reflects the 'national' view (i.e. there are just a lot folks out there that view it solely as a sex scandal and really don't care about it. ). Not saying they love it. They just don't care.

Hammer meet nail.  You've hit precisely on a huge problem in this country; me and my circle of friends think "x" therefore everyone else does as well.  Some of us on this board have a major problem in this vein.

[GMDino]

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Just got douchechills from that one.

I must have hit the G spot.

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Ruh roh.  The story came out well before 2018, a bit of a wikifail there for you.

Link? Thanks!

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: That he was a philanderer, yes.  That's been well known for quite some time.

And decent people don't like that and won't vote for a known liar and cheater. Some people don't have a problem as long as they have the right letter after their names.

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This quip didn't age well.

I'll reserve judgement on your judgement when I see your sources.

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Like I said, I confused being involved in 9/11 with funding terrorists post 9/11.  I'm glad you feel better about it.

Almost like saying you were completely wrong and used CAIR to distract from Trump doing something that has been proven.

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You know, except for the direct quote from a federal judge in the post you responded to.

Note sure this sentence refers to anything we are talking about.

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: eah, they were one of many groups funding terrorism.  I'm pleased to see the "everyone else is doing it" defense is alive and well.

Wait...YOU bring up CAIR as an example of unindicted co-conspirators and then say I AM using the "everybody does it" excuse? You're not that dense and it's not that late west coast time.

You used one group with a known name named out of 300 in a case that you didn't even remember what it was about so it was noun verb 9/11 to try and defend DJT!

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: While suspiciously sounding like you're defending CAIR.  You have a problem with Omar speaking before a group that funded terrorism btw?

OOoohhh! Nice spin! Keep it up on the Muslims! Daddy loves that!

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Bel and I had a very interesting discussion on this, you should look it up.

As you wish.

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Don't care about his philandering?  Clearly not as they elected him whilst knowing of it.

Care about his cover up. His lying. Really anything. I don't what you LIKE about Trump, but I sure know what you are willing to ignore.

(05-23-2019, 08:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Hahaha, look at you tying yourself in knots  You know why it got brought up Dino, why be so deliberately disingenuous?

No, I don't. You seem to want to always give DJT a pass because...Muslims? I dunno. I'm sure it's NOT because you have a personal problem with me so I'll let you explain it. Again.

[GMDino]

(05-23-2019, 06:26 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: You are expressing your views and probably the views of a lot of people in your circle. But I don't think that fully reflects the 'national' view (i.e. there are just a lot folks out there that view it solely as a sex scandal and really don't care about it. ). Not saying they love it. They just don't care.

Obviously it's my view...and I think more and more people feel his actions are worthy of caring about it.

Obviously it's the cover up, not the affair that I think will get more traction.  And obviously he has made a career out of simply lying about what he does and having 30% + of the people believe every word he says.

My problem is people SHOULD care.  If they are willing to vote for a known conam, a cheater a liar, that speaks to a sad state of affairs in this country.

It's one thing to elect a guy who turns out to be shady.  It's another to KNOW going in and say "eh".

If that DOESN'T bother people it's really, really sad.

And that would go for any politician.  

Maybe my ethics are too high?  Maybe there more people that are too low.

Last thought:  There are people in my circle who literally don't pay any attention to anything Trump does but vote for him because...republican.  It's not that they don't care what he does...they don't even know.  Smart people.  When we discuss it and I mention any of the brain-numbingly dumb/shady things he says and does they honestly say they never heard about it.

That's awful.

And it got us where we are with DJT.

People can complain about the split and division in the country but if more people just paid attention we could root out the losers and crooks instead of saying "eh, nothing we can do".

Again, maybe that's just me that thinks that way.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-24-2019, 12:31 AM)GMDino Wrote: I must have hit the G spot.

Yeah, that's not what it means.  I had a nastier quip in mind, but I'm trying to remain civil.

Quote:Link?  Thanks!

Sure.

https://www.apnews.com/f5b42620b4ec4d70a4675d8c83bf4892

"Days before the November 2016 election — Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, pays Daniels $130,000 in exchange for her silence.

Separately, the Wall Street Journal publishes a story stating that the National Enquirer — run by David Pecker, a Trump supporter — had paid $150,000 to silence former Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal about a sexual relationship she allegedly had with Trump a decade ago. The story also mentions Daniels and says she had been in talks with ABC News to tell her story but cut off negotiations with the network."

Quote:And decent people don't like that and won't vote for a known liar and cheater.  Some people don't have a problem as long as they have the right letter after their names.

I guess the ~63 million people who voted for him aren't decent people then?

https://www.270towin.com/2016_Election/

Quote:I'll reserve judgement on your judgement when I see your sources.  

In the United States it's spelled judgment.  Also, see above.

Quote:Almost like saying you were completely wrong and used CAIR to distract from Trump doing something that has been proven.

No, not completely wrong at all.  They deliberately fund terrorism, just not involved in 9/11.  Do these fine distinctions help you sleep at night?

Quote:Note sure this sentence refers to anything we are talking about.

Given your heretofore lack of reading comprehension this does not surprise me.

Quote:Wait...YOU bring up CAIR as an example of unindicted co-conspirators and then say I AM using the "everybody does it" excuse?  You're not that dense and it's not that late west coast time.  

You used one group with a known name named out of 300 in a case that you didn't even remember what it was about so it was noun verb 9/11 to try and defend DJT!  

Hold on, are you saying because several other organization funded terrorism that it doesn't matter that CAIR did?

Quote:OOoohhh!  Nice spin!  Keep it up on the Muslims!  Daddy loves that!

Ugh, daddy?  More douchechills.  Considering I work with CSEC girls this language is nauseating at best.

Quote:As you wish.

I'm so anxious to hear your well informed take on the discussion.

Quote:Care about his cover up.  His lying.  Really anything.  I don't what you LIKE about Trump, but I sure know what you are willing to ignore.

No you really aren't.  Trump's election has sincerely made you deranged.  I honestly never liked you, but you've become far more odious and incoherent since the man's election.  Sadly, I think you're the only one who doesn't see this.  Please keep in mind I'm trying to be as civil as possible.

Quote:No, I don't.  You seem to want to always give DJT a pass because...Muslims?  I dunno.  I'm sure it's NOT because you have a personal problem with me so I'll let you explain it.  Again.  

Nope, Muslims (or CAIR in this case, since I guess you lump all Muslims into one group all represented by CAIR) only enter into the discussion because of your inconsistent outrage over the "unindicted coconspirator".  It does nothing to excuse or mitigate the actions of anyone else and only serves to demonstrate your utter hypocrisy.


Put head to pillow tonight knowing you did your wokeness today.  The rest of us will look on, shake our heads and move on.

[Bengalzona]

(05-24-2019, 12:39 AM)GMDino Wrote: Obviously it's my view...and I think more and more people feel his actions are worthy of caring about it.

Obviously it's the cover up, not the affair that I think will get more traction.  And obviously he has made a career out of simply lying about what he does and having 30% + of the people believe every word he says.

My problem is people SHOULD care.  If they are willing to vote for a known conam, a cheater a liar, that speaks to a sad state of affairs in this country.

It's one thing to elect a guy who turns out to be shady.  It's another to KNOW going in and say "eh".

If that DOESN'T bother people it's really, really sad.

And that would go for any politician.  

Maybe my ethics are too high?  Maybe there more people that are too low.

Last thought:  There are people in my circle who literally don't pay any attention to anything Trump does but vote for him because...republican.  It's not that they don't care what he does...they don't even know.  Smart people.  When we discuss it and I mention any of the brain-numbingly dumb/shady things he says and does they honestly say they never heard about it.

That's awful.

And it got us where we are with DJT.

People can complain about the split and division in the country but if more people just paid attention we could root out the losers and crooks instead of saying "eh, nothing we can do".

Again, maybe that's just me that thinks that way.

The problem here is the cover up didn't get traction. DJT's cheerleading squad predictably ignored it, many completely eschewing their professed ethics and morals in the process. Those who do not like DJT talked until they were blue in the face about it for several weeks and then moved on to the next Trump 'atrocity'.

And this is how the cycle has been with each Trump misbehavior. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Sometimes the brouhaha lasts for weeks or months. Sometimes it is just a few hours. And what is gained by participating in it? An emotional high? A feeling or moral superiority? I mean, do people really feel that by 'raising the alarm' on Trump misbehavior that anyone else will suddenly be convinced of his moral failings and lack of competency? That would be "the win", wouldn't it? Converting people.

But I don't think that is how it works. I think pretty much everyone, most of all those who voted for Trump, had a pretty good idea of what a morally flawed and incompetent (read 'stupid') person he is long before he was even elected. All we get now is just affirmation. And with that in mind, I'm not sure how much more comfortable someone can feel about their own morals and ethics by discussing someone else's like Trump who we all realize is handicapped in that regard.

Therefore, I think people emotionally invest in this daily routine purely for entertainment. Like being on a roller coaster: up.... down.... up... down.... Or, maybe it is like a mass bipolarism. That may sound insulting, but take heart in the fact that whatever side you may take in our partisan society, the other side engages in the same behavior. Yes, they are on their emotional roller coaster as well. Wheeee!!!!

Now, just so you understand where I am coming from, I do not like Trump. Never have. And I think his Presidency is a pathetic excuse for a joke played upon the people of this country by those who mistakenly believe that a person can hate the federal government without hating the country itself and also by opportunistic foreign powers clever enough to realize that we sometimes forget the phrase "united we stand, divided we fall".

I engage in this behavior as well. My daily routine generally starts with checking Facebook and news feeds for Trumps latest affront against the human race so that I may disseminate the stories among my 'people', most of whom are busy doing the same thing (ever wonder why you and I post so many of the same memes in the political joke thread?). But sometimes, I find myself stepping "off the ride" for awhile and focusing on the rest of life.

[GMDino]

(05-24-2019, 03:09 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: The problem here is the cover up didn't get traction. DJT's cheerleading squad predictably ignored it, many completely eschewing their professed ethics and morals in the process. Those who do not like DJT talked until they were blue in the face about it for several weeks and then moved on to the next Trump 'atrocity'.

And this is how the cycle has been with each Trump misbehavior. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Sometimes the brouhaha lasts for weeks or months. Sometimes it is just a few hours. And what is gained by participating in it? An emotional high? A feeling or moral superiority? I mean, do people really feel that by 'raising the alarm' on Trump misbehavior that anyone else will suddenly be convinced of his moral failings and lack of competency? That would be "the win", wouldn't it? Converting people.

But I don't think that is how it works. I think pretty much everyone, most of all those who voted for Trump, had a pretty good idea of what a morally flawed and incompetent (read 'stupid') person he is long before he was even elected. All we get now is just affirmation. And with that in mind, I'm not sure how much more comfortable someone can feel about their own morals and ethics by discussing someone else's like Trump who we all realize is handicapped in that regard.

Therefore, I think people emotionally invest in this daily routine purely for entertainment. Like being on a roller coaster: up.... down.... up... down.... Or, maybe it is like a mass bipolarism. That may sound insulting, but take heart in the fact that whatever side you may take in our partisan society, the other side engages in the same behavior. Yes, they are on their emotional roller coaster as well. Wheeee!!!!

Now, just so you understand where I am coming from, I do not like Trump. Never have. And I think his Presidency is a pathetic excuse for a joke played upon the people of this country by those who mistakenly believe that a person can hate the federal government without hating the country itself and also by opportunistic foreign powers clever enough to realize that we sometimes forget the phrase "united we stand, divided we fall".

I engage in this behavior as well. My daily routine generally starts with checking Facebook and news feeds for Trumps latest affront against the human race so that I may disseminate the stories among my 'people', most of whom are busy doing the same thing (ever wonder why you and I post so many of the same memes in the political joke thread?). But sometimes, I find myself stepping "off the ride" for awhile and focusing on the rest of life.

I'm going to start with the end:  There are two main times I talk about DJT:  On this forum and when my mother starts one of her rants (in person or online) about him...using words that can't be used on this forum. 

I have a wonderful life outside of here.  This is where I share my thoughts and feelings about political and religious issues.  And I appreciate the outlet.  I don't want anyone to misconstrue that into thinking I'm one of the people out on the street everyday carrying signs and totally wrapped up in politics.

However...

Whenever such a conversation comes up I want people not to just admit Trump is a liar and a cheat and a conman, I want them to come to the realization that the American people have become IMMUNE to these kinds of people in politics and allowing them to stay in power.

I sincerely want change.  

I sincerely want people to read more, to educate themselves, to care enough to understand who they are voting for and then to hold them accountable when they are in office.  I do it at every level when I vote.  I have not voted for a friend of our family (twice) because I found out some of the things he was doing on the job and how he was treating some constituents.  He still won.  Small town, "everybody knows him".  He wins by less and less, but its politics at its finest.  He's not Trump level bad, but he's not doing what he was elected to do.  But he has "friends" and people "like him" as a person so its easier to just vote for the guy you know than take a chance with someone new who might be "different".

And I'm no fool.  (I'm not!  Shut up!) I know I'm fighting an uphill battle that is trying to change an entire culture that is now dominated by the fracturing of our society thanks to social media and 24 hour news cycles.  I'm a media guy.  I get it.  But that doesn't mean I won't continue to talk about it and try to get more people to change.

In the end it's not just about DJT.  I haven't liked him since long before he ran for POTUS.  He's just the great big example I can point to to show people what happens when the electorate is lazy and/or unwilling to be informed about what will happen AFTER the person takes office.  

Unfortunately sometimes its takes a natural disaster to get everyone's attention get them behind creating change.  

Then as years go by it fades from the collective memory enough that we slide backwards.

Personal observation about those last two lines:

I am the President of an parent organization that assists a program my son is involved in.  The year before he joined was apparently a very bad year.  Parents fighting, the program in shambles.  More than a few parents told me that meetings would just be hours long screamfests with parents accusing each other of horrible things.  One board member said someone called her boss and accused her of stealing from work!  (She stepped down immediately because she did NOT steal from work but did not want the intimidation any longer)   Later the entire board had been replaced because the previous board all quit (after winning re-election) because they didn't think the organization could survive without them.  

The year we join there is a new director of the program and the people who stepped up to fill the board roles were good people who wanted to make things right for the kids.  Within less than a year my wife was on the board.  Two months later I was President.  (That's a long story in and of itself.  Not something I was aiming for but I was glad to accept the role.)

Over the last two years we have made an incredible turnaround.  The program is thriving.  The parents are happy(ish) and all the in-fighting has stopped.  Parents who had left, came back.  And they told me horror stories of what used to go on.  And they tell us how happy they are to NOT see that kind of behavior anymore.  We will leave next year with the organization in a much better place than it was when we joined.

But the problem I have seen coming for the past year is that the parents who were around when things were REALLY bad are mostly gone.  They could accept a small setback or a misstep here and there because it was NOTHING like the way things were before the calm now.  But the NEW parents don't know what that was like.  They will see any "bad" thing that happens sa possibly the "worst" thing that has happened becuase that is all the experience they have.  And then you have to run a little tighter ship.  You have to be able to deal with people who expect even more.  And I am done in one year.  I will not be able to help my fellow board members (all of whom have at least one year more than me left) deal with the changes.  And that's the nature of these things.  There is a turnover of people and suddenly you have new perspectives that don't take into account the things that happened in the past.

Unless you educate them.

In our case we don't go on and on about how bad it was before WE came in and straightened things out.  There is no need to degrade the people before us that we didn't even know.  But what we do do and is have system where complaints and problems can be handle quickly and efficiently.  We recognized what is happening and adapted out strategies.  And we try to educate all the parents on how we do things and why.  (Transparency is the biggest factor.)

Anyway, this is my long-winded way of saying (and avoiding doing any real work at work on the Friday before a holiday) that we can't just accept things because other people say "eh", or because our talking about makes other people mad that we keep bringing it up.  So if it's just within my circle or here or on any other social media continuing to show how Trump isn't the cause he's the result of the system being broken will bring good in the end IMHO.

[jj22]

The problem with the Religious right not caring about sexual activity now is they impeached a President for it. Called him to testify under oath to Congress, and released the full details of the investigation (NYT best seller) all because of it.

Talk about what looks to have been a real witch hunt 19 years later now that we know they really don't care about any of that.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-24-2019, 10:04 AM)jj22 Wrote: The problem with the Religious right not caring about sexual activity now is they impeached a President for it. Called him to testify under oath to Congress, and released the full details of the investigation (NYT best seller) all because of it.

Talk about what looks to have been a real witch hunt 19 years later now that we know they really don't care about any of that.

I think you'll find that Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, not for sexual activity.  Facts matter.

[Bengalzona]

(05-24-2019, 09:48 AM)GMDino Wrote: I'm going to start with the end:  There are two main times I talk about DJT:  On this forum and when my mother starts one of her rants (in person or online) about him...using words that can't be used on this forum. 

I have a wonderful life outside of here.  This is where I share my thoughts and feelings about political and religious issues.  And I appreciate the outlet.  I don't want anyone to misconstrue that into thinking I'm one of the people out on the street everyday carrying signs and totally wrapped up in politics.

However...

Whenever such a conversation comes up I want people not to just admit Trump is a liar and a cheat and a conman, I want them to come to the realization that the American people have become IMMUNE to these kinds of people in politics and allowing them to stay in power.

I sincerely want change.  

I sincerely want people to read more, to educate themselves, to care enough to understand who they are voting for and then to hold them accountable when they are in office.  I do it at every level when I vote.  I have not voted for a friend of our family (twice) because I found out some of the things he was doing on the job and how he was treating some constituents.  He still won.  Small town, "everybody knows him".  He wins by less and less, but its politics at its finest.  He's not Trump level bad, but he's not doing what he was elected to do.  But he has "friends" and people "like him" as a person so its easier to just vote for the guy you know than take a chance with someone new who might be "different".

And I'm no fool.  (I'm not!  Shut up!) I know I'm fighting an uphill battle that is trying to change an entire culture that is now dominated by the fracturing of our society thanks to social media and 24 hour news cycles.  I'm a media guy.  I get it.  But that doesn't mean I won't continue to talk about it and try to get more people to change.

In the end it's not just about DJT.  I haven't liked him since long before he ran for POTUS.  He's just the great big example I can point to to show people what happens when the electorate is lazy and/or unwilling to be informed about what will happen AFTER the person takes office.  

Unfortunately sometimes its takes a natural disaster to get everyone's attention get them behind creating change.  

Then as years go by it fades from the collective memory enough that we slide backwards.

Personal observation about those last two lines:

I am the President of an parent organization that assists a program my son is involved in.  The year before he joined was apparently a very bad year.  Parents fighting, the program in shambles.  More than a few parents told me that meetings would just be hours long screamfests with parents accusing each other of horrible things.  One board member said someone called her boss and accused her of stealing from work!  (She stepped down immediately because she did NOT steal from work but did not want the intimidation any longer)   Later the entire board had been replaced because the previous board all quit (after winning re-election) because they didn't think the organization could survive without them.  

The year we join there is a new director of the program and the people who stepped up to fill the board roles were good people who wanted to make things right for the kids.  Within less than a year my wife was on the board.  Two months later I was President.  (That's a long story in and of itself.  Not something I was aiming for but I was glad to accept the role.)

Over the last two years we have made an incredible turnaround.  The program is thriving.  The parents are happy(ish) and all the in-fighting has stopped.  Parents who had left, came back.  And they told me horror stories of what used to go on.  And they tell us how happy they are to NOT see that kind of behavior anymore.  We will leave next year with the organization in a much better place than it was when we joined.

But the problem I have seen coming for the past year is that the parents who were around when things were REALLY bad are mostly gone.  They could accept a small setback or a misstep here and there because it was NOTHING like the way things were before the calm now.  But the NEW parents don't know what that was like.  They will see any "bad" thing that happens sa possibly the "worst" thing that has happened becuase that is all the experience they have.  And then you have to run a little tighter ship.  You have to be able to deal with people who expect even more.  And I am done in one year.  I will not be able to help my fellow board members (all of whom have at least one year more than me left) deal with the changes.  And that's the nature of these things.  There is a turnover of people and suddenly you have new perspectives that don't take into account the things that happened in the past.

Unless you educate them.

In our case we don't go on and on about how bad it was before WE came in and straightened things out.  There is no need to degrade the people before us that we didn't even know.  But what we do do and is have system where complaints and problems can be handle quickly and efficiently.  We recognized what is happening and adapted out strategies.  And we try to educate all the parents on how we do things and why.  (Transparency is the biggest factor.)

Anyway, this is my long-winded way of saying (and avoiding doing any real work at work on the Friday before a holiday) that we can't just accept things because other people say "eh", or because our talking about makes other people mad that we keep bringing it up.  So if it's just within my circle or here or on any other social media continuing to show how Trump isn't the cause he's the result of the system being broken will bring good in the end IMHO.

In your recent responses here, I see language such as "people should..." and "I want...". There is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has some amount of judgment and has personal desires. So you want to affect some behavioral changes in other people. While that sounds manipulative when written in that way, it is actually part of the human experience. My wife wants to affect behavioral changes on me all the time.

The need to call out behaviors and attempt to change them is not so much the problem. The methods of doing it can be the problem. If you are trying to educate someone who is dead-set against being educated on a matter, you are sort of doomed to failure before you even start. Especially if you repeatedly use methods to reach people that aren't working. And it really wouldn't matter how correct your facts are or how much good you are trying to accomplish.

[jj22]

(05-24-2019, 10:56 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think you'll find that Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, not for sexual activity.  Facts matter.

Fact, it all started because of the outrage from the Religious Right over a blowjob shared by consensual adults. Maybe Clinton was better off paying her off with campaign finance money. Since that the "Christian" lesson "Evangelicals" want to spread? I put it in quotes because Trump has led millions of them straight to hell.

Everything else is spin from the Religious right as to why they cared then and not now...

Unless you want to talk about lying under oath? We can talk about that too.

What's your thoughts on Barr?

Brett Kavanaugh?

Donald Trump Jr?

Jeff Sessions?

Roger Stone?

Carter Page?

Michael Flynn?

Shall I proceed? Cause something tells me yall no longer care about lying under oath now either..... funny how that works.

[GMDino]

(05-24-2019, 01:59 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: In your recent responses here, I see language such as "people should..." and "I want...". There is nothing wrong with that. Everyone has some amount of judgment and has personal desires. So you want to affect some behavioral changes in other people. While that sounds manipulative when written in that way, it is actually part of the human experience. My wife wants to affect behavioral changes on me all the time.

The need to call out behaviors and attempt to change them is not so much the problem. The methods of doing it can be the problem. If you are trying to educate someone who is dead-set against being educated on a matter, you are sort of doomed to failure before you even start. Especially if you repeatedly use methods to reach people that aren't working. And it really wouldn't matter how correct your facts are or how much good you are trying to accomplish.

There are those who will never change.  I know that.

Still nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade.

I do want to affect change.  I want people to care and be better.  Not just in politics but in their lives and how they treat others.

I know it comes off as pie in the sky thinking but I believe even if you can change one person into a better person it's worth it.

Please don't think that means I think everyone has to be like me!    Jebus no!  I'm awful about LOTS of things!  

But I do want to continue to have conversations even with the obstinate.  I can be as bull-headed as anyone!  But I can also change my opinion if given enough information.  I don't think that's too much to ask for.

And again, this is (hopefully) a once in a lifetime event with Trump.  If we as a nation are so collectively disconnected with what he is and does that he is voted in again then the country deserves the division and the hatred that it will spawn.

[hollodero]

(05-24-2019, 04:04 PM)jj22 Wrote: Fact, it all started because of the outrage from the Religious Right over a blowjob shared by consensual adults.

Hasn't it started with whitewater though?

[Bengalzona]

(05-24-2019, 05:32 PM)hollodero Wrote: Hasn't it started with whitewater though?

Whitewater was a separate investigation that came to nothing. The impeachment was about whether Bill Clinton lied under oath about having sex with Monica Lewinski.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-24-2019, 04:04 PM)jj22 Wrote: Fact, it all started because of the outrage from the Religious Right over a blowjob shared by consensual adults. Maybe Clinton was better off paying her off with campaign finance money. Since that the "Christian" lesson "Evangelicals" want to spread? I put it in quotes because Trump has led millions of them straight to hell.

No, it all started with the Whitewater investigation, which yielded considerably more indictments and jail time than the Muller investigation. 

Quote:Everything else is spin from the Religious right as to why they cared then and not now...

Sorry, but this is demonstrably untrue.

Quote:Unless you want to talk about lying under oath? We can talk about that too.

What's your thoughts on Barr?

Brett Kavanaugh?

Donald Trump Jr?

Jeff Sessions?

Roger Stone?

Carter Page?

Michael Flynn?

Shall I proceed? Cause something tells me yall no longer care about lying under oath now either..... funny how that works.

Anyone who provably lied under oath should face the consequences.

(05-24-2019, 05:32 PM)hollodero Wrote: Hasn't it started with whitewater though?

Not to contradict 'Zona, but yes.  Starr was investigating Whitewater and found out the Lewinski stuff in the process.  Clinton should have refused to answer anything not related to Whitewater.  Honestly Starr had no business asking about Lewinski other than to cause Clinton political damage.

(05-24-2019, 07:46 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Whitewater was a separate investigation that came to nothing. The impeachment was about whether Bill Clinton lied under oath about having sex with Monica Lewinski.

It was separate, but that's what Starr was investigating when he deposed Clinton and Clinton lied.  That it came to nothing is not true at all, unless you mean in regards to the Clinton's (which I think was your point), in which case you would be technically correct.  It netted a huge number of indictments, convictions and brought down the, then, current governor of Arkansas.