Jump to content

toonkee

Members
  • Content Count

    9,877
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by toonkee


  1. 25 minutes ago, TheSanDiegan said:

    Which is most certainly a form of Whataboutism, as it only serves to obfuscate the very real extraconstitutional abuse of power that needs to be put in check.

    Trump doesn't see himself bound by the constraints of law and has an authoritarian thirst for absolute power. 

    If Congress does not use their Constitutionally-enshrined authority now, we are implicitly establishing a new baseline for what is considered acceptable. While impeachment risks deepening a partisan divide, letting Trump's executive branch continue to run amok could spell the end of our democracy.

    And Taibbi's suggestion that impeaching him could be the very thing that triggers a dictatorial abuse of power to suppress political opposition is not a reason to not impeach; it is the very reason they have to impeach.

    I agree with a lot of what you say here, just trying to call balls and strikes fair and square.

    Regarding your last paragraph...

    Yes. I am seeing this argument more and more now that if Trump does some crazy ass stuff it's because others pushed him to the edge, so we better let him do whatever or he'll take us all down. Wtf?

     

    • Like 1

  2. 2 hours ago, DestinFlPackfan said:

    Just a quick comment before i go on my beer run... (aka bathroom) isn't the non bolded part at the end ....whataboutism? 

    Maybe not as taiibi seems to be saying that neither party has the moral authority to condemn the other, and that's a problem.


  3. 2 hours ago, Rebels18 said:

    No they do not. If you compare the two videos you can even see ABC cropped out shots of the crowd.--So they can't even claim they were mistaken, it was deliberate attempt to pass off the gun range footage as actual war scenes. But this is common practice with ABC, CNN, MSNBC, etc these days. Post the fake story with zero verification or investigative journalism and it gets 500,000 views, retweets, etc tjhen post the retraction a few days later and it gets 20k. Oh well, the damage was done. 

     

    I'm with you, this is a deliberate act and it's terrible, but I don't want you getting away with claiming this is a liberal media only issue. Fox has been busted with this kind of stuff often and we all know fox news is the number 1 watched cable news network. Almost all media is in a race to the bottom. 

     

     

    • Like 1

  4. 2 hours ago, Joe from WY said:

    That's like some 1984-esque shit, honestly, if they were in on the doctoring, and if they weren't, it still looks terrible on them because in their rush to blame Trump for getting the Kurds killed, they didn't do their vetting of the video and ran with it. So at worst they're sinister, at best, negligent and incompetent.

    They def did it on purpose.


  5. 18 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

    I’ll address this post with a better reply when I have some time to think. 

    With respect to the bolded part, I don’t think they’re crimes. I think it was corruption, in some part for self-interest but also allowing that they may genuinely have believed something was rotten in Denmark and it was their job to stop it. It was their job to stop it. It was also their job to do it in a way that was not corrupt. They appear to have done neither.

    Hence the quotes around "crimes"

    My point was it was one supposition versus many.


  6. 41 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

    Seems like the same Taibbi skeptical of institutions that I used to read, sourced with a litany of direct links that back up what he is saying. Potato/potato I guess

    I do not disagree that this is typical of Taiibi, but I see the piece as being somewhat unfair.  

    He pits a singular offense of Trump, the Ukraine quid pro quo, against all of the unproven crimes of the CIA in the last how many years. 

    I very much concede that it would be obtuse to dismiss the likely "crimes" of CIA/FB in the past years however Taiibi needs to extend the same courtesy to Trump, as you'd have to have the same level of obtuseness to declare Trump is not making certain policy decisions based on how it might affect his undivested companies. Neither are proved in court, however Taiibi posits the CIA stuff as fact and Trump's litany of apparent transgressions are missing.

    Some of the wording appears to say "appeasement" of Trump is better than the alternative but that will ultimately lead down the same road.

     


  7. Got to give Sanchez a little credit. He said this week they had to get back to being a running team and v of course that's what they did. The effectiveness of the run allowed the receivers to get a little space and oblad was able to make a couple more throws Rogers might have blown. Really happy for the guys, it's got to be hard to keep getting up off the mat. Any p5 scalp, even one from a crappy team, is a big deal for UNLV. 

    • Like 2
    • Cheers 2

  8. 6 minutes ago, CPslograd said:

    Bud, I don't think you know what you are talking about here.

    The vast majority of Republican voters may support Trump but a majority  of the republican elites (or intelligentsia if you prefer) do not.

    Hayes and Goldberg loathe Trump. That doesn't mean Hayes and Goldberg are objective journalists and Hannity is not.  None of them are objective journalists, that's not their job.

    So you have two different issues here.  One is are they journalists or commentators.  The other is are they Trumpets or anti Trumpers, or somewhere in the middle. 

    For instance Brit is now a commentator and has been since he turned Special Report over to Brett.  He is somewhere in the middle.  Hayes is anti Trump , the jackass from The Washington Times whose name I can't remember is a Trumper.

    So for starters, you need to realize there is a difference between a commentator and a journalist.  And secondly, you need to realize that there are a wide range of conservative commentators positions on Trump.

     

     


  9. 6 minutes ago, Lester_in_reno said:

    the House of Saud gives the USA money.

    The Kurds don't. (and they don't have any)

    Thats all you need to know.

    Trump sez the saudis are paying the us now for the escalation of our military involvement. 

    Sez the saudis buy a lot of military equipment from us.

    So our troops are for hire now? We’re not even going to pretend there’s some righteousness cause? 

     

    • Like 1

  10. 14 hours ago, Wyobraska said:

    I'm amazed in this day and age how many people document and put their crimes on the internet for the world to see.  They don't mean to of course and think things like photos are trivial, but they leave a trail of evidence if put together right, severely hurts their case.

    Maybe don't take pictures with people who you are plotting with?

    The thing with criminals is that most of them don't think anyone is smart, or smarter than them anyway.  They have a hard time even imagining something that seems obvious to you or me. Because they are often dummies and sociopaths.

×