search results matching tag: split

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (358)     Sift Talk (26)     Blogs (29)     Comments (1000)   

Republicans Try to Dismiss Trumps Second Impeachment Trial

newtboy says...

Impeachment already happened for a second time. You mean the trial.

It is pretty definitely constitutional because he was impeached while still the sitting president.

One reason for it is, in a criminal trial, they have to prove he intended to start a violent insurrection, a very difficult bar to clear especially considering his contradictory instructions in his speech and his mental state....in an impeachment trial they only have to show that his words incited it, not his intent. That’s a no brainer.

The only way it hurts Democrats in 2022 is it would hinder his creating a new party that would split “conservative” votes and guarantee victory for democrats across the board. Thinking conservatives should be itching for conviction and a ban from office to save the Republican party in 2022, if he’s let off conservatives are domed....republicans can’t win without Trumpists, Trump can’t win without Republicans. Conversely, letting him off with no consequences would hurt the democrat vote badly...why elect them if they let Republicans get away with everything including violent and deadly insurrection and attempted assassination.

Your fear of libs coming for your guns makes me sad. You drank the fear flavored koolaid, they just aren’t unless you go violently nuts, stalk someone, or beat your wife up, or if you need to buy them illegally because you’re a felon. Note, the NRA went bankrupt under Trump and McConnel, not Biden.

If Republicans want to fight everything because a murderous and treasonous coup is prosecuted as if it were disturbing the peace with no prison time possible, they should be tossed as traitors to the constitution that they swore to uphold that requires a punishment for inciting insurrection and attempting a government overthrow. Really, they want an excuse for fighting everything, it’s a foregone conclusion that they will no matter what, they have zero interest in compromise or bipartisanship. They insisted Trump had a mandate and should ignore Democrats completely because he won the electoral college, but now that Biden won it and the popular vote and the house and senate they insist he has no mandate and must let the minority call the shots. It’s not consistent because they aren’t honest about anything anymore.

No one that thinks prosecuting directing an attempted coup is wrong would be voting democrat anyway. Prosecuting incitement of murderous insurrection is not vengeance, it’s barely a thin slice of justice, but it’s the best that can be reasonably hoped for in today’s hyper partisan climate.

Mordhaus said:

As much of a fuck up Trump turned out to be, it really isn't going to happen. I believe, as does about half of the legal scholars, that once the President has left office there are other methods to go after him other than impeachment. Impeachment is for a sitting President.

If you want to go after him for Treason/Sedition in a Federal court, feel free, just quit wasting time with an impeachment that may not be constitutional and that will never happen. Plus, instead of focusing on pushing the stimulus, you are both giving Republicans an excuse to fight you on everything and showing moderates that you are more concerned with vengeance than fixing the country. That is not going to help you out in 2022, mark my words.

Thankfully all the brouhaha is keeping the government focused well away from guns. Crossing my fingers that Dems are stupid enough to kill enough time on Trump stuff that we can take back the House/Senate.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Once again, after weeks of waiting for your evidence, I'll ask....can you name ONE?! So far, every person identified is a hard core Trumpist, every armed terrorist identified, everyone hunting Pence, everyone carrying cuffs and zip tie cuffs, everyone beating police, everyone breaking Windows, everyone giving tours to insurgents for recon on secret offices, everyone live tweeting Pelosi's location....ALL Trumpsters, not one identified as Antifa. Nice fantasy you think somehow absolves the violent terrorist Trump mob that tried to violently overthrow the government, but as usual you have zero evidence besides self serving lies. Even if it's true (and there's no evidence it is) there were a few non Trumpsters egging on the crowd of thousands, do you think that absolves your ilk of responsibility, or do you see that it means they were so primed and itching for insurrection that a few scruffy anarchists convinced them to attack their own country.

Also, you must ignore the mountains of evidence these morons left of their plans, plans to attack congress, kidnap elected officials, and somehow install Trump as president. Those plans weren't from Antifa, they were proud boys, boogaloos, militias, white power groups, and bat shit crazy Karens and Kens....all Trumpists.

So....Antifa destroying democratic headquarters and waving banners saying "we don't want Biden, we want revenge" pretty much blows up your "Antifa=Democrats, Democrats=Antifa" claims. What now?

Enjoy the patriot party, don't think about the fact that splitting the Republican party means never winning any elections. You just go on with Donny, who likely won't be able to hold office. Clearly he hasn't thought it through or he would have waited until after his impeachment trial to announce his new party, because now Republicans understand the only way to save their party and jobs is to ban Trump from politics.
Also, how is he going to start a political party in prison. Hard to set up a press conference from solitary.
Sorry sunshine, like everything he touches, Trump is destroying the right on his way out the door.



bobknight33 said: Didn't help that ANTIFA was there as Trump supporters inciting action.

Sci-Fi story from Many Worlds interpr. of Quantum Mechanics

vil says...

This is like travelling "faster than the speed of light". No idea what thats about either.

Nice SF story.

According to the currently most popular simplest many worlds theory the universe splits every time anything happens at the quantum level - good luck keeping up. Also good luck "communicating" without splitting more universes.

Also its just a theory.

Let's talk about a message from one of your daughters

Notre Dame Faculty Pens Open Letter To Delay Hearings

newtboy says...

Sounds to me like a commercial for single payer.

Not only does everyone save the 20% off the top insurance takes but that adds nothing but red tape and hoops to try to deny coverage, but we cut the red tape and split the hoops too. Prices would be fairly fixed (with some leeway between say San Francisco and Redding, seriously affluent vs lower middle class, high rent vs low rent) which would drastically lower costs with one group of 350 million to negotiate most favored nation pricing for everything like Trump promised by it didn't deliver, and insurance still available for preferential treatment or private practices like most single payer nations have.

I will agree, what ever the cause, quality of care and access to care are both on a downward spiral, and something needs to change. Fighting over covering everyone or making it a pay to play (read as pay to live) system where many go to drastic lengths to get care, be that crime, 4 jobs, or just a willingness to not pay is not solving the problem, it's creating it.

Then they plopped covid on all of it like epoxy in the lifters. Thanks Trump. ;-)

Mordhaus said:

That is on top of insurance. We pay roughly 275 dollars per paycheck for both of our insurance. Before the ACA, that insurance was sufficient to cover our doctor, etc.

After the ACA, more and more independent doctors are going to the concierge or direct pay method. Most of the reason given is the extra red tape. They apparently would rather charge for the office visits and minor tests via fee/concierge payment instead of trying to wade through the post-ACA insurance hoops.

Here in Texas, it is rapidly splitting into 3 groups. Lower quality doctors that remain independent, good doctors like my old one who are going direct pay/concierge, and doctors that are part of a multi doctor clinic.

Notre Dame Faculty Pens Open Letter To Delay Hearings

Mordhaus says...

That is on top of insurance. We pay roughly 275 dollars per paycheck for both of our insurance. Before the ACA, that insurance was sufficient to cover our doctor, etc.

After the ACA, more and more independent doctors are going to the concierge or direct pay method. Most of the reason given is the extra red tape. They apparently would rather charge for the office visits and minor tests via fee/concierge payment instead of trying to wade through the post-ACA insurance hoops.

Here in Texas, it is rapidly splitting into 3 groups. Lower quality doctors that remain independent, good doctors like my old one who are going direct pay/concierge, and doctors that are part of a multi doctor clinic.

newtboy said:

You're kidding. You can get good care (I assume anything non surgical?) For $1800 a year and you don't?!? I pay that three times over for insurance that pays almost nothing until I'm $4500 out of pocket, and compared to today's market here that's a bargain.

Here I'm lucky to have a doctor at all. We have a huge shortage, always have since I've lived here.

Do you really see it getting better without the aca? Can you tell me why, since normally any improvements wouldn't go to patients or level of care but instead to higher profits?

I sure don't recall when advancements of any kind led to lower health care costs on average...my thought was the aca just spread the pain of paying for the indigent, and gave them preventative care to lower their need for expensive treatments we pay for either way, with higher insurance rates covering care for the poor and lowering overall costs or with higher care cost, leading to higher insurance and more unhealthy poor skipping out on higher bills.

I absolutely think single payer is best. Costs can be negotiated by the entire country, leading to lower costs. Everyone gets basic care, no one skips on their bill, leading to lower costs. 20% that the insurance industry takes from every medical dollar goes away, leading to lower costs. Like other nations with universal healthcare, anyone who chooses can buy supplemental insurance that covers better, more comfortable care like private rooms or choice of top doctors, so nothing's lost for patients. The only issues I see are ideological.

Pedo-Trump

newtboy says...

If party didn't matter, why list it for each accused? Since you did, you made it matter, but I admit Epstein went both ways, at least politically.

1) if I were Epstein, I would have killed myself after my first child rape.
2) if I were Epstein, I would have cameras everywhere except my "massage room" and the sex dungeon....especially after the first prosecution. You don't need homemade porn if you have multiple sex slaves.

I think they are both smarter than that, and that if he made any, she would have destroyed them when he was arrested if the police didn't find them first.

It is a conspiracy theory that would explain his murder, many people believe he had video of Trump, the Prince, and other notables and he was killed to stop him from revealing them. I have serious doubts about that, but it's possible and more likely than keeping videos of himself raping children. Even videos of others raping children at his house makes him complicit, so aren't a good insurance policy.

BTW, did you see Cohen's daughter interviewed about that time when she was 15 and Trump tried to pick her up, intending to have sex with her, not knowing it was his lawyer's daughter? Good stuff. Before you claim disgruntled ex employee, the story was reported before their split, well before he was president.

bobknight33 said:

Yea it was cut and past. Epstein Dem or Rep doesn't matter.


If you were Epstein wouldn't you have cameras. Nothing like an insurance policy. Even if it did not work out for him.

But his side kick Maxwell has or know where it is.

Doc Rivers

Mordhaus says...

I hearken back to the ACA, it would never have passed in a split congress. But it did because it was a perfect storm of all dem leadership and I still have issues with some of it. Without going too deep, the ACA has seriously fucked up my life as many family doctors in my area simply gave up and went full concierge (or just started refusing insurance). So now my options are to go to a clinic with no primary doctor or go back to my family doctor and pay 2k per year on top of insurance.

The same thing could happen to guns if the dems take both houses and the presidency. At the very least it ends in a return to the ban of 96 and is likely to be far worse. I support some gun control, but 80% of what they are suggesting is no bueno with me. Are these phantom fears? Possibly, but I trust the dems about as far as I can throw one in regards to gun control.

newtboy said:

Hmmmm...ok, that's not legislation but is what I meant. A forced buyback program is going to have issues.

1) I have no problem with companies having to answer for injuries caused by the prescribed, advertised proper use of their product. If shoes were sold as having the greatest shin kicking power, doing the most damage when you kick someone, shoe manufacturers should be sued by those who get kicked. If manufacturers haven't modeled and advertised in a way that suggests dangerous uses, the suits will lose. Lawyers don't take loser cases, so it won't be an issue imo. Special protections from liability are a problem imo.

2) I've never understood the endgame there. What is an assault rifle, and how are their capabilities special? That said, no one is clamoring for Uzis to come back. Without a legitimate reason for high capacity fast shooting rifles, and no attempts to ban semi auto rifles, I'm just not that bothered by it, but I do think it's placating not meaningful legislation.

3) I have zero issues with registration or background checks. That seems the right way to deal with "assault rifles". There's no reason it should be expensive or time consuming if records are up to date. If they make it expensive as a tax disincentive against ownership, I have a problem. Shooting isn't a cheap sport, $10-20 a year shouldn't bother those who spent $2k on one rifle.

4) No issue at all with voluntary buy backs. Involuntary buybacks are going to be a legal and practical nightmare.

5) one purchase per month, a bit much. One purchase at a time, I'm ok with, that's 3 a month, right? I'm suspicious of anyone who needs multiple guns quick before they calm down.

6) I'm all for universal background checks. I don't want nutjob and violent criminals buying guns they aren't allowed to own.

7) I'm all for not allowing those who can't handle day to day existence to buy guns. I'm even ok with TEMPORARY removal of their guns in some cases, but only if they're returned immediately after they're deemed competent.

misdemeanor hate crime? I thought hate crime was an enhancement charge that took a misdemeanor up to felony level. I'm definitely against taking gun rights away permanently for misdemeanors.

9) dunno what that is.

10) the problem is you can buy a receiver that needs to be finished, as little as one tiny drill hole is enough, with no serial number or registration. It's just a chunk of metal until it's finished. No problem with a background check for every purchase, but a maximum of one check per month seems a reasonable compromise.

11) with proper oversight and a system that ensures it's not abused, no problem for me.

12) Yes, strict guidelines and quick return seem necessary. 48 hours without a doctor stating it's necessary would work, but as of now they aren't ready for prime time on that it seems.

13) had that in cali forever, not an issue yet.

14) as designed, smart guns wouldn't be hackable, there's no reason for wireless connectivity. Battery? Make it charge itself by shaking it like some flashlights? I like the idea that guns can only be used by the owner, solves so many issues, mainly being shot with your own gun.

15) depends on what constitutes "safe". I agree, guns for home defense need to be available quickly.

16) some ghost guns are milled on professional cnc mills but unfinished. 3d printed guns, I'm not a fan. 3 shots is plenty to murder someone, and with no identification it's a near perfect weapon for crimes.
3d printing is advancing constantly. You can print in metal with fine details now on home equipment. I think it won't be long before stable guns can be printed if they aren't already.

Thanks for doing the research. I seriously doubt most could pass even a democratic congress but some would, and most won't pass court challenges, but I understand your reluctance to put that to the test.

If you're going to fight the swamp thing, I won't argue against leaving a few snakes in the black lagoon. Some opposition is healthy, but the ability to be obstructionist on every idea is gridlock. I don't see it getting better.

Doc Rivers

Mordhaus says...

I would go hunting for the videos, but Biden has already stated that he fully plans to empower Beto to be his gun control 'czar'. Beto has already said that he absolutely is coming for "our" guns. He plans a forced turn in or buyback of all assault style weapons, presumably those also covered by laws that allow them under federal tax stamps (full auto).

In addition, Biden lists the following on his website as his plans:

1. Hold gun manufacturers accountable. In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection. (Only this is misleading. Do shoe manufacturers get sued if you kick someone in the face? Do knife manufacturers get sued if you stab someone? Do car manufacturers get sued when you get into an accident? No and neither do most other manufacturers. Putting this in place means that any time a gun is used in a crime, they can try to sue the manufacturer of that gun into non-existence. It doesn't even have to be an 'assault' weapon, any gun manufacturer is at risk. The only thing that wouldn't count is blackpowder guns since they aren't classed as firearms.)

2. Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons. (So this would be a perma ban on assault weapons and would also anticipate changes to circumvent the law. This would be the assault ban of 1994 on steroids.)

3. Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. (So even if he doesn't get Beto to push through a buy back, he can force owners of assault rifles to be subject to the EXTREMELY restrictive NFA. Not only that, but it's expensive and would be a tax on gun owners yearly.)

4. Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act. (Covered this already. But if this does go through, you likely won't be seeing me on here anymore as it will be a cold day in hell before I surrender my guns or pay the government to be allowed to own them.)

5. Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one. (Once you get this through, it is far easier to get legislation passed to cap how many guns a person can own total. Fuck that.)

6. Require background checks for all gun sales. Today, an estimated 1 in 5 firearms are sold or transferred without a background check. Biden will enact universal background check legislation, requiring a background check for all gun sales with very limited exceptions, such as gifts between close family members. This will close the so-called “gun show and online sales loophole” that the Obama-Biden Administration narrowed, but which cannot be fully closed by executive action alone. (I can deal with this, just means you need to go through an FFL.)

7. Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. (Not 100% on this one, but it isn't a deal breaker)

8. Enact legislation prohibiting an individual “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission” from purchasing or possessing a firearm. (Felony yes, but that already exists. Misdemeanor, fuck no.)

9. Close the “Charleston loophole.” (yeah, no problem with this one)

10. End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts. (So if I want to build another AR15 I can't? Fuck that. You still have to get the primary receiver through or shipped to an FFL. Which means a background check every single time.)

11. Create an effective program to ensure individuals who become prohibited from possessing firearms relinquish their weapons. (I would be for this if it wasn't for the fact that it is one step away from the government outlawing guns. Once this mechanism is in place at a federal level, all that means is you are one vote away from having your guns seized.)

12. Incentivize state “extreme risk” laws. Extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws, enable family members or law enforcement officials to temporarily remove an individual’s access to firearms when that individual is in crisis and poses a danger to themselves or others. (Sounds good, but nobody is willing to state the guidelines that the family or LEO will have to follow. That means that it is completely up to family members and LEO's to decide what constitutes a 'crisis'. Bet you a lot of LEO's in protest states would red flag most protesters immediately if this law existed now in all states.)

13. Give states incentives to set up gun licensing programs. (This is above and beyond the federal checks. This would mean any gun owner or potential owner would have to maintain and pay for a separate gun license. Also, it allows states and locales to decide what constitutes the requirements for the gun license. There are already some states doing this and you have to get permission to even own a gun from the sheriff or other official. Fuck that.)

14. Put America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns. (Are you fucking kidding me? What if the battery runs out, what if it gets hacked, or what if the government decides to flip a switch and shut them all down? I'll never agree to this.)

15. Require gun owners to safely store their weapons. Biden will pass legislation requiring firearm owners to store weapons safely in their homes. (IE, locked in a safe or partially disassembled, possibly a combination of both. Why bother having a gun for home defense if it can't be used without spending 5-10 minutes to make it available/functional?)

16. Stop “ghost guns.” (This is just stupid. 3d printed guns might be able to fire a few shots before reaching a critical failure. You can't 3d print a lower or upper receiver that matches a stock one. Yes, they made lowers for the original m-16s, but they swapped from those because they were shit. They broke constantly. And those weren't printed, they were molded from a tougher plastic. A 3d printed one is not nearly as strong. Either way, I don't care too much about this because it is a buzzword for non-gun people. Just like bumpstocks. You can still bump-fire a regular ar-15, the bumpstocks were just training wheels for idiots.)

Now he has a shitload more laws he wants to pass, but most of them I don't care too much about. I won't bother covering all of them. In any case, he is going to go after guns on a scale unseen to this point. If the dems get control of both houses, he will get these laws passed. Then the only hope is that SCOTUS votes them down as unconstitutional.

I won't vote for Trump, but I will be doing my part to maintain a split congress. Which means straight republican ticket other than Trump.

newtboy said:

What anti gun legislation do you mean? All I know of is closing a few loopholes that allow people legally banned from gun ownership to obtain them anyway without background checks. I disagree that that is anti gun legislation, and across the board background checks are something a vast majority think is proper.

There's plenty of misinformation on this topic floating about. Is there other actual legislation in the works, or just rumors of other legislation the left will enact....and only according to the right?

ThunderCats Opening Remade with CGI

Orange County is the Florida of California

newtboy says...

Screw that!
As a true NorCaler, in Humboldt, we don't want Sacramento and the bay area. We are a completely different animal up here from those central Californians.
Split it at Big Sur, and again at Ukiah. They can keep the big port, pollution, and traffic, we'll keep the forests and unspoiled rivers.

StukaFox said:

As a former NorCal'er, I can't tell you how much I loathe SoCal. Every now and then, a call goes out to split the state horizontally at around Fresno. Fuck that! Split it at Big Sur and let them have all the shit between King City and the Mexican border.

Orange County is the Florida of California

StukaFox says...

As a former NorCal'er, I can't tell you how much I loathe SoCal. Every now and then, a call goes out to split the state horizontally at around Fresno. Fuck that! Split it at Big Sur and let them have all the shit between King City and the Mexican border.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Lol. All PROFESSIONAL doctors agree....and social distancing with good hygiene is not shutting down for the most part.
(There are dozens of ways to achieve relative safety and keep even schools open, but just going back isn't one of them. For instance, staggered school days, splitting classes into 5 equal groups that each attend one day a week could allow social distancing and more personal attention, online classrooms could supplement at home schooling the other 4 days a week. What won't work is Trump's plan of just sending everyone back to overcrowded classrooms all at once, that's a guarantee of new large scale outbreaks nationwide.)

Now we know the doctors that agree with you are the same doctors that say alien DNA is used to make medicines, gynecologic issues are caused by having sex with demons in dreams, hydroxychloroquine is safe and effective, and 1/2 the government is lizard people and other aliens.
Trump's got the best doctors.
*facepalm

Feeling like you're being lied to yet?

Or are these conspiracy theorist nutbags, the only ones who agree with Trump, the best and brightest doctors (in your mind) and those millions of professional and sane health care workers are in a huge perfectly executed global conspiracy designed solely to hurt Trump even in countries that love Trump like Brazil and Russia, murdering hundreds of thousands and maiming millions and starting a global depression to further the fraud?

Second question. If every nation in the world is willing to murder it's own citizens and destroy their own economies to hurt Trump, shouldn't he be removed for the good of the nation and planet? If his "leadership" has made enemies out of every other country, how does that benefit America?

bobknight33 said:

First of al not ALL agree to stay shut down or to mask up.

% of deaths to infected is small. Is It worth shutting down and loosing mom and pop shops and much more worth it?


I say mask up and go to work.

Kids are the safest demographic.

The Looters

VoteVets - Traitor

luxintenebris jokingly says...

what? fake a bone malady? to rename badly named military bases?

hey! if you actually have info, that can independently be verified (meaning, factual) - dish it, bobby!

it'd be a real distraction. a black president passing on removing traitors' names from US bases? or if barry faked his birth certificate (stay w/the hits), wasn't 10 during vietnam and really is 68! oh! mah-mah!

or it's just another spit and split salvo?

sing it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uEWQrZldnk

[think bk is softening. no rationalization for the draft-dodging, being traitorous, or why dj is pictured on the three-man aryan volleyball team?)

bobknight33 said:

Obama was asked to do this also. So now lay the blame on Trump.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon