search results matching tag: gang

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (563)     Sift Talk (19)     Blogs (18)     Comments (1000)   

White House revokes CNN reporters press pass

newtboy says...

You claimed he was portrayed unfairly because it was reported when he repeatedly dehumanized migrants, Arabs, and Muslims as pretext to treat them poorly, Obama didn't dehumanize and demonize them, nor did he just let them all in, so only Fox reports that he did....in opinion pieces dressed as news. You can try to hide from that claim by attempting to change the subject to Trump's poor performance but you won't be successful.

Obama did a better and more humane job on immigration, Trump did a worse, but undeniably more racist job.

Trump calls migrants rapists, murderers, and gang members. He gave up any pretext for middle eastern people and just calls them middle eastern with a derisive tone, because all middle eastern people and Muslims are terrorists we don't want here.
You claim reporting that is an unfair portrayal, painting him as a meanie, I say it's honest reporting of his unedited words and positions.

Briguy1960 said:

Never once said Trump was doing a better job handling the illegal caravans.
I'm talking about how he is portrayed as if he is the only meanie who won't let them in.
Your mind is making things up as usual about what I think or anyone thinks who disagrees with you on this.


Oh and to refresh your memory on what Fusion GPS is ...

https://heavy.com/news/2017/07/fusion-gps-dossier-russia-trump-jr-christopher-steele-

Steve Schmidt on Trump 'Stoking And Inciting' Worst Among Us

newtboy says...

How could anyone possibly connect Dumb Donald's continuing public accusations against numerous prominent Jews that they are paying refugees (rapists and murderers), gang members (murderers), and Islamic terrorists (murderers) to "invade America" with the right wing terrorist, Bowers, who authored a social media post before the shooting accusing the organization HIAS, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, of bringing "invaders in that kill our people."
There's clearly no connection at all. Just because right wing terrorists are attacking the exact targets Trump continues to designate as the enemy (like calling CNN "the enemy of the people" between when the second and third bomb addressed to them was discovered), and are using his arguments and tweets in their manifestos and internet ramblings doesn't mean they've ever even heard of Trump, no connection.
*facepalm

bobknight33 said:

Such Bull crap. Trump has nothing to do with the shooting.


Dog whistle for the left.
*lies

TED Talk: Whitopia

newtboy says...

My counter argument....that that's not what you said....and it's still inaccurate.

You said the blanket statement about any/every group of 50 whites being a violent racist gang is not entirely inaccurate. It is.

Now, had you said the blanket statement about every group of 50 whites being a lynch mob was true some of the time, that would still be a wildly inaccurate overstatement, but better. There has been no point in time when every group of 50 white men was a lynch mob.

Had you said what you now say, it's not entirely inaccurate because it's true some of the time in certain specific areas with certain groupings, it would be contradicting the original blanket statement which is inaccurate, so it's still technically incorrect, just like saying the statement about groups of black people isn't entirely inaccurate....it is, because the unwritten but undeniable subject of the statement is ANY group of 50 black/white people, not one specific group in a few specific places at some times.

If you understand that, you understand why it's entirely inaccurate no matter how you wish to interpret the rest.

Is it true that there have been groups of 50 white men that were a lynch mob, yes. That doesn't resemble what you said.

Drachen_Jager said:

Okay, still an exaggeration. How about we take it to mean what it says, instead, "That's true some of the time."

Now, your counter-argument is?

TED Talk: Whitopia

newtboy says...

I don't think they're intended to mean "it's infinitesimally possible, however incredibly unlikely and totally wrong as a blanket statement about any group of 50 white people", paired with your explanation I think it means "that's true in many places".


Kind of like agreeing that "50 black people are a violent criminal gang" is not entirely inaccurate because in certain specific places it might be possible....but as a blanket statement about ANY and EVERY group of 50 black people it's not only entirely inaccurate, it's insultingly racist.

Drachen_Jager said:

And your point is? You'll have to spell it out. Preferably without the hyperbole this time. What do you think the words, "Not entirely inaccurate..." mean?

A Scary Time

scheherazade says...

What sort of evidence?

- Accusation/testimonial evidence?

- Or Physical evidence that is an invariant indicator of rape, that you can hold, see, measure, etc?



Anyone can accuse. That's effortless. Takes barely more energy than breathing.

(It's also effortless for a group of sour girls to gang up on a dude that upset them. Because "f that guy'. (That attitude isn't even rare.))



Physical evidence? People are convicted day in and day out of all sorts of things without physical evidence.

(Court is after all a popularity contest.)




My scary moment was when a cop detained me and told me he was going to charge me with : reckless driving, driving without a seat belt, and with threatening his life.

Why? Because I pulled up to a road block and asked him if I could drive past his road block to go home (which was a short way past the road block)... and he was having some emotional stability/triggering issues at the time, and he instantly turned red and went full on tirade mode.

Fortunately for me, after detaining me a few hours, some switch flipped in his head again and he just went to his car, got in, and drove off. Surreal.

So I asked myself :
If I had been charged, what would be the difference in court, vis-a-vis evidence, between it being a lie, and it being the truth?
Answer : No difference.

All he threatened me with was provable only by his word, and no evidence was required. I likely would have gone to jail, and had my life turned upside down... all on some person's grimace.

My view on evidence changed that day.
I will _NEVER_ convict anyone of anything, without physical tangible evidence that I can hold in my hand and see with my eyes, or at least run forensic tests on.
Testimony doesn't mean _shit_. It's absolutely, patently _worthless_.

(I also now run a dash cam everywhere I drive to protect myself from false accusations)




Basically, unless you have physical proof, I don't care.
Whatever you have to say, prove it.
No proof, no cares.

That goes for all accusations of anything ever. Across the board. Absolute.

It's the standard I want people to have for me, and it's the standard I have for others.

-scheherazade





(Aside, unrelated : I know a dude that was raped by a girl (he was nearly paralyzed drunk at his own house party). Wasn't even a secret. People at the party knew it happened. Nobody cared. When he complained, all anyone said was "Oh whatever. Shut up get over it". It wasn't even a question of 'did it happen?', it was a matter of "so what?".)

ChaosEngine said:

[...]
Finally, where is the abandoning of proof and evidence? Show me someone who has been convicted of sexual assault without any evidence. There's a big difference between accepting an allegation is worth looking into and convicting that person.

If a woman (or a man) comes forward with a claim of sexual assault, they are entitled to be taken seriously. That doesn't mean their alleged assailant is guilty though.
[...]

Kavanaugh: No More Nineties Reboots, Please | Full Frontal

bobknight33 says...

Nope I Do not concede it was Hypothetical speaking.

3 public accusations known..

1 is ford.
1 claims gang raped - 10 times -- She is not a victim.. She is an enabler.

The 3 is -- A story so not believable no one want to use it.

Democrats used this stunt to besmirch Clarence Thomas and Democrats are doing it again.

newtboy said:

So you now concede he tried to rape Ford? Wow, that's progress.
It's not once, there are a minimum of 3 public accusations known, and if they're true, probably dozens unreported since the MO was drug them into unconsciousness. Most wouldn't know what happened or who did it to ever accuse anyone.
These acts have destroyed one career, family, and life....Ford's.

We are, however, all doomed, thanks to the kind of politics that let people support probable drunks and rapists (and incontrovertibly those with no decorum, professionalism, or self control) for the highest court in the land if those rapists will push their politics from the bench.

McCain defending Obama 2008

newtboy says...

Did you ever consider they ganged up on him because he's so incredibly anti American and destructive that anyone who cares about American Democracy would oppose him, Democrats, Republicans, independents, honest media, the intelligence community, law enforcement, etc? Probably not, you're convinced his party is turning on him because he's winning too much.

Lol. Steele dossier....the one that was just upheld in court when Trump's lible/slander cases were thrown out....or did you not know that?

Yes. It was the turn to backing him that was the wrong, self serving, proven short sighted move.

Trump has not sold out conservative principles, he's thrown them in the trash and shit on them. Clearly principles are NOT what you hang your hat on, he has none and you've admitted it privately.

The creature from the bronze lagoon was hardly the one to help clean up the swamp, and his most criminally convicted administration ever is pretty good proof of that.

That $80 you got goes away in a few years and becomes a raise in your taxes by around $160, in case you won't read the actual law. You didn't get a tax break, you got a tax raise and a 5 year loan packaged as a tax break, and you bought it. Trump, according to economists that studied his public holdings, stands to gain around $1 million per year forever....his tax breaks are permanent. Not what he said, but you don't care he outright lied to you about it for months, do you, yet one corrected mistake by Clinton (Benghazi was a protest over Koran burnings in America, quickly retracted) and you still think she'll be indicted for....something you're incapable of naming, but something.

Fuck, Bob. Your insistence on backing Trump's every move no matter what has made you bat shit insane, inconsistent, and totally disconnected from reality. I hope you can get therapy.

bobknight33 said:

McCain was a turncoat to me in 2008. ( well even before 2008) Same for Bush 44.
Deplorable Republicans. I did not vote for McCain in 08.

Bush 44 turn me against ( # walkaway) the Republican party and I then registered independent.


Republicans and Democrats are fundamentally the same .
In public they will "fight " each other for show. Behind the doors they serve their own self interest. They enrich themselves and family. Author Peter Schweizer book (Secret Empires) shines light on this.


Trump comes along, a true outsider, and both sides gang up on Trump, to the likes America has never seen. Media is right along for the ride (ratings). McCain, in my opinion had his hand in the Steele Dossier to destroy Trump.

The Republican kept their anti Trump position for nearly a year, and only then started to back Trump.

If you are a Republican you don't sell out conservative principles.----------------This is where I hang my hat. --


Bottom line DC is a self interest swamp. Every one wants something done. Liberals wanted Bernie. Republicans wanted Bush. America ended up with Trump.
I'm happy it was not Bush
My pocketbook is happy it wasn't Bernie.


As far as Trump Tax cuts They touted that average family of 4 making 70K would see something like 140$month
I see about 80$.. Not what they said but definitely noticed.

McCain defending Obama 2008

bobknight33 says...

McCain was a turncoat to me in 2008. ( well even before 2008) Same for Bush 44.
Deplorable Republicans. I did not vote for McCain in 08.

Bush 44 turn me against ( # walkaway) the Republican party and I then registered independent.


Republicans and Democrats are fundamentally the same .
In public they will "fight " each other for show. Behind the doors they serve their own self interest. They enrich themselves and family. Author Peter Schweizer book (Secret Empires) shines light on this.


Trump comes along, a true outsider, and both sides gang up on Trump, to the likes America has never seen. Media is right along for the ride (ratings). McCain, in my opinion had his hand in the Steele Dossier to destroy Trump.

The Republican kept their anti Trump position for nearly a year, and only then started to back Trump.

If you are a Republican you don't sell out conservative principles.----------------This is where I hang my hat. --


Bottom line DC is a self interest swamp. Every one wants something done. Liberals wanted Bernie. Republicans wanted Bush. America ended up with Trump.
I'm happy it was not Bush
My pocketbook is happy it wasn't Bernie.


As far as Trump Tax cuts They touted that average family of 4 making 70K would see something like 140$month
I see about 80$.. Not what they said but definitely noticed.

MilkmanDan said:

@bobknight33 --

I'm interested in what your thoughts on McCain were in 2008, when he was the Republican candidate for president. If I looked back at your comment history from that era, would you have criticized him in the same ways back then? Were you OK with him being the Republican nominee?

Opinions can legitimately shift over time. But, that's usually a gradual process. If your opinions on McCain shifted radically in a short span of time (since, say, 2016 -- a date I've completely randomly selected for no particular reason), you might want to consider that perhaps some external actor is more responsible for that shift than your own internal feelings.

You are, of course, welcome to your own opinions. However, it seems possible that this one is not precisely "your own". McCain's willingness to break away from groupthink and be a "maverick" was one of the things that people on both side of the aisle respected the most about him.

It's Time to Quit the Catholic Church!

newtboy says...

No. I disagree completely.

Paying taxes to support your government is mandatory and not doing so is punishable by law, with the full force of law enforcement backing that up.
Paying tithe and supporting a gang of known repeated, continuous child molesters and their helpers/protectors is a conscious free choice, as is remaining intentionally ignorant of their crimes (if that's even possible).

There's no correlation. It's not a slippery slope at all imo.

Now if you choose to stand up in support of those disastrous government programs, cheering them on and backing their supporters, then you're complicit.

MilkmanDan said:

I'm an atheist ...^

It's Time to Quit the Catholic Church!

newtboy says...

Um....it was time to leave when the first public massive child molestation case happened decades ago which also included a massive thorough cover-up by the church.

It's time to use RICO to seize all the catholic church's assets in America and end them. What the fuck is wrong with people that they wouldn't want to eradicate this cabal of child molesters?

*promote telling Catholics to GTFO of this molestation gang or be labeled complicit in the molestation. You give tithe, you paid to molest children....you still tithe, then you're doing it knowingly and should be lumped in with the molesters.

Groundhog Day For A Black Man

newtboy says...

You got it right, that's the agenda as I see it, make racism seem so outrageous and pervasive that people act....but only white on black racism exists or matters in that agenda. If you have such a biased, racist agenda, it detracts from the message that racism is bad and makes you sound ignorant.
Yeah....he argued once that he believes in racist faucets as a real issue of institutional racism, not a function of physics, even when it was explained scientifically....but I sound ignorant.
And through the filter of that agenda any white vs black interaction that's not the white person kissing ass is obviously pure racial malice and bias, and the only possible explanation is because all white people are overtly racist....and I sound ignorant.
And outright lies are fine with that agenda, including 100% bullshit stories like the one about racist gangs kidnapping a kid that obviously never happened, and dozens of others that are never corrected when debunked...and I sound ignorant.
I've posted dozens and dozens of videos about racism, but I do it because I think it's a real problem not dog poo I get to shove someone's nose in, so I'm careful to not equate bullshit, lies, exaggeration, hyperbole, and other falsehoods with it, because that gives racists ammunition to "prove" racism is dead and only alive in some people's minds and agendas, and a license to ignore true stories of real racism as more of the same. Doing THAT is ignorant and harmful.
That's true no matter what the agenda is, and is especially misguided and ill advised when it's about something important.
*facepalm

mborchew said:

Whats the agenda? Magnify the racist society he lives in? God forbid white people look in the mirror, right? You sound ignorant.

Unarmed child shot in the back while running from police

newtboy says...

Sure....then you just get killed in custody or framed and jailed for life.
Even in the highly unlikely event you find an honest police department, you have to fight the charges they think you might deserve with money and lawyers you don't have (the one they give you will have 200 open cases and 3 minutes to work on your case and will tell you to plea guilty), all after sitting in jail for years waiting for trial because you don't have $200k for bail.... sounds great.....after you. (You have to be black or Latino first though).

You know how you fix that, prosecute every small infraction any officer might be guilty of and remove the criminal cops permanently, like once fired for cause you get bared from any law enforcement job for life. We'll have to replace 2/3 of them and retrain the rest, but we still should, the police as they are are a gang of armed thugs that every now and then do a good deed so they can point to helping grandma get home when caught shooting kids in the back and pretend the former excuses the latter.

Esoog said:

You know how to fix that? Don't run away.

Trump Holds Rally Amid Aftermath of Family Separation Policy

newtboy says...

Funny, following the law isn't important when it's environmental law, or international law, charity law, fraud law, tax law, etc.....or when it takes effort to follow American law. That's why he spent money on building and running child jails instead of immigration judges, who could solve the problem 100% by making the application process last under 3 weeks.
Democratic politicians have tried to solve this repeatedly, but obstructionist republicans couldn't let any Obama laws pass and kicked it down the road to where we are now, where democratic bills stand zero chance of consideration, much less a vote.

Trump intentionally caused this with his presidential order to move to zero tolerance and arrest asylum seekers in an effort to force the political issue while Republicans only need to stop Democrats from filibustering, but enough Republicans balked at his monsterousness that he actually needs democrats votes now, something he won't get.

Since it's so often American policy and American drug trade that has made their homes terrible places, we owe those who our actions have displaced an opportunity for asylum.

It's like I come to your home, break in, take your valuables, burn the house down looking for more, then deride you for needing help, deny you shelter, and tell you to get your shit together and stabilize your life while my other gang members pick through the rubble of your home, then we dump you in Reno, your wife in Oklahoma, and your kids.....somewhere, not our problem, you find them.

There isn't some sudden rush of immigrants like Trump and oan/faux claim, the rate is still fairly steady.

Also, contrary to the lies you've repeated, no party advocates open borders. That's as true as saying Republicans are advocating the destruction of families and murder of children. Democrats have tried to fund rational immigration controls and have been stymied, but Republicans just want to lock the door and only let in those with connections and money.....like the Bin Ladens.

To think otherwise is just ignorant of the facts.

bobknight33 said:

Trump is doing the right thing. Following the law. This need to be FIXED this has been kicked down the road for decades. Politicians promise to do something then don't . They enact laws and then don't enforce. Trump is being non political and will try to fix it. Obama, Bush, Clinton all kick the can down the road as did the house and senate. Now 30+ million illegals and thousand every month coming. THIS NEEDS FIXED.

I sorry these people come from terrible places. The solution is not open boarders but to stabilize their countries. THEY need to get their shit together.


To think otherwise is foolish.

Unarmed child shot in the back while running from police

newtboy says...

So, you support shooting all the Bundies and the militia men that stood with them in the back....to death....right? Even if they're running away unarmed?
That wouldn't have been Obama and his Jack booted thugs murdering citizens in your mind, it would be an armed gang of criminal thugs getting what they deserve?

I don't believe that for one picosecond.....they're white.

You're trolling particularly hard recently, personal issues or just upset that Trump is failing on so many levels causing you to lash out?

bobknight33 said:

Why post such video?

He deserved what he got.

No police mishandling.

Second Ellicott City 'Thousand Year Storm' in 2 years

eric3579 says...

(edit)

I think title and description may be wrong

"The 2016 Ellicott City cloudburst was deemed* a “thousand-year rain event” in terms of the probability of recurrence. That an event of this magnitude unfolded in the same spot, two years later, is what it is"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/05/28/the-second-1000-year-rainstorm-in-two-years-engulfed-ellicott-city-heres-how-it
-happened/?utm_term=.c1948c1b867b

*Which came from this https://www.weather.gov/lwx/EllicottCityFlood2016

Please correct me if i'm wrong on this.



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