Political Roundtable Part XXIV

[montestewart]

Continued from here

[daoneandonly]

Great - and that is where we disagree. From my point of view the folks that don't support women raising children are right there in the middle of the brigade (actually worse because in my mind an infant is even less able to support himself than a fetus).

And there you have it... now you should be able to clearly understand why gtn's comment was so succinct. It just took a like time to get there.

So then where do you stand? You say part of the brigade is saying a woman who cant afford to raise a child should be able to have an abortion, so what about the women/men that can? Are you for them having that right?

Cause you are basically saying one of two things, either a poor person has more rights and freedoms than a middle class or rich when it comes to abortion, or you support abortion on all levels, across the board, no exceptions. So which is it?

[CobraCommander]

From Still Droppin responding to questions!

Pointgod wrote:
Wizardspride wrote:
Wizardspride wrote:
A question for the hardcore Trump supporters (mainly SD20/Nate):


IF Trump perjured himself while answering Mueller's questions, does that change your opinion?


Just want to get everyone on the record.

I'd like a response to this please.

Thanks.


Crickets.....,..


sorry wizardspride, i didn't think you actually wanted an actual answer to this rhetorical nonsense. But if you insist.

If Trump meaningfully perjures himself i'll go on record as saying that could be a red line for me. I'll reserve the right to define meaningfully for myself thank you very much and I'll reserve the right to define any type of punishment for crossing such a red line. But Impeachment would not be off the table if the perjury is meaningful enough.

Thats said, wow...you guys really chopping on that "russian ties to business bone today, huh?"

1. Even though we already knew about this quelched deal during the transition? And by "deal" i do mean a "pitched" deal.
2. Even though (as a private citizen) he already hosted his pageant in russia?
3. Even though Manaforte had worked for 2 russian friendly Ukraine politcians?
4. Even though he is a Global Billionaire that sells condos to foreigners including those from the middle east, russia, and others while he was a private citizen running his company?

You...know its been 25 years since i bought and flipped my first condo which gave me the seed money to begin buying income property....You could call me a very very poor man's Donald Trump. I also own many businesses. I am currently closing on a multi dental practice purchase to build my "Enpire" (muahahahaha) ...to date I've closed on more than 400 real estate transactions. Some i made some money. Some I lost some money. Some i still have and make a little money on each month. Do you have any idea as to how many "deals" got away? Take a guess? There was a time from 2010-2012 (god, those were dark and gloomy years but i digress) that I was making actual offers (submitting contracts) to purchase over 10 properties per day (200 per month)...about 1-2 would be accepted. I met with agents. Spoke to them on the phone. Sometimes met with sellers directly. Toured properties. Drove by. Even kicked in a few doors (that were stuck). We held tons of preliminary talks...and the deal fell apart on 95% of them...and these were 2 flats! 3 flats! 4 flats!

So you want me to be worried about trump leveraging his massive popularity uptick in 2016 as a potential presidential candidate to boost a business deal? I would too!!! He was down 5-7 points against HRC and 10-12 against bernie. And probably was still having internal debates as to whether or not he even wanted to be president...i mean why put yourself through this If you are already worth $8 Billion?

And to trump Russia was not a boogie man. No one is a boogie man. Look i'm not a billionaire...but i am a millionaire...many time over. And I can tell you...people get less scary when you know the law, under stand the law, and have the ability to pay the best lawyers in the world. Trump aint afraid of no one. because he understand people. You dont get to where he is at without understanding people extremely well.

So all of this...outrage...over every little thing he does...its just political spin. There are no crimes here...and there are not even misrepresentations. trump is an international businessman. I assume someone from every single state department in the entire world has at least stayed at one of his hotels and possible even met him or bought something from him. So what! There will only be a problem if trump compromises the citizens of the USA in exchange for personal gain. and quite the opposite has occurred since he took office. His Brand has took a major hit with half the country. liberal media has successfully branded him toxically (for liberals) and most of trump's base cant afford his products. <--I'm guessing they open up a modest brand of motels 8's across middle america or something else.

But right now...the only criminals i can find are the Clintons and the Obama's are looking to take a page from their book...tours around the world selling access to foreign states. <--and if Trump does that!! Then I'll be upset. If trump forms a charity...collects tens of millions from foreign bad actors like the Clintons did under the Bush and Obama watch, no less...i mean under Obama's very nose as he fell for it and made her secretary of state while BIll Clinton is collecting massive checks overseas!!

Thats a problem! Uranium One is still a problem!! Those are crimes against the american people, enriching themselves while selling access to our heads of state! But you seriously want me to (worry about) or question a real estate deal that never occurred!!?? No money changed hands!!??? While he was a private citizen????!!

Come on! find some consistency!

Still Dropping

I cant tell if your logical fallacy is primarily an Ad hominem or a straw man....because you are good twisting the narrative to fit your situation- which i can respect in a way because it does lend credence to your claims about your business acumen.

But the question is simply this- do you care if the claims that trump may have deference to the Russia dictatorship because of his business dealings (past present or future) with the Russian dictator that aggressively tampered with our elections? If the President Lied about having business deals pending with Russia do you care? If you do not—-fine. But dont make it about Hillary Obama or any other person no longer in power- the argument against the previous regime is really irrelevant. If Hillary committed a crime- lock her up- i dont know her nor do i care where she spends her days.

The thing that may scare the OP is that trump followers give him a pass for things that are clearly against their MAGA agenda- but its ok because they follow his personality. You can hate trump but you got to admit...he has a bunch of poor people with bad and dangerous jobs with horrible employeers following him. Even though if you ask them they hated Wall Street- most dont own ANYTHING and they are willing to ride or die with a New York business man that had a reality show and tweets policy. That has NO PROBLEM with a dude killing another man for talking bad about him as long as that man is rich....Trump can have a bunch of black rappers in his office talking about prison reform and racist followers don’t revolve. Trump can talk about infringing on the 2nd amendment and his followers dont budge. He can lie about getting a wall built and Mexico paying for it and 2 years later...not a peep. He can salute a North Korean general and nothing (they called Obama a traitor for bowing to the queen but trump saluted a general of a country actively AND ON PAPER in reality at WAR WITH AMERICA(wttf) and nothing. Sexual assault allegations confessed on tape...nothing. 100 years from now people are going to look back on this time and wow. I’m not surprised anymore. I’m just like...aight trump keep making the people in power richer- nothing he is doing now cant be rolled back. Its the same stuff different day- the difference in my opinion is trump is at least HONEST about his corruption - what is hard—to hear seemingly good people profess support for it.

[Jamaaliver]

The myth of the good guy with a g u n...

Yet another fairy tale conservatives have concocted to paint over an ugly truth.

A Mall Shooting, a Black Man’s Death, and a Debate Over Race and Gun Rights



After gunshots rang out in a cavernous suburban shopping mall on Thanksgiving night, Ashlyn McMillan encountered a man she considered a hero.

Yet to a police officer who raced to the scene in Hoover, Ala., the black man with the gun was not a hero in action, but “a suspect brandishing a pistol,” according to a police account. The officer fired at him, and the man, Emantic Fitzgerald Bradford Jr., died.

As it turned out, Mr. Bradford was not the gunman the police had been searching for.

The correction was too late for Mr. Bradford, whom the police initially identified as the culprit, only to change their story a day later. Mr. Bradford had not shot anyone, the Hoover police said, but was a licensed gun owner at a chaotic scene in the crowded mall.

The two competing versions of what Mr. Bradford, who was 21, did that night — try to protect those in danger or pose a serious threat by wielding a gun during a moment of chaos — are at the center of a controversy over race, gun rights and bias that has erupted in this predominantly white suburb outside of Birmingham, and led to protests.

The incident has called into question the veracity of a popular slogan among Second Amendment enthusiasts: “The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Black people trying to protect themselves or others with a gun may not have gotten the benefit of the doubt in recent heat-of-the-moment situations.

This month, before Mr. Bradford’s killing:

• the police fatally shot a black security guard who had pulled his gun to try to break up a shooting in a suburban Chicago bar. He was licensed to carry.
  
• A Portland State University policeman fatally shot a black Navy veteran who, witnesses said, had been trying to break up a fight outside of a bar when his firearm fell to the ground during the scuffle. He was licensed to carry.
  
• And in St. Louis last year, a black off-duty police officer was shot and wounded by a white colleague after the black officer had taken his service weapon out to help officers trying to catch suspects near his home.

Much remains unclear about what led to Mr. Bradford’s death on the opening evening of the holiday shopping season at the Riverchase Galleria, the state’s largest indoor mall. Witnesses have said they did not see Mr. Bradford pointing his gun at people or hear the police shouting commands before shooting him.

Those details will be important as investigators determine whether the shooting was legally justified. In chaotic situations, officers can have just a split second to make life-or-death decisions, and the presence of firearms only complicates things, experts say.

New York Times

[gtn130]

SD20 saying it *could* be a red line depending on *what* Trump is perjuring himself over is the most disingenuous load of **** i've ever heard.

[stilldropin20]

The myth of the good guy with a g u n...

Yet another fairy tale conservatives have concocted to paint over an ugly truth.

A Mall Shooting, a Black Man’s Death, and a Debate Over Race and Gun Rights

After gunshots rang out in a cavernous suburban shopping mall on Thanksgiving night, Ashlyn McMillan encountered a man she considered a hero.

Yet to a police officer who raced to the scene in Hoover, Ala., the black man with the gun was not a hero in action, but “a suspect brandishing a pistol,” according to a police account. The officer fired at him, and the man, Emantic Fitzgerald Bradford Jr., died.

As it turned out, Mr. Bradford was not the gunman the police had been searching for.

The correction was too late for Mr. Bradford, whom the police initially identified as the culprit, only to change their story a day later. Mr. Bradford had not shot anyone, the Hoover police said, but was a licensed gun owner at a chaotic scene in the crowded mall.

The two competing versions of what Mr. Bradford, who was 21, did that night — try to protect those in danger or pose a serious threat by wielding a gun during a moment of chaos — are at the center of a controversy over race, gun rights and bias that has erupted in this predominantly white suburb outside of Birmingham, and led to protests.

The incident has called into question the veracity of a popular slogan among Second Amendment enthusiasts: “The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Black people trying to protect themselves or others with a gun may not have gotten the benefit of the doubt in recent heat-of-the-moment situations.

This month, before Mr. Bradford’s killing:

• the police fatally shot a black security guard who had pulled his gun to try to break up a shooting in a suburban Chicago bar. He was licensed to carry.
  
• A Portland State University policeman fatally shot a black Navy veteran who, witnesses said, had been trying to break up a fight outside of a bar when his firearm fell to the ground during the scuffle. He was licensed to carry.
  
• And in St. Louis last year, a black off-duty police officer was shot and wounded by a white colleague after the black officer had taken his service weapon out to help officers trying to catch suspects near his home.

Much remains unclear about what led to Mr. Bradford’s death on the opening evening of the holiday shopping season at the Riverchase Galleria, the state’s largest indoor mall. Witnesses have said they did not see Mr. Bradford pointing his gun at people or hear the police shouting commands before shooting him.

Those details will be important as investigators determine whether the shooting was legally justified. In chaotic situations, officers can have just a split second to make life-or-death decisions, and the presence of firearms only complicates things, experts say.

New York Times

these shooting really bother me. We have one in chicago right now where a young black man was a security guard at a club, there was a fight and a shooting...the security guard brandished his own weapon, chased down the shooter...for about a mile on foot...performed a citizens arrest...held the shooter until police arrived...when they did...they shot him. That one especially bothers me because the security guard has a perfect record and had been applying to be a police officer at many police departments...he just wasn't that bright...so he didn't score well on their exams...but apparently...he would have been a really good cop!! So I'm really torn up about that one. It hurts.

And worse...i think the cop that shot him was a "bad" cop. I think that cop was part of the drug dealing bandits (with the owner) that were dealing drugs in the club. The security guard...just doing his job...maybe took it too serious...but still...he should not be dead.

But the solutions are on the way.

1. Smart technology on guns. electronics on guns that tell police on the scene if any given firearm has been fired. Thermal cams can probabaly do it right now. cold gun? thats not your shooter. Even better finger print technology on guns...a gun wont shoot without the registered user fingerprint to allow it to fire and a transmitter that sends a signal to the police every time a gun is fired. <--that would be a great technology and allow conceal and carry to every single citizen over 21.

2. real time tie-in to the local camera systems. This is long over due...but these shooting are not going to occur in homes for the most part...they will occur in public space. Cops need to be allowed to tie in to those camera systems.

3. Real time feeds from cell phones. cops need to be able to tie in to camera systems and audio recording for any local shootings as they arrive on the scene.

i know a lot of that is "big brother" but it will keep us safer both from killers and from cops that arrive on the scene and have to sort out who killed who.

I will add that any other info besides that info used to aid in a "live shooter" is to be automatically destroyed and can never be used in a court of law other than to identify the original shooter (killer).

[Jamaaliver]

these shooting really bother me.
But the solutions are on the way.

1. Smart technology on guns.

Why the NRA hates smart guns

With yet another push from President Obama to revive initiatives to develop “smart gun” technology, it looks like it’s time to revisit the issue once again.

The most common question I got in response to my previous piece on the many problems with smart guns is, “even if you’re correct that smart guns are a bad idea, why is the NRA so opposed to letting the market even try to get it right?”

The NRA’s official position is that they don’t care one way or the other about smart gun tech, and that the market should decide, but we all know that’s baloney. The NRA doesn’t want smart guns to ever reach the market, at all.

So the question is, why? If smart guns [are] as doomed to fail as previously argued, why not just let them fail in the market? Why try to prevent this technology from even having a chance?

Tech Crunch -- 2016

Spoiler:

Most who follow this issue know that the NRA hates smart guns because they’re afraid that once a seemingly viable smart gun technology exists, anti-gun legislators at the state and federal levels will attempt to mandate it in all future guns by comparing it to seat belts, air bags, and other product safety features.

But maybe you’re thinking, “that’s fine, then. We just won’t mandate it. There will be no mandate. There, you happy now? Can we just get on with the smart gun innovation and let this play out in the market?”

Here’s the thing, though: the NRA is actually right, in this case. If smart guns get any traction, then non-smart-guns will come under legislative assault.

....This, then, is what the NRA is terrified of: that lawmakers who don’t even know how to begin to evaluate the impact of the smallest, most random-seeming feature of a given firearm on that firearm’s effectiveness and functionality for different types of users with different training backgrounds under different circumstances will get into the business of gun design.

And they’re right to be afraid, because it has happened before.

[Pointgod]

The myth of the good guy with a g u n...

Yet another fairy tale conservatives have concocted to paint over an ugly truth.

A Mall Shooting, a Black Man’s Death, and a Debate Over Race and Gun Rights



After gunshots rang out in a cavernous suburban shopping mall on Thanksgiving night, Ashlyn McMillan encountered a man she considered a hero.

Yet to a police officer who raced to the scene in Hoover, Ala., the black man with the gun was not a hero in action, but “a suspect brandishing a pistol,” according to a police account. The officer fired at him, and the man, Emantic Fitzgerald Bradford Jr., died.

As it turned out, Mr. Bradford was not the gunman the police had been searching for.

The correction was too late for Mr. Bradford, whom the police initially identified as the culprit, only to change their story a day later. Mr. Bradford had not shot anyone, the Hoover police said, but was a licensed gun owner at a chaotic scene in the crowded mall.

The two competing versions of what Mr. Bradford, who was 21, did that night — try to protect those in danger or pose a serious threat by wielding a gun during a moment of chaos — are at the center of a controversy over race, gun rights and bias that has erupted in this predominantly white suburb outside of Birmingham, and led to protests.

The incident has called into question the veracity of a popular slogan among Second Amendment enthusiasts: “The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Black people trying to protect themselves or others with a gun may not have gotten the benefit of the doubt in recent heat-of-the-moment situations.

This month, before Mr. Bradford’s killing:

• the police fatally shot a black security guard who had pulled his gun to try to break up a shooting in a suburban Chicago bar. He was licensed to carry.
  
• A Portland State University policeman fatally shot a black Navy veteran who, witnesses said, had been trying to break up a fight outside of a bar when his firearm fell to the ground during the scuffle. He was licensed to carry.
  
• And in St. Louis last year, a black off-duty police officer was shot and wounded by a white colleague after the black officer had taken his service weapon out to help officers trying to catch suspects near his home.

Much remains unclear about what led to Mr. Bradford’s death on the opening evening of the holiday shopping season at the Riverchase Galleria, the state’s largest indoor mall. Witnesses have said they did not see Mr. Bradford pointing his gun at people or hear the police shouting commands before shooting him.

Those details will be important as investigators determine whether the shooting was legally justified. In chaotic situations, officers can have just a split second to make life-or-death decisions, and the presence of firearms only complicates things, experts say.

New York Times

100% the NRA will stay silent on these good guys with guns because they’re black. The only solution is to stop voting in NRA backed politicians and criminal justice reform.

[stilldropin20]

these shooting really bother me.
But the solutions are on the way.

1. Smart technology on guns.

Why the NRA hates smart guns

With yet another push from President Obama to revive initiatives to develop “smart gun” technology, it looks like it’s time to revisit the issue once again.

The most common question I got in response to my previous piece on the many problems with smart guns is, “even if you’re correct that smart guns are a bad idea, why is the NRA so opposed to letting the market even try to get it right?”

The NRA’s official position is that they don’t care one way or the other about smart gun tech, and that the market should decide, but we all know that’s baloney. The NRA doesn’t want smart guns to ever reach the market, at all.

So the question is, why? If smart guns as doomed to fail as I’ve previously argued, why not just let them fail in the market? Why try to prevent this technology from even having a chance?

Tech Crunch

Spoiler:

Most who follow this issue know that the NRA hates smart guns because they’re afraid that once a seemingly viable smart gun technology exists, anti-gun legislators at the state and federal levels will attempt to mandate it in all future guns by comparing it to seat belts, air bags, and other product safety features.

But maybe you’re thinking, “that’s fine, then. We just won’t mandate it. There will be no mandate. There, you happy now? Can we just get on with the smart gun innovation and let this play out in the market?”

Here’s the thing, though: the NRA is actually right, in this case. If smart guns get any traction, then non-smart-guns will come under legislative assault.

....This, then, is what the NRA is terrified of: that lawmakers who don’t even know how to begin to evaluate the impact of the smallest, most random-seeming feature of a given firearm on that firearm’s effectiveness and functionality for different types of users with different training backgrounds under different circumstances will get into the business of gun design.

And they’re right to be afraid, because it has happened before.

do i look like an NRA shill? I may be a 2A shill but i have no problem with smart tech on guns. each and every gun should have a "black box." Especially automatic and semi automatic.

More importantly...smart tech on bullets. (for after the fact).

Look, a man or woman needs to be able to defend themselves and with deadly force if necessary. Smart technology on guns and bullets doesn't prevent anyone from protecting themselves.

Bottom line, you kill someone...you must be able to account for why in a court of law or at least during an investigation.

I would add that i want police stations immediately notified the second any fire arm is locked and loaded with the safety off and trigger finger indexed. And I want the cops to know who has that gun in their hand, their record, photo, everything...even known family, friends, and associates. get that info to the beat cops immediately...and even better like an amber alert send that info to all cell phones with 500 feet of the location that gun is locked and loaded.

make it a crime (or $1500.00 fine ) to lock and load a pistol and index your trigger finger because doing so will trigger an expensive series of events.

Bottom line...the public deserves to know these things. I am all for full and complete transparency of government and full and complete transparency of all citizens.

Believe it or not, privacy is actually an enemy of the people.

1. Privacy is what allows the rich to hide wealth.
2. Privacy is what allow pedophiles to operate in stealth.
3. Privacy is what allows husbands to beat their wives.
4. privacy is what allows many to deal drugs.
5. Privacy is what allows many to use and abuse drugs.
6. Privacy is what allow most of you to masturbate to weird shxt all day long warping your sense of reality.

Privacy is trick played on the poor who literally have nothing to hide. it allows the wealthy to operate in stealth.

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

I wonder if Deplorables will ever figure out that they were conned by a grifter reality show host

[dobrojim]

^^^

Doubtful. Too painful. Rationalizations will have to be built
that this actually didn't happen. Cognitive dissonance will reign.

[Jamaaliver]

do i look like an NRA shill? I may be a 2A shill but i have no problem with smart tech on guns.

Look, a man or woman needs to be able to defend themselves and with deadly force if necessary.

Bottom line, you kill someone...you must be able to account for why in a court of law or at least during an investigation.

Believe it or not, privacy is actually an enemy of the people.

Privacy is trick played on the poor who literally have nothing to hide. it allows the wealthy to operate in stealth.

I only agree with like 30% of this.

But you get the +1 for openly acknowledging the hypocrisy and ineptitude of the NRA.

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

SD20 though is cautiously waiting for the right type of perjury from Trump before he draws his red line.

[stilldropin20]

Read on Twitter

I wonder if Deplorables will ever figure out that they were conned by a grifter reality show host

"grifter."

he was already worth billions. like $8-10 billion. Heck he inherited over almost $1 billion! He had the perfect team in place. 3 finance gurus and MBA's and one attorney to take over from here. And Baron. The presidency has only hurt them. Both in the global and national level. Once he is out of office there is no country they can now trust. I'd be afraid to travel if i were them. Half of america wants them all dead! admit it...you want them all to suffer, robbed of their wealth and power and to spend time in jail. You have said so! over and over. Many of you have. so dont back away from it now. And you are not alone.

So the presidency has only hurt them and him. Even a string of Trump motel 8's on the highway wont save them. When this is over their brand that he spent 50 years building will essentially be dead.

Unless...unlesss...unlesss...he can get the liberal media off of his back. get mueller off his back...come away virtually unscathed. and rebuild the brand his last few years in office. <--which is clearly his goal. And he can only do it by keeping the economy going, avert war, better trade deals, balancing the budget, more jobs in the US, relative peace in the middle east, crushing terror around the globe, rid america of opiods, cutting healthcare costs in half, and making gas a nickel again. All of which he could very well achieve and the liberal media still wont let him off of the hook because liberal dems wont let him off the hook...they wont make a single deal with him. So his Brand will be tarnished and likely forever because young libs like you will never appreciate a thing he has done. You will likely never to understand any of this on any type of higher logic level than you miserable "I want more free stuff" level.

[stilldropin20]

do i look like an NRA shill? I may be a 2A shill but i have no problem with smart tech on guns.

Look, a man or woman needs to be able to defend themselves and with deadly force if necessary.

Bottom line, you kill someone...you must be able to account for why in a court of law or at least during an investigation.

Believe it or not, privacy is actually an enemy of the people.

Privacy is trick played on the poor who literally have nothing to hide. it allows the wealthy to operate in stealth.

I only agree with like 30% of this.

But you get the +1 for openly acknowledging the hypocrisy and ineptitude of the NRA.

i lobbed that softball out there and put it just right in the liberal sweet spot....what is the 70% you disagree?

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

I wonder if Deplorables will ever figure out that they were conned by a grifter reality show host

If you listened to Trump talk for even 5 minutes you’d realize that he’s completely unqualified to be President. Only really stupid people believed any of the garbage he spewed. Yes I said it.

[gtn130]

Turns out that noted slumlord SD20 has a lot of respect for Trump's business practices.

Additionally SD20 believes rich people can't be grifters. Very smart.

[Jamaaliver]

i lobbed that softball out there and put it just right in the liberal sweet spot....what is the 70% you disagree?

Believe it or not, privacy is actually an enemy of the people.

Privacy is trick played on the poor who literally have nothing to hide.

I'm into some pretty k!nky stuff, man.

I needs my privacy.

Spoiler:

NOTE:

You're much easier to converse with when you keep your posts brief and free of weird, easily refutable tweets and articles.


Consider doing that more often

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

SD20 though is cautiously waiting for the right type of perjury from Trump before he draws his red line.

Let’s paint this picture. Imagine candidate Hillary Clinton negotiating with Iran for a donation to the Clinton Foundation. And in return she offers the President her 50 million dollar luxury apartment. Imagine the heads explosing from everyone. And rightly so.

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

This is all just very good and normal #MAGA stuff. Nothing to see here folks keep it moving