Political Roundtable Part XXXI

[dckingsfan]

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=JkAoLJIWAG-Hs2IFBjyb1Q&s=19

[Zonkerbl]

Read on Twitter

?s=20&t=YbpaUl_H33JA7CNFmJDB_g

Read on Twitter

?t=e5ilznSQ_g5l_Rk3qpNc5Q&s=19

I’m sorry but the stupidest thing I’m seeing from the online left is trying to give legitimacy to the right wing defund the FBI bull. Do you think people who were cheering the FBI investigating Hillary really want to defund it?

Everything you posted Zonks is true and that has nothing to do with the legitimate work of the FBI searching Mar Al Largo. The left wing reactionary Twitter needs to sit this out.

I'm confused. This is just a reminder that, just because the FBI happens to be persecuting your personal enemies, doesn't mean that the FBI is good or that we should stop demanding the police be defunded. The Patriot act is still the law of the land and it is an absolute crapshow. I don't see anywhere in these tweets a call to join forces with MTG, who is obviously just lying for the cameras anyway. The problem is the moment you take your eyes off them, or if a Republican wins the POTUS, the FBI is going to be used to persecute BLM protestors and enforce abortion bans.

I mean, it's ok to cheer Ramsay Bolton being eaten by the monster dogs that he created. But monster dogs are still bad and shouldn't exist. I think normal, non-torture trained guard dogs could have handled Trump's mishandling of classified documents.

[Zonkerbl]

Read on Twitter

[Zonkerbl]

This lady is great

Read on Twitter

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

?s=20&t=YbpaUl_H33JA7CNFmJDB_g

Read on Twitter

?t=e5ilznSQ_g5l_Rk3qpNc5Q&s=19

I’m sorry but the stupidest thing I’m seeing from the online left is trying to give legitimacy to the right wing defund the FBI bull. Do you think people who were cheering the FBI investigating Hillary really want to defund it?

Everything you posted Zonks is true and that has nothing to do with the legitimate work of the FBI searching Mar Al Largo. The left wing reactionary Twitter needs to sit this out.

I'm confused. This is just a reminder that, just because the FBI happens to be persecuting your personal enemies, doesn't mean that the FBI is good or that we should stop demanding the police be defunded. The Patriot act is still the law of the land and it is an absolute crapshow. I don't see anywhere in these tweets a call to join forces with MTG, who is obviously just lying for the cameras anyway. The problem is the moment you take your eyes off them, or if a Republican wins the POTUS, the FBI is going to be used to persecute BLM protestors and enforce abortion bans.

I mean, it's ok to cheer Ramsay Bolton being eaten by the monster dogs that he created. But monster dogs are still bad and shouldn't exist. I think normal, non-torture trained guard dogs could have handled Trump's mishandling of classified documents.

The FBI is an institution. It’s neither all good or all bad. The FBI should hold people breaking the law accountable. If Hillary Clinton is breaking the law investigate, if Hunter Biden is breaking the law investigate it. It’s as simple as this, Republicans want to break laws without being held accountable and want to use violence and harassment to get what they want. The whole idea of defunding the FBI is idiotic, but even if Democrats did that all Republicans would do is create their own brown shirts when they get into power.

Going back to your analogy about Ramsay Bolton, your argument is saying let’s get rid of all dogs instead of saying hey let’s not give monstrous dogs to an unhinged psychopath. Let’s just put it this way, getting rid of the FBI is advocating for giving more responsibility to state and local police like the Uvalde cops

If the online left was smart, they’d point out that Republicans are part of the corruption and they want to be free to break laws without consequences that the rest of us face. If the idea is to find common cause with disaffected right wingers then it should be centred on right wing corruption.

[Zonkerbl]

If my argument was "get rid of all dogs" I'd say "get rid of all dogs." You know me well enough that I do not speak in code. I say exactly what I mean to say. Did I say "Get rid of the FBI"? Please go back and read my post again. I'm not going to argue with someone who doesn't even respect me enough to read what I wrote.

[dobrojim]

Read on Twitter

?t=NXS8EGbaZnPvLkUAfN-xFg&s=19

This **** is unhinged. Was he going to sell these documents or blackmail people? The right wing is going to look like **** idiots as always when the truth comes out.

my second followup to this

The right wing doesn't care when they know they can get away with lies that are so transparent.
And you know they are lies when each day brings a fresh rationale for the treason and corruption of
Golfy McBonespurs. But we also know they have long ago sacrificed self respect, not to mention their
sworn duty and oath(s) of office in their lust for power.

[Zonkerbl]

Now I'm suspended from Twitter for telling Scott Walker to go stick his head in a bucket and sing

[closg00]

Watch on YouTube

[pancakes3]

i was guessing at what the end of the title would be. hold no games:

1) in China
2) in States that have banned abortion
3) on Juneteenth (close)
4) on days with Mass Shootings (it'd be every day)

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

We do not need parties.

CSPAN1 and CSPAN2 show me all I need to see.

Candidates tell constituents ANYTHING to get elected. The Clinton's, for example, SAID they understood the problem that PAC monies and lobbyists present. When they get in office there will be changes.

Yeah, right!

Getting elected is just another way to get rich and once people get elected all they're gonna do is vote along party lines. When I watch seaspan I don't see any republicans crossing their party and I don't see any democrats parting ways with their party and I don't really watch seas band cause it's all a waste of **** time


We should vote issues shoes not party lines

There should be a synopsis about each issue and a more detailed view of each issue and every individual voter should have something like their cable subscription enabling them to vote their conscience

We don't even **** need Congressman


Political parties are just a bunch of ****

Sent from my SM-A536U using RealGM mobile app

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Likewise we do not need lawyers or judges

The NFL had an independent arbiter for the Deshaun Watson situation


In much the same way that Walmart can have a self-checkout or Target can have a self checkout people should be able to have a self-checkout divorce which is only affected by the constraints or whatever you put in the basket so to speak that relate to your particular marriage there will have to be a County Clerk and a real life judge to okay things but a zoom meeting after all that is all people really need

Regardless of your jurisdiction or wherever you are there could be one particular family law app and one particular civil law app and one particular criminal law app which would not be biased by what you're wearing who knows whom and what have you it would be fair

I'm convinced that the bureaucracy and the port of the system wants to keep giving lawyers all that money and judges all that money and paralegals all that money while the average Layman suffer and while healthcare costs go up because of litigation and all that stuff and malpractice insurance prices I just think they want the system to be bad but what I'm saying is you only need one app to be a judge and one have to be a lawyer and they really could be the same app

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

All it takes is one app to replace every single judge and every single lawyer. But then who would steal all that money from poor people who are suffering?

And, likwise, who would muddy the waters without [MOST] lawyers and judges. Things might actually be fair

DISCLAIMER
My words are not directed toward the Trailblazers and the courageous lawyers who advocate for those who cannot advocate for themselves. Obviously those who work pro bono are not trying to get paid and those who are ethical or not the ones I'm talking about

[Pointgod]

If my argument was "get rid of all dogs" I'd say "get rid of all dogs." You know me well enough that I do not speak in code. I say exactly what I mean to say. Did I say "Get rid of the FBI"? Please go back and read my post again. I'm not going to argue with someone who doesn't even respect me enough to read what I wrote.

Here’s what you said word for word so there is no ambiguity.

I'm confused. This is just a reminder that, just because the FBI happens to be persecuting your personal enemies, doesn't mean that the FBI is good or that we should stop demanding the police be defunded. The Patriot act is still the law of the land and it is an absolute crapshow. I don't see anywhere in these tweets a call to join forces with MTG, who is obviously just lying for the cameras anyway. The problem is the moment you take your eyes off them, or if a Republican wins the POTUS, the FBI is going to be used to persecute BLM protestors and enforce abortion bans.

The first bolded section you’re making a pretty unambiguous statement that the FBI is bad (at least not good) and you reinforced your position on defunding the police. The second bolded part you talk about finding common cause with Republicans about the FBI. The Republicans are calling to defund the FBI which 100% means getting rid of it and replacing it with a Facist right wing organization that goes after their enemies. Your argument about the FBI exists in the context of what Republicans are saying, because the whole issue is only a controversy because a Republican broke the law. Republicans are not making the argument about the FBI in response to their historical racism or targeting non threatening social movements. That’s why the online left is picking the wrong time to bad mouth FBI and give legitimacy to the wrong people by even entertaining getting rid of the FBI. I believe you’ve made your stance pretty clear, it sounds like you’d support dismantling the FBI but if you want to clarify then please go ahead.

I mean, it's ok to cheer Ramsay Bolton being eaten by the monster dogs that he created. But monster dogs are still bad and shouldn't exist. I think normal, non-torture trained guard dogs could have handled Trump's mishandling of classified documents.

In the bold below, you’re comparing the FBI to monster dogs. If it isn’t clear, I rejected that belief in my response. The FBI are a mix of good, bad, somewhere in the middle dogs. That’s why I said that getting rid of the FBI is the equivalent of getting rid of all dogs, not just the monster ones. Maybe I should clarified it but based on your own words, I don’t believe I’m unfairly making up any position that you haven’t expressed support for.

[Zonkerbl]

If my argument was "get rid of all dogs" I'd say "get rid of all dogs." You know me well enough that I do not speak in code. I say exactly what I mean to say. Did I say "Get rid of the FBI"? Please go back and read my post again. I'm not going to argue with someone who doesn't even respect me enough to read what I wrote.

Here’s what you said word for word so there is no ambiguity.

I'm confused. This is just a reminder that, just because the FBI happens to be persecuting your personal enemies, doesn't mean that the FBI is good or that we should stop demanding the police be defunded. The Patriot act is still the law of the land and it is an absolute crapshow. I don't see anywhere in these tweets a call to join forces with MTG, who is obviously just lying for the cameras anyway. The problem is the moment you take your eyes off them, or if a Republican wins the POTUS, the FBI is going to be used to persecute BLM protestors and enforce abortion bans.

The first bolded section you’re making a pretty unambiguous statement that the FBI is bad (at least not good) and you reinforced your position on defunding the police. The second bolded part you talk about finding common cause with Republicans about the FBI. The Republicans are calling to defund the FBI which 100% means getting rid of it and replacing it with a Facist right wing organization that goes after their enemies. Your argument about the FBI exists in the context of what Republicans are saying, because the whole issue is only a controversy because a Republican broke the law. Republicans are not making the argument about the FBI in response to their historical racism or targeting non threatening social movements. That’s why the online left is picking the wrong time to bad mouth FBI and give legitimacy to the wrong people by even entertaining getting rid of the FBI. I believe you’ve made your stance pretty clear, it sounds like you’d support dismantling the FBI but if you want to clarify then please go ahead.

I mean, it's ok to cheer Ramsay Bolton being eaten by the monster dogs that he created. But monster dogs are still bad and shouldn't exist. I think normal, non-torture trained guard dogs could have handled Trump's mishandling of classified documents.

In the bold below, you’re comparing the FBI to monster dogs. If it isn’t clear, I rejected that belief in my response. The FBI are a mix of good, bad, somewhere in the middle dogs. That’s why I said that getting rid of the FBI is the equivalent of getting rid of all dogs, not just the monster ones. Maybe I should clarified it but based on your own words, I don’t believe I’m unfairly making up any position that you haven’t expressed support for.

First bold part: THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT I SAID

Secondly, DEFUNDING THE POLICE DOESN'T MEAN ABOLISHING IT. IF I MEANT "ABOLISH THE POLICE" I WOULD SAY THAT. Just because Republicans are stupid and don't know what words mean DOESN'T MEAN I AM ALSO THAT STUPID. I MEAN WHAT I SAID. I HAVE EXPLAINED WHAT I MEAN BY DEFUNDING MANY MANY TIMES. I AM TIRED OF REPEATING MYSELF. I AM NOT GOING TO DO IT AGAIN.

The next several sentences is you making up an argument with me in your head based on absolutely nothing that I said.

In the last sentence of what I said, WHICH YOU COMPLETELY IGNORE, I say, and I quote, " I think normal, non-torture trained guard dogs could have handled Trump's mishandling of classified documents." This inconveniently contradicts everything you just said, so you ignore it AND YELL AT ME AND DEMAND I EXPLAIN MYSELF.

NO.

[pancakes3]

to follow up on that - there is a role for law enforcement in society. the problem is that cops (1) are doing things that have nothing to do with law enforcement; and (2) when they are enforcing the law, they're doing it poorly.

I don't think the FBI is really guilty of the former, and any criticism would go towards the latter.

to explain, with Cops, it's not just that they're bad at law enforcement, it's also that they're doing things they have no business doing: namely militarizing and self-funding. I'm sure there are more but I can't think of it.

If we can snap our fingers and cut that off cops' job descriptions, cops are still enforcing the law incorrectly: racist, entrenching white supremacy, overpolicing, police brutality, no social work training, etc. and this is where the vast majority of Defund the Police reasons come from.

The FBI on the other hand, are relatively guilt-free of prong 1. This is largely because they're not first responders. They're detectives. That, really is what makes Cops worse. Under the guise of being first responders, local police have grown their role in the community in militarization, and grabbing money to support that militarization. The focus of police have become being armed to the teeth instead of enforcing laws.

Like, LAPD has an entire air division comprised of 16 active helicopters. The entire Belgian air force has 14.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAPD_Air_Support_Division
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_Air_Component#Current_aircraft

Go ahead and DEFUND that.

But taking beat cops off their routes because they're too racist? Too many Denzels out in the streets? That's REFORM.

But I don't know if I have a salient point to make with all of this. Just jibber jabbering.

[doclinkin]

to explain, with Cops, it's not just that they're bad at law enforcement, it's also that they're doing things they have no business doing: namely militarizing and self-funding. I'm sure there are more but I can't think of it.

It's also that they are self-policing. They have extra-judicial powers that act as carte blanche to murder civilians with minimal consequences. Unlike the actual military which has pretty restrictive rules of engagement and after-action reviews that can come down pretty harshly on bad actors, the de facto domestic military has minimal oversight and zero consequences for excessive force, or even state sanctioned homicide. Power corrupts. "Qualified Immunity" is dangerous to allow, it weaponizes police departments even more so than any decommissioned army equipment. If police forces can literally get away with murder, then they will attract people for whom that is a job perk. And drive away principled actors who find those sorts of officers repellent to work with. Or work for. And will be used as a weapon by the folks who choose where and how to deploy them. And which laws get enforced, and on whom.

I'm a union guy, but police unions are part of the problem.

[Pointgod]

If my argument was "get rid of all dogs" I'd say "get rid of all dogs." You know me well enough that I do not speak in code. I say exactly what I mean to say. Did I say "Get rid of the FBI"? Please go back and read my post again. I'm not going to argue with someone who doesn't even respect me enough to read what I wrote.

Here’s what you said word for word so there is no ambiguity.

I'm confused. This is just a reminder that, just because the FBI happens to be persecuting your personal enemies, doesn't mean that the FBI is good or that we should stop demanding the police be defunded. The Patriot act is still the law of the land and it is an absolute crapshow. I don't see anywhere in these tweets a call to join forces with MTG, who is obviously just lying for the cameras anyway. The problem is the moment you take your eyes off them, or if a Republican wins the POTUS, the FBI is going to be used to persecute BLM protestors and enforce abortion bans.

The first bolded section you’re making a pretty unambiguous statement that the FBI is bad (at least not good) and you reinforced your position on defunding the police. The second bolded part you talk about finding common cause with Republicans about the FBI. The Republicans are calling to defund the FBI which 100% means getting rid of it and replacing it with a Facist right wing organization that goes after their enemies. Your argument about the FBI exists in the context of what Republicans are saying, because the whole issue is only a controversy because a Republican broke the law. Republicans are not making the argument about the FBI in response to their historical racism or targeting non threatening social movements. That’s why the online left is picking the wrong time to bad mouth FBI and give legitimacy to the wrong people by even entertaining getting rid of the FBI. I believe you’ve made your stance pretty clear, it sounds like you’d support dismantling the FBI but if you want to clarify then please go ahead.

I mean, it's ok to cheer Ramsay Bolton being eaten by the monster dogs that he created. But monster dogs are still bad and shouldn't exist. I think normal, non-torture trained guard dogs could have handled Trump's mishandling of classified documents.

In the bold below, you’re comparing the FBI to monster dogs. If it isn’t clear, I rejected that belief in my response. The FBI are a mix of good, bad, somewhere in the middle dogs. That’s why I said that getting rid of the FBI is the equivalent of getting rid of all dogs, not just the monster ones. Maybe I should clarified it but based on your own words, I don’t believe I’m unfairly making up any position that you haven’t expressed support for.

First bold part: THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT I SAID

Secondly, DEFUNDING THE POLICE DOESN'T MEAN ABOLISHING IT. IF I MEANT "ABOLISH THE POLICE" I WOULD SAY THAT. Just because Republicans are stupid and don't know what words mean DOESN'T MEAN I AM ALSO THAT STUPID. I MEAN WHAT I SAID. I HAVE EXPLAINED WHAT I MEAN BY DEFUNDING MANY MANY TIMES. I AM TIRED OF REPEATING MYSELF. I AM NOT GOING TO DO IT AGAIN.

The next several sentences is you making up an argument with me in your head based on absolutely nothing that I said.

In the last sentence of what I said, WHICH YOU COMPLETELY IGNORE, I say, and I quote, " I think normal, non-torture trained guard dogs could have handled Trump's mishandling of classified documents." This inconveniently contradicts everything you just said, so you ignore it AND YELL AT ME AND DEMAND I EXPLAIN MYSELF.

NO.

Okay take a breath. This isn’t Twitter where everything has to be a battle to the death. We’re obviously talking past each other so let’s take a step back. Starting from the last point.” Let’s work our way backwards.

"I think normal, non-torture trained guard dogs could have handled Trump's mishandling of classified documents." This inconveniently contradicts everything you just said, so you ignore it AND YELL AT ME AND DEMAND I EXPLAIN MYSELF.“

So in this example are the FBI still the non torture trained dogs or is it another entity? If it’s the FBI then it doesn’t contradict anything I’ve said or the perspective that both of us have. Where I disagree with you is that as it relates to Trump, nothing the FBI a did was overreach or unwarranted. Maybe you have the same stance and you were just using hyperbole to describe a worst case scenario, but in that case I don’t see how your definition of defunding the FBI addresses that.

Now on addressing the issue of defunding.

Secondly, DEFUNDING THE POLICE DOESN'T MEAN ABOLISHING IT. IF I MEANT "ABOLISH THE POLICE" I WOULD SAY THAT. Just because Republicans are stupid and don't know what words mean DOESN'T MEAN I AM ALSO THAT STUPID. I MEAN WHAT I SAID. I HAVE EXPLAINED WHAT I MEAN BY DEFUNDING MANY MANY TIMES. I AM TIRED OF REPEATING MYSELF. I AM NOT GOING TO DO IT AGAIN.

What does defunding the FBI look like to you? If the Federal government takes away funding from the FBI and reallocates it to other areas, then I’m not sure it addresses the problems of overreach and abuse in the FBI. It just means less resources, probably less agents to investigate across the whole country and either those larger investigations fall off or more likely are picked up by another department which may be less equipped and even more abusive. For example, you’d have a situation where you’d have Florida officials appointed by Desantis investigating Matt Gaetz. Opens up so many conflicts of interest and opportunities for cronyism.

Everyone person except for Republicans and hardcore Conservative Democrats believe that the FBI shouldn’t be able to abuse their power. The best way to ensure that is to elect a President that can be pressured to take those into consideration when assigning the head of the FBI and through Congress passing laws and more congressional oversight. When it comes to the FBI, I’m not sure your definition of defunding addresses any of the problems you’d like to solve. I’m happy to look at some studies or analysis that support your view.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter