Antagonist in Chief

[Recording Engineer]

A criminal indictment generally results in a court trial, discovery in that trial would reveal the affidavit contents, and an adversarial process to discern the underlying truth(s). Unlike arguments in the court of popular opinion that have little to do with "truth".

JR

This is exactly why I say actual court cases is the only way I tell which way is up or down. Yet there are people here that still want to throw that out the window when it’s convenient.

 

[scott2000]

actual court cases is the only way I tell which way is up or down

Lucky you. That abortion stuff confuses the heck out of me...

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Assume away. There’s all sorts of possibilities. None of it changes your or my ability to have reasonable perspective and have a reasonable adult conversation.

Sure it does. But keep hiding.

Your voting record absolutely does not take away your political rhetoric here.

I'm not trying to "take away" anything. I'm simply pointing out how the Democrat party has changed, how the GOP has changed, and how those changes affected my own viewpoint. Directly experiencing California devolve into a failed state as its government became a one-party machine was also illustrative.

Let me clue you in… If you continually feel you have to defend yourself of what you say you’re not, you may be…

Assume away, as you say. I'm sharing things that opened my eyes and changed my perspective. I don't have to defend anything from a person who won't even admit to a personal mistake or any bias at all. Did you vote for Biden/Harris? Gavin Newsom?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Lucky you. That abortion stuff confuses the heck out of me...

It's difficult, but not all that confusing***. SCOTUS declared that abortion is not a right enumerated by the constitution, and kicked it down to the individual states to decide with state laws. As is typical of such things the different states will reflect different priorities.

JR

**** there are reasonable questions about when (or if) a fetus attains human rights.

 

[pucho812]

So....it's fake news?

I didn't say that. We all know people went into the capitol on 1/6 for self guided tours. What i said was that photo looks staged, that does not mean it didn't happen or it's fake, it means it set up to look that way.

 

[Recording Engineer]

Sure it does. But keep hiding.

That’s an unreasonable response to fit a narrative. We can agree to disagree there though.

I'm not trying to "take away" anything. I'm simply pointing out how the Democrat party has changed, how the GOP has changed, and how those changes affected my own viewpoint. Directly experiencing California devolve into a failed state as its government became a one-party machine was also illustrative.

I’m not necessarily disagreeing. Same can be said to many other states.

Assume away, as you say. I'm sharing things that opened my eyes and changed my perspective. I don't have to defend anything from a person who won't even admit to a personal mistake or any bias at all. Did you vote for Biden/Harris? Gavin Newsom?

I have not assumed anything.

I’ll say Newsom rubbed me the wrong way when he was Mayor of SF. You think I voted for him for CA Governor? I will also say, to me, a Biden/Harris vote for a lot of people was a hail-mary to get Trump out. You can assume what you will there, but I bet the pot you’d be wrong.

 

[scott2000]

It's difficult, but not all that confusing***

Yeah....Was more referring to being able to take a court's decision as a solid direction. Seems it's actually a bit more involved in some cases...literally

 

[pucho812]

Sure it does. But keep hiding.


I'm not trying to "take away" anything. I'm simply pointing out how the Democrat party has changed, how the GOP has changed, and how those changes affected my own viewpoint. Directly experiencing California devolve into a failed state as its government became a one-party machine was also illustrative.


Assume away, as you say. I'm sharing things that opened my eyes and changed my perspective. I don't have to defend anything from a person who won't even admit to a personal mistake or any bias at all. Did you vote for Biden/Harris? Gavin Newsom?

I unlike you are still experiencing California as a failed state. I can pinpoint the exact moment it all started to go down hill. You may have been here during the recall of gray davis, in the early 2000. The recall was necessary but it allowed for any yahoo to run for governor. When all was said and done we had Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnold + the dems in Sacramento really started in on making it the one party state we know now. after arnold we really went heavily for the one party. The sad part as you know, is the states highly dense populated areas have more than enough votes to tip the scales for the rest of the state. You get outside the cities and it's a whole different set of people voting completely opposite of the city folk. Unfortunately they don't have the numbers, unfortunately the city folk thumb their nose at the country bumpkins. But you go out of l.a. or s.f. or s.d. or even sacramento and they think completely opposite. While places like orange county are opposite in voting like the other major cities it's still not enough.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Yeah....Was more referring to being able to take a court's decision as a solid direction. Seems it's actually a bit more involved in some cases...literally

SCOTUS very specifically decided not to decide but kicked it down to the states.

State legislators should be better able to decide what their local voters want. We will likely see different laws in different states, and that is OK.

JR

 

[Recording Engineer]

Yeah....Was more referring to being able to take a court's decision as a solid direction. Seems it's actually a bit more involved in some cases...literally

I was referring more to helping me judge what is truth and what is pure political rhetoric BS.

I agree though. It’s the Wild West out there on abortion.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

I unlike you are still experiencing California as a failed state. I can pinpoint the exact moment it all started to go down hill. You may have been here during the recall of gray davis, in the early 2000.

I moved to CA in April of 1992 when moderate Republican Wilson was governor. At the time I was an idealistic young man. Davis was a limp noodle of indecision. He needed to go. Ahnohld ran as a Republican but was really slightly left of center, IMO.

I think the Dem machine in CA, led by slimeballs like Willie Brown, took the Clinton victory of '92 and ran hard wuth it. They promised and spent and failed to maintain infrastructure all while building up an unmanageable debt (financially and otherwise). Seeing 29 years of change from a somewhat balanced state to today's mess was enlightening.

The recall was necessary but it allowed for any yahoo to run for governor. When all was said and done we had Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnold + the dems in Sacramento really started in on making it the one party state we know now. after arnold we really went heavily for the one party.

Yes the imbalance tipped around 2008 and doesn't seem recoverable.

The sad part as you know, is the states highly dense populated areas have more than enough votes to tip the scales for the rest of the state. You get outside the cities and it's a whole different set of people voting completely opposite of the city folk. Unfortunately they don't have the numbers, unfortunately the city folk thumb their nose at the country bumpkins. But you go out of l.a. or s.f. or s.d. or even sacramento and they think completely opposite. While places like orange county are opposite in voting like the other major cities it's still not enough.

In 1992 when I moved to the state it was to take a job at a small private medical tech company in Chico. Chico then was a fun place for a single twenty-something. Being a college town there were bars, live music, and such. But also outdoors activities. The university was full of liberal types while the surrounding agriculture and small business owners were mostly conservative. People got along.

I moved down to silicon valley late 1993. In those days there was a healthy mix of lefties (hard left), classical liberals, libertarians (many engineers), and conservatives (business leaders and owners). We got along. Now it is hard left dominated and tolerance for other viewpoints is much reduced. I found it to be increasingly oppressive. Glad to be out.

 

[pucho812]

I moved to CA in April of 1992 when moderate Republican Wilson was governor. At the time I was an idealistic young man. Davis was a limp noodle of indecision. He needed to go. Ahnohld ran as a Republican but was really slightly left of center, IMO.

I think the Dem machine in CA, led by slimeballs like Willie Brown, took the Clinton victory of '92 and ran hard wuth it. They promised and spent and failed to maintain infrastructure all while building up an unmanageable debt (financially and otherwise). Seeing 29 years of change from a somewhat balanced state to today's mess was enlightening.


Yes the imbalance tipped around 2008 and doesn't seem recoverable.


In 1992 when I moved to the state it was to take a job at a small private medical tech company in Chico. Chico then was a fun place for a single twenty-something. Being a college town there were bars, live music, and such. But also outdoors activities. The university was full of liberal types while the surrounding agriculture and small business owners were mostly conservative. People got along.

I moved down to silicon valley late 1993. In those days there was a healthy mix of lefties (hard left), classical liberals, libertarians (many engineers), and conservatives (business leaders and owners). We got along. Now it is hard left dominated and tolerance for other viewpoints is much reduced. I found it to be increasingly oppressive. Glad to be out.

Yes, I saw the aftermath of the 90's. I got here in 2000. It was still o.k. to have a difference of opinion. not any more.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

That’s an unreasonable response to fit a narrative. We can agree to disagree there though.

Not unreasonable to ask about your personal rationale and/or philosophy.

I’m not necessarily disagreeing. Same can be said to many other states.

The only states I observe to have failed are run by Democrats or have major cities run by Democrats. Republicans certainly have their faults, but the way they govern doesn't tend to lead to catastrophic failure.

I have not assumed anything.

That you are aware of at least.

I’ll say Newsom rubbed me the wrong way when he was Mayor of SF. You think I voted for him for CA Governor?

No, that's why I asked.

I will also say, to me, a Biden/Harris vote for a lot of people was a hail-mary to get Trump out. You can assume what you will there, but I bet the pot you’d be wrong.

Hail Mary is not a logical vote. And again, I asked and did not assume. You seem to hate Trump so I guess third party. I've done that before, but cannot again until the ship of state is righted. Lesser of two evils is fully in play.

 

[hodad]

Unlike arguments in the court of popular opinion that have little to do with "truth".

Fair enough. But I'd also assert (and I'd base this on his prior behavior, not "mindreading" or some such) that Trump's primary motivation for unsealing an unredacted affidavit is so that he might start trying the case in the court of popular opinion, and likely to indulge in some attempted witness tampering as well (as he and/or his associates have allegedly done with 1/6 witnesses.)

And I'd absolutely agree with you that Trump's blathering in this case has almost nothing to do with truth.

So far, the facts that we know look pretty damning. He grossly mishandled Top Secret documents--in a way that's an insult to anyone with clearance who actually respects this nation enough to handle and store these sorts of documents in the proper and legal manner. He lied about having them, he lied about where they were stored. That's what we know so far.

What we don't know, and what I have largely refrained from mentioning:

Did other people have access to these documents who shouldn't have?

Did Trump share info from these documents with agents of foreign govts.?

Did Trump share info in a casual, gossipy way, just to show how "smart" he was?


So what we know, which admittedly is not everything, is enough to indict Trump, and it looks like a pretty damn strong case. I don't think it's going to start looking any better for Trump, but it certainly could start looking a whole lot worse.

 

[Recording Engineer]

Not unreasonable to ask about your personal rationale and/or philosophy.

That is NOT what we’re talking about. It IS absolutely unreasonable to determine who has more perspective, based on voting record; which is EXACTLY what you proposed.

The only states I observe to have failed are run by Democrats or have major cities run by Democrats. Republicans certainly have their faults, but the way they govern doesn't tend to lead to catastrophic failure.

That alone shows your political bias and doesn’t allow you to see the other side doing the same thing. The left can “feel” and sight examples (and they do), just as much as the right.

Hail Mary is not a logical vote.

You are right, it absolutely isn’t. Who is actually acting logically these days anyhow?

 

[Recording Engineer]

Yes, I saw the aftermath of the 90's. I got here in 2000. It was still o.k. to have a difference of opinion. not any more.

You can thank the 24-hour, 7-Days-A-Week radio, television, internet, online chat rooms, podcasts, and social media “news” for that. After 30 or so years of that, everyone are just extremist zombies; and have even passed it on to their offspring.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

That is NOT what we’re talking about. It IS absolutely unreasonable to determine who has more perspective, based on voting record; which is EXACTLY what you proposed.

Past voting record was not the only factor I shared if you had paid attention.

That alone shows your political bias and doesn’t allow you to see the other side doing the same thing. The left can “feel” and sight examples (and they do), just as much as the right.

Hardly. My current philosophy/political tendency is more classical liberal with small gov libertarian and pragmatic conservatism. The problem is that nothing I believe is really supported by modern Democrats. But some of it is by modern Republicans. Quite a lot, in fact. That wasn't the case 20-30 years ago. Name a state that has been run by a Republican majority for 20+ years and that is anywhere near as effed as California. Or NY. Or IL. And the word you're looking for is "cite" not "sight."

You are right, it absolutely isn’t. Who is actually acting logically these days anyhow?

I am. I know quite a few others who are as well. The problem here is that you simply cannot fathom that other people don't want the same outcomes that you seem to either want or are willing to tolerate (pretty much all CA policy of the last decade plus).

 

[john12ax7]

The problem is that nothing I believe is really supported by modern Democrats. But some of it is by modern Republicans. Quite a lot, in fact.

I see basically nothing in modern republicans that resembles classical liberal, libertarian, fiscal conservative. There is a reason that people like Justin Amash leave the party.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

I see basically nothing in modern republicans that resembles classical liberal, libertarian, fiscal conservative. There is a reason that people like Justin Amash leave the party.

Which party is constantly attacking freedom of speech, thought, religion? Which party is busy spending trillions of dollars during a recession? Which party has helped create California's massive debt (and 58B+ in deferred transportation infrastructure maintenance)? Which party supports the Second Amendment? Which party supports state and local decision-making over massive and wasteful Federal oversight (in public education, for example)?

The Libertarian Party has a long way to go before I'll take them seriously. Open immigration? Pragmatism is severely lacking in their platform, IMO. Until that is addressed they will remain a fringe party with no influence. And Amash dropped out of politics after switching parties, didn't he? Why?

 

[hodad]

A message to all those still supporting Trump: If you don't know who the sucker at the poker table is, it's probably you.

The evidence laid out in the filing, experts said, could build a legal case that Trump attorneys Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb obstructed the government’s investigation, allegedly telling FBI agents and prosecutors that they had handed over all classified documents when in fact many remained in Trump’s possession.
Left unanswered were key questions that could determine Trump’s legal fate: Did he direct Corcoran and Bobb to mislead the government, either before or after the FBI raid of his Florida home and club?
**********
“Trump and his lawyers had months to find these documents,” she said. “The FBI was able to find them easily. It was in a desk, for goodness sake.”

Of course, it beggars belief that Trump himself couldn't find a bunch of files in his own desk. But I'm sure the loyal Trumpists will eat up whatever excuse the corpulent orange one conjures up.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/08/31/trump-lawyers-legal-jeopardy/