Antagonist in Chief

[Recording Engineer]

I just read an editorial by Alan Dershowitz about whataboutism. He opined that the comparison to Hillary Clintons private server (emails) was appropriate despite her mocking hat. Equal application of justice requires comparing past events to current.

JR

PS; DOJ returned ExPresident Trump's passports.

I heard the summary (end of segment), talking of that opinion piece, by conservative radio host/retired Sheriff, who agreed with Alan.

From my understanding of said summary, it seems to me that Alan stopped-short and didn’t necessarily address it all:

We don’t know AT ALL yet if this truly is an apples to apples case. We know Hillary was investigated. No criminal charges were ever brought. Anyone can (oh and they have, minds have ran wild) speculate and accuse anyone as to why private property wasn’t searched or actual charges not filed, or why she was officially cleared 3-years later. But the reality is she was cleared! I speculate there was not enough evidence to support criminal charges in a court of law; not even for a private-property search warrant. Period.

On the other hand, there must have been some absolutely, undoubtedly, damning evidence to get a private-property search warrant on the ex-president. Period. On top of that, it’s must have been THAT important to know and deal with the fallout; they are and will further!

Time may tell, or it won’t, but so far, nothing about this is apples to apples, as Alan opinionated. WAY too early for that assessment!

 

[JohnRoberts]

And that’s what makes him special and why you trust him? Makes absolutely no sense to me.

No, it is not about "who" he is, or was. He served a four year term in office so we have a factual record of his accomplishments despite the aggressive political opposition fighting him at every turn...

This sounds like cancel culture focus on personality... HE IS A BLOWHARD, no argument. How about instead look at his accomplishments?

What has the current President accomplished? Besides opening the border, raising taxes, increasing spending, doubling the number of IRS agents, giving Afghanistan back to the Taliban, etc.

JR

 

[pucho812]

I heard the summary (end of segment), talking of that opinion piece, by conservative radio host/retired Sheriff, who agreed with Alan.

From my understanding of said summary, it seems to me that Alan stopped-short and didn’t necessarily address it all:

We don’t know AT ALL yet if this truly is an apples to apples case. We know Hillary was investigated. No criminal charges were ever brought. Anyone can (oh and they have, minds have ran wild) speculate and accuse anyone as to why private property wasn’t searched or actual charges not filed, or why she was officially cleared 3-years later. But the reality is she was cleared! I speculate there was not enough evidence to support criminal charges in a court of law; not even for a private-property search warrant. Period.

On the other hand, there must have been some absolutely, undoubtedly, damning evidence to get a private-property search warrant on the ex-president. Period. On top of that, it’s must have been THAT important to know and deal with the fallout; they are and will further!

Time may tell, or it won’t, but so far, nothing about this is apples to apples, as Alan opinionated. WAY too early for that assessment!

all stories are true some actually happen. As always just because you did it doesn't mean you're guilty. This is a blanket statement that applies to all. I don't think we will ever know the real story, we have seen enough evidence to cause distrust in the three letter agency so who knows.

 

[Recording Engineer]

No, it is not about "who" he is, or was. He served a four year term in office so we have a factual record of his accomplishments despite the aggressive political opposition fighting him at every turn...

This still makes absolutely no sense to me. To me it’s saying, he was special because he came from business finance and not a lifetime politician (as if that’s so unique in the world) and I trust him because he was president/ is a former president; bypass the fact I think he’s a blowhard and I don’t trust the government.

He was the head of the government and had an entire administration and judges around he hand picked! He continually and unabashedly said the most obvious lies nearly daily about even most bizarre things. He continues election rig lies after 60 lost or thrown out cases in courts.

Now he’s in some criminal investigations but he deserves trust of what he says about them?

It’s ok, was just trying to understand the logic, but I don’t.

 

[hodad]

The hits just keep on coming:
Georgia election data copied under direction of Trump attorney

 

[Recording Engineer]

all stories are true some actually happen. As always just because you did it doesn't mean you're guilty. This is a blanket statement that applies to all. I don't think we will ever know the real story, we have seen enough evidence to cause distrust in the three letter agency so who knows.

Evidence or speculation spurred by more speculation?

I’ll never put anything past our government and questioning and doubting can be very healthy, but it also can lead to deterioration. All these insane conspiracy-theories are so mainstream now, I believe we’re there.

The question is what to do about it. If it’s as bad as more and more are presenting, enough for people to trust the endless bizarreness Trump and talking-heads spew daily regarding his government-persecution, then this republic has already failed. This is what you all are saying, not me. As, not even Trump, the superheroes’ superhero, could save us!

 

[pucho812]

Evidence or speculation spurred by more speculation?

I’ll never put anything past our government and questioning and doubting can be very healthy, but it also can lead to deterioration. All these insane conspiracy-theories are so mainstream now, I believe we’re there.

The question is what to do about it. If it’s as bad as more and more are presenting, enough for people to trust the endless bizarreness Trump and talking-heads spew daily regarding his government-persecution, then this republic has already failed. This is what you all are saying, not me. As, not even Trump, the superheroes’ superhero, could save us!

You seem focused on trump. You seem focused on everything he does or says. It would be better use of your time and energy to focus on the people who are in office who's actions have affect on us. They are more dangerous than a private citizen who once held office.

 

[Recording Engineer]

Read the name of the post. Plus, he’s still saving lives out of office. Just a man, but a man’s man. And you know he loves us talking about him!

 

[pucho812]

Read the name of the post. Plus, he’s still saving lives out of office. Just a man, but a man’s man. And you know he loves us talking about him!

I am sure he does, but that doesn't mean you have to. best to focus energy elsewhere.

 

[Tubetec]

Seems to me party politics are so divided in the USA many have dug themselves into a corner either for or against Trump . Even if he took to the stage bollock naked like in the emperors new clothes seems like his supporters wouldnt object out of loyalty . I think theres no doubt about it Trump was the most dangerous president ( to the USA's own interests) ever. Of course other world leaders are put in an awkward position when a man like Trump gets into power , they have to bite their tongue and pretend all is rosey in the garden for the sake of international relations . If the the wedge is driven in too hard there wont be anything left to conquor by the time the fighting is over .

 

[JohnRoberts]

This still makes absolutely no sense to me. To me it’s saying, he was special because he came from business finance and not a lifetime politician (as if that’s so unique in the world) and I trust him because he was president/ is a former president; bypass the fact I think he’s a blowhard and I don’t trust the government.

He was the head of the government and had an entire administration and judges around he hand picked! He continually and unabashedly said the most obvious lies nearly daily about even most bizarre things. He continues election rig lies after 60 lost or thrown out cases in courts.

Now he’s in some criminal investigations but he deserves trust of what he says about them?

It’s ok, was just trying to understand the logic, but I don’t.

sorry I don't think I can help you... I can lead you to the water (his successful policies), but I can't drink for you.

I can drink for myself.

JR

 

[Recording Engineer]

Suck it up! Ha!

 

[Matador]

What has the current President accomplished? Besides opening the border, raising taxes, increasing spending, doubling the number of IRS agents, giving Afghanistan back to the Taliban, etc.

I guess nominating the first black woman to the Supreme Court doesn't count in the list?

Or is this another "opinions vary" situation?

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Isn't Trump rich because his father was rich? He's by no means a self made millionaire / billionaire.

He definitely got a head start. Nothing unusual or illegal about that.

Despite his claims of entrepreneurial skill, I thought he was a fairly unsuccessful businessman but always had his father's wealth to bail him out?

He had failures and successes. I haven't looked into all the details, but he has positive net worth, I believe. No one who has lived life without failure has truly lived. You've got to take some risks, stretch yourself out, push the envelope, etc or you're not going to improve yourself, the world, or the lot of others.

People (especially the media) love to focus on failure, but they fail to understand that the best learning comes from analyzing a failure. If you succeed you have no idea if the task was too easy (not really challenging yourself by being too cautious) or you just got lucky. Entrepreneurs know this as do many in high tech or other professions. Do you think the Wright brothers feared failure? What about the early NASCAR/Formula 1 mechanics and engineers who pushed engine design way beyond original parameters? The world is built on the bones of past failures.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

That’s all dandy, but I don’t understand anyone associating excitement of policy with whether or not they believe that policy maker (who is a known nut job) is trustworthy or not; and at the same time, be so untrusting of our government.

Trump was an outsider. He brought in a few other outsiders and appointed others. But "the government" we don't trust is the permanent bureaucracy which includes over 2M Federal employees (excluding military, post office, contractors, and Federal grant recipients). It seems obvious where the problem is.

When a career politician or statist is elected president I include them and their appointees in the distrust. In short, the mindset that more gov is good or that gov is the best solution to every problem is what I oppose.

If you still don't understand, that's your problem.

 

[Tubetec]

The real problem is an idea emerges , seems like the best thing since slice pan , by the time its properly tested and those results end up in the public domain you have a billion dollar industry hanging off the back of it , its pretty much like a train with no brakes and the throttle fully open at that stage . Bad ideas like feeding people crazy amounts of sugar ,its obvious now the medical industry can make much more money from unhealthy people .
I think its a game of giving everyone enough rope , or making sure theres enough bad choices available to try and reduce the average lifespan , at the current trajectory the pensions and social welfare systems are destined to implode when the number of older people in need of care outstrips the number available to the work force.

 

[pucho812]

I guess nominating the first black woman to the Supreme Court doesn't count in the list?

Or is this another "opinions vary" situation?

I don't think it does. Just because your first at something doesn't mean you're the right candidate or a good candidate for the position. I guess focusing on anything other then qualifications is the new norm.

 

[hodad]

doubling the number of IRS agents

So let's talk about this. For years, and largely thanks to Republicans, the IRS has been underfunded and woefully understaffed when it comes to catching tax cheats. The upshot of that has been that wealthy people--those with the money to pay accountants and lawyers when they're fighting with the IRS--have been able to cheat on their taxes for years with little risk of consequential repercussions.

So when Republicans attack increased enforcement by the IRS, what I hear them saying is that they believe rich people should be allowed to break the law (tax law specifically) with impunity. Because rich people shouldn't have to follow the law like the rest of us. I mean, rich people are obviously better, because they're...well, they're rich, after all.

I guess focusing on anything other then qualifications is the new norm.

You seem not to have focused at all on Judge Jackson's qualifications, so maybe you're right about that.

 

[Recording Engineer]

Trump was an outsider. He brought in a few other outsiders and appointed others. But "the government" we don't trust is the permanent bureaucracy which includes over 2M Federal employees (excluding military, post office, contractors, and Federal grant recipients). It seems obvious where the problem is.

When a career politician or statist is elected president I include them and their appointees in the distrust. In short, the mindset that more gov is good or that gov is the best solution to every problem is what I oppose.

If you still don't understand, that's your problem.

I’ve addressed this already; that I don’t understand the logic and why. My conclusion is craziness, politics talking-points, or eating them up and regurgitating them; most likely one of the later two. You can say the same of me. It’s ok. However, I know that those who know me know I’m too middle and see both sides way too often; to a fault honestly. It makes things much more difficult. So many people see things in black & white / your side & my side. I do not!

Same goes for the he’s an outsider argument. He absolutely wasn’t after a lifetime of constantly rubbing elbows with them, including the Clintons, and especially isn’t now! How can that be said for someone running the entire show? Ran the country, GOP and all! Irrational logic to me! Life goes on.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Same goes for the he’s an outsider argument. He absolutely wasn’t after a lifetime of constantly rubbing elbows with them, including the Clintons, and especially isn’t now! How can that be said for someone running the entire show? Ran the country, GOP and all! Irrational logic to me! Life goes on.

Your comparison is poor. An insider makes a career of "public service." Trump spent 4 hard years as POTUS after decades of business and didn't even take the paycheck. Contrast that with, oh, Bernie Sanders who has never held a real job of any kind. Same with Chuck Schumer, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Mazie Hirono, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Tip O'Neill, and many, many others through the years.