America - The Official Thread

[Leo Thorne]

No, the lack of actual evidence makes it false

Okay. With that same logic, the Russian collusion is a hoax then, because there isn’t any proof at all.

 

[TexRex]

Okay. With that same logic, the Russian collusion is a hoax then, because there isn’t any proof at all.

Hey look, more conjecture based on the analysis of Mueller's findings by a demonstrably biased Trump appointee (The Department of Redundancy Department approves of this description) being accepted as Mueller's actual findings.

 

[PocketZeven]

Russian collusion during the election. He could easily be colluding with Russia (or anyone else for that matter) now that he's president. I don't want to get all McCarty here, but the way Trump buddies up to Russia is a bit concerning.



Wealthy people don't go to jail for the most part, especially high profile wealthy people. I mean just earlier this week Jussie Smollett had all of his charges dropped (16 felony counts I believe) because he agreed to forfeit $10,000 in bond money and do some community service.

It really depends on the crime. I dont think Manafort's financial crimes are any less then Trump's. As sitting President he is untouchable, as a civilian he won't. I suspect that if he doesnt win in 2020, the repiblican will turn on him. But considering the current political climate globally is a very big possibility he will win.

 

[jjaisli]

Okay. With that same logic, the Russian collusion is a hoax then, because there isn’t any proof at all.

There is plenty of evidence of foreign interference in our election process. What remains to be proven or disproved, if we can take Robert Muller's exhaustive inquiry as "definitive proof" is if Trump himself endorsed, sought out or actively engaged himself in the process.

 

[PocketZeven]

There is plenty of evidence of foreign interference in our election process. What remains to be proven or disproved, if we can take Robert Muller's exhaustive inquiry as "definitive proof" is if Trump himself endorsed, sought out or actively engaged himself in the process.

I guess we wont know till the raport is made public. Trump may have had contact with russians for other reasons, which perhaps werent (to the letter of the law) illegal. Mueller just hasnt found evidence Trump conspired with them to win an election. That does not exonerate him yet from other possible crimes, that werent in the scope of Muellers investigation. Trump is very savy at using this "win" to sway public perception that if he is innocent of collusion he must be innocent of all other (future) charges.

 

[McLaren]

Poking fun at the Green New Deal is the best I can figure. It ended in the most Mormon way possible by telling people to fight climate change you need to fall in love, get married, and have babies.

He also included Aquaman, Tauntaun, and other completely off the wall things. While I don't agree with his stance on climate change, I do enjoy his approach to calling out how bad the Green New Deal is. We can fight climate change and not spend trillions replacing every building in the US.

Did I hear on the news correctly that not only did it fall 57-0, but that 43 Democrats did not vote for it including the person who co-wrote it?

 

[Joey D]

Did I hear on the news correctly that not only did it fall 57-0, but that 43 Democrats did not vote for it including the person who co-wrote it?

Yes, but AOC said to vote present to show that it was a sham vote or something like that.

 

[PocketZeven]

Did I hear on the news correctly that not only did it fall 57-0, but that 43 Democrats did not vote for it including the person who co-wrote it?

It was in protest to Mitch McConnell:

"Democrats slammed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for holding a 'sham' vote on the matter - it was a non-binding resolution, meaning it had no force of law, and needed 60 votes to advance in the legislative process, which was an impossible task given Democrats only have 47 votes in their corner."

 

[TexRex]

Yes, but AOC said to vote present to show that it was a sham vote or something like that.

Respectfully, is this written as it was intended to be read? Something's not gelling for me.

Edit: Ah, nevermind. Sufficiently gelled thanks to other comments.

 

[PocketZeven]

I thought this was a meme.... But apparently this actually happened:

 

[McLaren]

Yes, but AOC said to vote present to show that it was a sham vote or something like that.

Ah. I heard there were at least 4 Dems who did not support it, but the talking point was a co-writer who did not make any attempt to back it.

Either way, naturally I’m reading both sides are claiming they won in some regard.

 

[PocketZeven]

Ah. I heard there were at least 4 Dems who did not support it, but the talking point was a co-writer who did not make any attempt to back it.

Either way, naturally I’m reading both sides are claiming they won in some regard.

I am reading that there is only more division in the US government then there was at the start of Trump's presidency.

 

[McLaren]

I am reading that there is only more division in the US government then there was at the start of Trump's presidency.

That’s been that way since the start; it’s not news.

I’m referring to this specific outcome: Repubs feel it shot down an outlandish plan, & Dems feel it forced the Repubs to confront climate change.

 

[TexRex]

That’s been that way since the start; it’s not news.

I’m referring to this specific outcome: Repubs feel it shot down an outlandish plan, & Dems feel it forced the Repubs to confront climate change.

I can't imagine why they (we?) would think that or what having done so is supposed to accomplish. Showing a dog the pile of crap it left in the hall doesn't keep it from leaving another one. Frankly it may have done more harm than good, the massive overreach that the "plan" was.

 

[Joey D]

That’s been that way since the start; it’s not news.

I’m referring to this specific outcome: Repubs feel it shot down an outlandish plan, & Dems feel it forced the Repubs to confront climate change.

And like everything in politics everyone lost. Now Republicans and even citizens will associate Democrats with an asinine plan to fix climate change, whereas on the flip side others will continue to peg Republicans as curmudgeons who won't accept basic science.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I keep wondering why the democrats don't try to get a law passed (or some other procedural move, who knows) that basically only acknowledges that climate change is real and caused/exacerbated by human activity. Just the 'climate change acknowledgement act' or something. I don't know what kind of legal precedent it could follow.

 

[TexRex]

I keep wondering why the democrats don't try to get a law passed (or some other procedural move, who knows) that basically only acknowledges that climate change is real and caused/exacerbated by human activity. Just the 'climate change acknowledgement act' or something. I don't know what kind of legal precedent it could follow.

I think I see what you're getting at, and I can even appreciate it, but I'm not sure it would lead to anything and I suspect it would get hit just as hard as proposals to actually do something because it seems to me that not demonstrating a willingness to act in the face of such an acknowledgement casts an unfavorable light.

 

[Danoff]

I keep wondering why the democrats don't try to get a law passed (or some other procedural move, who knows) that basically only acknowledges that climate change is real and caused/exacerbated by human activity. Just the 'climate change acknowledgement act' or something. I don't know what kind of legal precedent it could follow.

While we're voting on something, let's also include some funding for that infrastructure bill we've been talking about.

That's why.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I just wish liberals and conservatives could meet in the middle of the venn diagram of energy production.

Clean/Zero Emissions ------- Old fasioned/"not wimpy"

The answer is nukes. A lot of nukes.

Ammiright?

 

[Rage Racer]

Hey hey... What do you mean Trump didn’t collude with Russia? You mean our efforts were going to waste? That’s sad...

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Hey hey... What do you mean Trump didn’t collude with Russia? You mean our efforts were going to waste? That’s sad...

Something something plausible deniability.

 

[huskeR32]

I keep wondering why the democrats don't try to get a law passed (or some other procedural move, who knows) that basically only acknowledges that climate change is real and caused/exacerbated by human activity. Just the 'climate change acknowledgement act' or something. I don't know what kind of legal precedent it could follow.

This kinda happened back in 2015 in the Senate, though it was an amendment to another bill, not standalone legislation. Nothing really came of it, unsurprisingly.

 

[McLaren]

And like everything in politics everyone lost. Now Republicans and even citizens will associate Democrats with an asinine plan to fix climate change, whereas on the flip side others will continue to peg Republicans as curmudgeons who won't accept basic science.

This article is basically that.

While no Democrats supported the Green New Deal in a Senate test vote forced by Republicans Tuesday, the sheer volume of discussion made clear the plan has struck a nerve as both parties seek to use it to their advantage in the 2020 elections.

“Democrats are on offense” about climate change, Schumer said as he announced a Democrat-only committee on climate. “We’re feeling really good about where we’re moving.”

Results in the Senate showed otherwise, Republicans said.

Democrats called the vote scheduled by GOP leaders a “sham” and said it carried its own political risk by mocking an issue — climate change — that a growing number of Americans care deeply about.

“All across the country, people young and old are mobilized, organized and galvanized to take action now on climate change,” Markey said.

Republicans dismissed the plan as a government takeover of the economy that could bankrupt the nation with an unrealistic goal of obtaining net-zero carbon emissions within 10 years.

Schumer and other Democrats insisted they were winning, citing polls showing that a clear majority of Americans support action on climate change. A December NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found that two-thirds of Americans believe action is needed to combat climate change, and a record 45 percent say the problem is serious enough to demand immediate action.

A growing number of Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, now say they believe climate change is real and that humans play a role in it.

https://www.boston.com/news/politic...e-politics-burn-hot-after-green-new-deal-vote

 

[Whitestar]

a velociraptor (an incorrect raptor, but still)

OT: Just curious, what's incorrect about it?
EDIT: Are you referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinonychus#In_popular_culture?

 

[Dotini]

Trump, in victory lap with Fox TV, gloats and vows pursuit and investigation of reeling and defeated enemies.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tr...eller-probe-is-concluded-slams-treasonous-fbi

 

[Joey D]

OT: Just curious, what's incorrect about it?
EDIT: Are you referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinonychus#In_popular_culture?

Yup, the raptor in the painting is what Jurassic Park called a raptor. But since that movie came out, paleontologists have figured out that the raptor had feathers. Still, if you're the general public, chances are you associate the raptor with what Jurassic Park showed.

 

[PeterJB]

Real-life Velociraptors were much smaller than the Jurassic Park ones and had a longer, narrower snout, and were covered in feathers. The ones in Jurassic Park are halfway between Deinonychus and Utahraptor in appearance and size.

 

[TexRex]

Pfft, Velociraptors...

 

[DDastardly00]

make the moon great again:

https://www.space.com/us-astronauts-moon-return-by-2024.html

 

[mustafur]

Your never going to getting the Republicans to sign the Green New deal even if they believe the facts on Climate Change as there is too much welfare added on to it.