Re: The Biden - Harris Era.
Posted: Wed May 29, 2024 1:38 pm
RunRussellRun, no personal attacks.
Correct. Why? Why doesn't our money go as far as it did a few years ago?youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2024 5:09 pm It speaks volumes that you need to read some schlub from TWP gaslight the hell out of us, when we and they know full well our money does not go nearly as far as it did a short handful of years ago. The BS they are pushing is embarrassing. They are running interference for Biden....nothing more.
+1 It would be impossible to single out any particular entity of government to lay the blame on. There are too many people with their fingers in the money pie. What the hell though a Fan, when your spending other people's money...who cares? It ain't like you will ever face a day of reconning or be held accountable for your malfeasance.a fan wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2024 1:57 pmCorrect. Why? Why doesn't our money go as far as it did a few years ago?youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2024 5:09 pm It speaks volumes that you need to read some schlub from TWP gaslight the hell out of us, when we and they know full well our money does not go nearly as far as it did a short handful of years ago. The BS they are pushing is embarrassing. They are running interference for Biden....nothing more.
You know why. And I watched you cheer it on, YA.
What does massive tax cuts for corporations and the 1%ers who are holding all the US currency do? It keeps more money in circulation, right?
What happens when you have too much money in circulation, YA?
Inflation, right?
Now add in borrowing EVEN MORE money....trillions........what do you think will happen?
No one complained about this as it was happening. Everyone was THRILLED with Trump as he pumped TRILLIONS of borrowed money into the US economy which, duh, led to prosperity. Odd what happens when you hand every person in America cash and eviction bans, isn't it? Remember the Billions in cash for farmers BEFORE Covid?
Now the bill is due. And you cats want to blame Biden for it? Please.
We signed up for this. Don't like it? Simple solution: raise taxes to pay for all the cr*p we bought. No one wants to do that, and hasn't wanted to do that for 20+ years now, and counting.
Know what the interest payment on our debt is this year, YA? We broke through $1 Trillion this year. Wasted money on NOTHING because a bunch of grown adults are convinced that they don't have to pay for the things government give them. Oh, and then pretends that the government doesn't do anything for them.
Why do you think Catherine Rampell is a "schlub"? Better to bring in the stuff from bubblebathgirl? Benny Johnson? Collin Rugg?youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2024 5:09 pm It speaks volumes that you need to read some schlub from TWP gaslight the hell out of us, when we and they know full well our money does not go nearly as far as it did a short handful of years ago. The BS they are pushing is embarrassing. They are running interference for Biden....nothing more.
Vote to hold him in contempt squeeks by: https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ ... index.htmlSeacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 1:26 pmYes, I think that is a valid argument; production of the transcript voluntarily effectively waives the assertion of privilege to the videotape. It will depend, among other things, I whether the voluntary production of the transcript reserved or tried to reserve the privilege to anything else, such as the video and audio. But yes, that is an argument the Committee could make. The real problem will be the broader question of whether Congress/the Committee has any basis for wanting any of it in the first place due to the (pretty clear to me, anyway) absence of a legislative purpose for the materials.youthathletics wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 1:12 pmCurious, as an attorney what is your take on this idea…Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 2:56 pmPerformative nonsense that you pass on. You are a purposeful or unwitting agent of deep MAGA bullsh@t. But you got Jesus going on, so you’re good.youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 11:51 amThe plot thickens (my little pretty) .....love the video and background music by Luna, makes it kinda scary...Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 10:55 amAhh, clever reply that I can label, "YA takes the Fifth."youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 10:13 amObjection. speculation. "Sustained"Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 10:09 amAssume that the GOP House Oversight Committee contempt citation is issued. Now what happens?youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 8:40 am Garland in Contempt? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-69022395
The President has interposed executive privilege against disclosure of the videotapes. The DOJ will likely contest the legal basis for the subpoenaed materials, asserting that the Congress does not have an appropriate legislative purpose for the disclosure, and that the disclosure of the transcripts was sufficient for any such purposes in any event.
I know you have registered your disagreement with Trump's interposition of executive privilege on many...whoa, strike that.
So a case is filed in the federal district court in Washington, House Oversight v. Garland. The Court issues an order quashing the contempt and effectively validating the DOJ's/Garland's measured and lawful approach to evaluation of the subpoena and DOJ's decision to contest its scope and purpose. Appeal is had to the DC Circuit, and a briefing schedule is published and the case is briefed and argued.
Where in the foregoing is the GOP Majority doing anything that helps Americans? Do you not understand that this is all of the mishmash you purport to hate, but now, as it is coming from Comer the Gomer, you seem OK with it. Weird. Wonder what the legal authority "bubblebathgirl" thinks?
https://x.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1791473442237075779
If they released the transcripts of the interview, does that not nullify executive privilege in releasing the actual audio? If no, why? Otherwise the argument is that the transcript and audio differ, no?
If we could keep the conversation about things like this -- that have a basis in reality and reason, and not the Luna silliness or other stupid twittersphere idiocy -- that would be nice. Once you invoke a GOP member of Congress for nearly any proposition, the conversation goes down the sewer.
Another dumb stunt by the majority party in the 118th Congress. I guess the issues now go into the courts for resolution, and Congress -- Comer and Jordan -- have to come up with a legislative purpose served by the video, when they already have the complete and verified transcript. What has the GOP majority carried into law that serves the interests of its constituency?youthathletics wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 4:31 pmVote to hold him in contempt squeeks by: https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ ... index.htmlSeacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 1:26 pmYes, I think that is a valid argument; production of the transcript voluntarily effectively waives the assertion of privilege to the videotape. It will depend, among other things, I whether the voluntary production of the transcript reserved or tried to reserve the privilege to anything else, such as the video and audio. But yes, that is an argument the Committee could make. The real problem will be the broader question of whether Congress/the Committee has any basis for wanting any of it in the first place due to the (pretty clear to me, anyway) absence of a legislative purpose for the materials.youthathletics wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 1:12 pmCurious, as an attorney what is your take on this idea…Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 2:56 pmPerformative nonsense that you pass on. You are a purposeful or unwitting agent of deep MAGA bullsh@t. But you got Jesus going on, so you’re good.youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 11:51 amThe plot thickens (my little pretty) .....love the video and background music by Luna, makes it kinda scary...Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 10:55 amAhh, clever reply that I can label, "YA takes the Fifth."youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 10:13 amObjection. speculation. "Sustained"Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 10:09 amAssume that the GOP House Oversight Committee contempt citation is issued. Now what happens?youthathletics wrote: ↑Fri May 17, 2024 8:40 am Garland in Contempt? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-69022395
The President has interposed executive privilege against disclosure of the videotapes. The DOJ will likely contest the legal basis for the subpoenaed materials, asserting that the Congress does not have an appropriate legislative purpose for the disclosure, and that the disclosure of the transcripts was sufficient for any such purposes in any event.
I know you have registered your disagreement with Trump's interposition of executive privilege on many...whoa, strike that.
So a case is filed in the federal district court in Washington, House Oversight v. Garland. The Court issues an order quashing the contempt and effectively validating the DOJ's/Garland's measured and lawful approach to evaluation of the subpoena and DOJ's decision to contest its scope and purpose. Appeal is had to the DC Circuit, and a briefing schedule is published and the case is briefed and argued.
Where in the foregoing is the GOP Majority doing anything that helps Americans? Do you not understand that this is all of the mishmash you purport to hate, but now, as it is coming from Comer the Gomer, you seem OK with it. Weird. Wonder what the legal authority "bubblebathgirl" thinks?
https://x.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1791473442237075779
If they released the transcripts of the interview, does that not nullify executive privilege in releasing the actual audio? If no, why? Otherwise the argument is that the transcript and audio differ, no?
If we could keep the conversation about things like this -- that have a basis in reality and reason, and not the Luna silliness or other stupid twittersphere idiocy -- that would be nice. Once you invoke a GOP member of Congress for nearly any proposition, the conversation goes down the sewer.
Kind of trolling post, right?OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 7:21 am Interesting how the Biden administration is trying to tell us we're not really seeing what we're seeing with these video clips we're seeing. So how come folks are touching Biden's arm and showing him the way to exit, or the way to face? Touching his arm, though... But we're not seeing that. Yeah--it's just the MAGA folks putting lies out into the ether. U-huh. Okay if you say so.
He is pushing back against your viewpoint that "we're not really seeing what we're seeing with these video clips," and suggesting you take a deeper dive into the world of out of context videos and other pieces of sly misinformation that plague almost all social discourse, to say nothing of political discourse. Retreating into "I have had quite enough of your condescending insults" is, as I have come to know, totally de rigueur for many Americans, who don't want their lives and opinions shaped by facts, or corrections to misapprehended or misinformed opinions. It allows one to retreat into the hard shell of one's static views, and cast everyone else aside as "condescending."OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 9:13 am No thanks, MD. I have had quite enough of your condescending insults to last for a good long while. Your pedantic lectures are insufferable. (C&S was accurate in referring to them as such). Your making-certain-sure-you-appear-to-have-won-the-argument tactic of raising all kinds of other topics--side or on point--so as to muddy the water and confuse the issue. As I've said before--just like Trump. It's a disingenuous way of getting your point across. For those reasons, I don't enjoy interacting with you so, no thank you. You're on the Pay No Mind list until further notice.
Oh, and if you think I am "trolling" – feel free to report me.
Then don't post if you don't want responses which disagree with you.OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 9:13 am No thanks, MD. I have had quite enough of your condescending insults to last for a good long while. Your pedantic lectures are insufferable. (C&S was accurate in referring to them as such). Your making-certain-sure-you-appear-to-have-won-the-argument tactic of raising all kinds of other topics--side or on point--so as to muddy the water and confuse the issue. As I've said before--just like Trump. It's a disingenuous way of getting your point across. For those reasons, I don't enjoy interacting with you so, no thank you. You're on the Pay No Mind list until further notice.
Oh, and if you think I am "trolling" – feel free to report me.
Birds of a feather, Seacoaster--birds of a feather.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 10:55 amHe is pushing back against your viewpoint that "we're not really seeing what we're seeing with these video clips," and suggesting you take a deeper dive into the world of out of context videos and other pieces of sly misinformation that plague almost all social discourse, to say nothing of political discourse. Retreating into "I have had quite enough of your condescending insults" is, as I have come to know, totally de rigueur for many Americans, who don't want their lives and opinions shaped by facts, or corrections to misapprehended or misinformed opinions. It allows one to retreat into the hard shell of one's static views, and cast everyone else aside as "condescending."OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 9:13 am No thanks, MD. I have had quite enough of your condescending insults to last for a good long while. Your pedantic lectures are insufferable. (C&S was accurate in referring to them as such). Your making-certain-sure-you-appear-to-have-won-the-argument tactic of raising all kinds of other topics--side or on point--so as to muddy the water and confuse the issue. As I've said before--just like Trump. It's a disingenuous way of getting your point across. For those reasons, I don't enjoy interacting with you so, no thank you. You're on the Pay No Mind list until further notice.
Oh, and if you think I am "trolling" – feel free to report me.
Discussion of difficult subjects, particularly in written form on pages like this one, carries no other humanizing quality -- a smile, a smirk, a hand gesture, and the like. So we take the cold words delivered in writing either like an adult who placed themselves in the public marketplace by their rendering of an opinion on a divisive topic, or we act the part of an aggrieved little boy who "won't be talked down to," or some such thing.
See how easy that was to make my point? Well done. Kindly note the evident condescension.OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 11:26 amBirds of a feather, Seacoaster--birds of a feather.Seacoaster(1) wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 10:55 amHe is pushing back against your viewpoint that "we're not really seeing what we're seeing with these video clips," and suggesting you take a deeper dive into the world of out of context videos and other pieces of sly misinformation that plague almost all social discourse, to say nothing of political discourse. Retreating into "I have had quite enough of your condescending insults" is, as I have come to know, totally de rigueur for many Americans, who don't want their lives and opinions shaped by facts, or corrections to misapprehended or misinformed opinions. It allows one to retreat into the hard shell of one's static views, and cast everyone else aside as "condescending."OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 9:13 am No thanks, MD. I have had quite enough of your condescending insults to last for a good long while. Your pedantic lectures are insufferable. (C&S was accurate in referring to them as such). Your making-certain-sure-you-appear-to-have-won-the-argument tactic of raising all kinds of other topics--side or on point--so as to muddy the water and confuse the issue. As I've said before--just like Trump. It's a disingenuous way of getting your point across. For those reasons, I don't enjoy interacting with you so, no thank you. You're on the Pay No Mind list until further notice.
Oh, and if you think I am "trolling" – feel free to report me.
Discussion of difficult subjects, particularly in written form on pages like this one, carries no other humanizing quality -- a smile, a smirk, a hand gesture, and the like. So we take the cold words delivered in writing either like an adult who placed themselves in the public marketplace by their rendering of an opinion on a divisive topic, or we act the part of an aggrieved little boy who "won't be talked down to," or some such thing.
... Petey is back.OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 7:21 am Interesting how the Biden administration is trying to tell us we're not really seeing what we're seeing with these video clips we're seeing. So how come folks are touching Biden's arm and showing him the way to exit, or the way to face? Touching his arm, though... But we're not seeing that. Yeah--it's just the MAGA folks putting lies out into the ether. U-huh. Okay if you say so.
jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 12:37 pm... Petey is back.OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2024 7:21 am Interesting how the Biden administration is trying to tell us we're not really seeing what we're seeing with these video clips we're seeing. So how come folks are touching Biden's arm and showing him the way to exit, or the way to face? Touching his arm, though... But we're not seeing that. Yeah--it's just the MAGA folks putting lies out into the ether. U-huh. Okay if you say so.