Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[PhaelixWW]

The fact that there are no prosecutions should be a red flag.

You're fucking joking, right?

You sound like QAnon, now.

"The fact that there's no evidence just proves that it's a coverup!"

Or, you know, Occam's razor...

[Edge-]

The fact that there are no prosecutions should be a red flag.

It would be, if there weren't prosecutions. Which there were -

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/repub...b0df0de8b064e5

91 officials under Republican presidents have been convicted of crimes. Compared to 1 under Democrats. The only red flags are that Republicans keep thinking that Democrats are the corrupt ones despite decades of history indicating otherwise.

To think in this day and age of obscene amounts of lobbyist dollars floating around and quid pro quo, you can't possibly believe what happens in Washington DC is all legitimate?

Sounds like Republicans should start supporting campaign finance reform to diminish the corrupting influence of money in politics, rather than...you know...what they've been doing which is to fight back against Democratic attempts to do so while actively defend the existing structure that they benefit from.

You keep painting my posts in some R vs D, Conservative vs Liberal light, but you need to step outside the box for a moment.

I would if you'd stop repeating bog-standard Fox News/Republican talking points.

This isn't confined to Democrats or Republicans, because both are the problem as a seemingly overarching uni-party that Democrats just happen to be the leader of because of Corporate America's support.

https://twitter.com/WendyRogersAZ/st...51565506699268

The corporate communist globalist satanic Uniparty is the faction our founders warned us about.

Weird seeing uniparty pop back up again so soon. You're not doing yourself any favors in trying to claim you're not repeating Republican talking points, because this is a fairly meaningless one, especially within the context of Democrats attempts at campaign finance reform to limit the influence of corporate America. Which has been consistently rebuffed by Republicans who agree with the SCOTUS that "money = speech", which any reasonable person will say is absolutely ludicrous.

And to go a step further, it should be concerning that China was hoping to find solace with the Democrats with Biden coming into office.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/20/w...ina-biden.html

Yeah, seems like they just...don't love Biden at all? Weird. Where'd you even get that from?

[BronzeCondor]

You're fucking joking, right?

You sound like QAnon, now.

"The fact that there's no evidence just proves that it's a coverup!"

Or, you know, Occam's razor...

It's not Occam's Razor. Do you think humanity has finally shed itself of the weaknesses in the human condition and found itself above power & corruption? These shortcomings have been around for thousands of years, and you want to discount history and act like we've finally gotten above that?

[draynay]

It's not Occam's Razor. Do you think humanity has finally shed itself of the weaknesses in the human condition and found itself above power & corruption? These shortcomings have been around for thousands of years, and you want to discount history and act like we've finally gotten above that?

Just getting more and more abstract in the face of being wrong. Isn't it about time for a "Lol" or a "tell us what you really think"?

[Edge-]

Wasn't 100% sure where to put this, but looks like the "cyber symposium" is under way.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1425140025700847620

Guy on the side seems like he's trying to take the mic away from a drunk guy on stage but he's too scared.

So did this just end up being, "Listen to a rich dude prattle on like he's on his Tumblr blog"? Because based off that clip it sure seems like it.

[Endus]

It's not Occam's Razor. Do you think humanity has finally shed itself of the weaknesses in the human condition and found itself above power & corruption? These shortcomings have been around for thousands of years, and you want to discount history and act like we've finally gotten above that?

Pretty sure he was pointing directly at examples of exactly that kind of corruption, and pointing out that, despite your empty claims otherwise, there's a very clear imbalance in how said corruption is distributed. It's overwhelmingly present among one faction, not evenly spread throughout all politics.

Which strongly suggests it's not, actually, a "human condition", but endemic to the principles of certain factions or ideologies.

[PhaelixWW]

It's not Occam's Razor. Do you think humanity has finally shed itself of the weaknesses in the human condition and found itself above power & corruption? These shortcomings have been around for thousands of years, and you want to discount history and act like we've finally gotten above that?

No, I think politicians are hard to prosecute successfully. The fact that so goddamn many Republican politicians have been prosecuted in spite of that indicates that their crimes were staggeringly worse to the level that they couldn't protect themselves, despite the trappings of power, or just that they're monumentally stupid and bad at it.

Or, you know, both.

The alternative is, what exactly? That Democrats are so much more corrupt that they can obfuscate their crimes better? Not only is that a ludicrous conspiracy theory, but it also is basically the same as calling Republican politicians stupid and inept. I mean, it's not like you're trying to say that the Republicans are being falsely accused and prosecuted, are you?

[Edge-]

I'm waiting for this "evidence" bombshell to happen, still.

I thought this was for people to disprove the "evidence" he has, for a chance to win $5M?

I mean, he already "showed" the "evidence", which was just a low-rent Matrix screen that couldn't even get the vertical characters or green color right.

- - - Updated - - -

The alternative is, what exactly? That Democrats are so much more corrupt that they can obfuscate their crimes better? Not only is that a ludicrous conspiracy theory, but it also is basically the same as calling Republican politicians stupid and inept. I mean, it's not like you're trying to say that the Republicans are being falsely accused and prosecuted, are you?

Apparently, that Democrats haven't been caught and prosecuted more is just all the more evidence of how good they are at evading discovery and prosecution. THE ABSENSE OF EVIDENCE IS EVIDENCE ITSELF!

Circular logic is wonderful.

[BronzeCondor]

No.

You tried to protest that the America First movement wasn't Nazi-adjacent, because they were concerned about those things.

The problem is that so were the Nazis. There is no meaningful distinction to be had, there. It's a pro-Nazi slogan, used to support a modern re-emergence of fascism and hatemongering. It isn't "just good people worried about jobs and stuff".

You're letting semantics run this dialogue.

It would be, if there weren't prosecutions. Which there were -

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/repub...b0df0de8b064e5

91 officials under Republican presidents have been convicted of crimes. Compared to 1 under Democrats. The only red flags are that Republicans keep thinking that Democrats are the corrupt ones despite decades of history indicating otherwise.

Sounds like Republicans should start supporting campaign finance reform to diminish the corrupting influence of money in politics, rather than...you know...what they've been doing which is to fight back against Democratic attempts to do so while actively defend the existing structure that they benefit from.

I would if you'd stop repeating bog-standard Fox News/Republican talking points.

https://twitter.com/WendyRogersAZ/st...51565506699268

Weird seeing uniparty pop back up again so soon. You're not doing yourself any favors in trying to claim you're not repeating Republican talking points, because this is a fairly meaningless one, especially within the context of Democrats attempts at campaign finance reform to limit the influence of corporate America. Which has been consistently rebuffed by Republicans who agree with the SCOTUS that "money = speech", which any reasonable person will say is absolutely ludicrous.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/20/w...ina-biden.html

Yeah, seems like they just...don't love Biden at all? Weird. Where'd you even get that from?

Please don't throw Fox News in my face - consumption of MSM should be discouraged for all people who value their mental health. They're all desperately competing for attention right now. "Uni-party" is the perfect description for what Washington is today, it's not a relatively new term in politics but it may be vogue for what they're using for rhetoric.

Do you really believe the Democrats running this country are above corruption? Can you honestly answer that?

As for China & Biden, Corporate America and China alike both had a heavy stake in Biden because of Trump's harsh tone through-out his Presidency. Corporate America is still heavily invested in China, of course those parties hoped for a more positive tone with regards to China. Thankfully Biden's continued to be aggressive in the SCS to counter Chinese aggression, didn't immediately lift the tariffs, and is still executing forward with a modest tone.

https://apnews.com/article/election-...30e93d9c05a425

[PhaelixWW]

Apparently, that Democrats haven't been caught and prosecuted more is just all the more evidence of how good they are at evading discovery and prosecution. THE ABSENSE OF EVIDENCE IS EVIDENCE ITSELF!

Circular logic is wonderful.

That is, quite literally, the hallmark of the deep conspiracy theory "justification". It's a staple of the QAnon rhetoric.

[BronzeCondor]

I thought this was for people to disprove the "evidence" he has, for a chance to win $5M?

I mean, he already "showed" the "evidence", which was just a low-rent Matrix screen that couldn't even get the vertical characters or green color right.

- - - Updated - - -

Apparently, that Democrats haven't been caught and prosecuted more is just all the more evidence of how good they are at evading discovery and prosecution. THE ABSENSE OF EVIDENCE IS EVIDENCE ITSELF!

Circular logic is wonderful.

Circular logic? LOL, hardly. It's a proven understanding of humanity. To deny the existence of corruption in places where corruption has traditionally existed for thousands of years is to deny human nature.

Do you believe we're above it now?

No, I think politicians are hard to prosecute successfully. The fact that so goddamn many Republican politicians have been prosecuted in spite of that indicates that their crimes were staggeringly worse to the level that they couldn't protect themselves, despite the trappings of power, or just that they're monumentally stupid and bad at it.

Or, you know, both.

The alternative is, what exactly? That Democrats are so much more corrupt that they can obfuscate their crimes better? Not only is that a ludicrous conspiracy theory, but it also is basically the same as calling Republican politicians stupid and inept. I mean, it's not like you're trying to say that the Republicans are being falsely accused and prosecuted, are you?

I agree they're hard to prosecute. I think the reality is both are corrupt, there's no winner for "Most Corrupt" because you get away from the importance of identifying and dealing corruption in the first place, insulating one and prosecuting another. I think that's a big problem that is prevalent right now, and can be seen in the posts above.

[Edge-]

Do you really believe the Democrats running this country are above corruption? Can you honestly answer that?

Hell no, and I've never said otherwise.

You claimed that Democrats, specifically, were "corrupt", yet the data available shows that not to be true.

You tried to rebuff the data on indictments as somehow "proof" of this corruption because so few Democrats had been indicted, as if that was evidence of coverups rather than it just not being as big of an issue in Democratic administrations, I pointed out prosecutions. And now you're here once again moving the goalposts to, "Yeah, well corruption exists!"

Yeah, no duh corruption exists. It will always exist, but the topic we're discussing is the reasonably quantifiable amount of corruption. Which strongly indicates that it's actually very much the Republican party that's "corrupt", and that Democrats are remarkably corruption-free.

Unless we're buying the circular, "They aren't indicted because they're so good at avoiding getting caught!" nonsense, which is unprovable nonsense.

As for China & Biden, Corporate America and China alike both had a heavy stake in Biden because of Trump's harsh tone through-out his Presidency. Corporate America is still heavily invested in China, of course those parties hoped for a more positive tone with regards to China. Thankfully Biden's continued to be aggressive in the SCS to counter Chinese aggression, didn't immediately lift the tariffs, and is still executing forward with a modest tone.

https://apnews.com/article/election-...30e93d9c05a425

So...China isn't "finding solace" under a Biden administration as you said? I mean the article you even linked, which is more in line with what I've argued rather than your own argument, predates the Biden administration and is analysis of possible futures rather than reporting on the actual events.

[Endus]

You're letting semantics run this dialogue.

By pointing out that "America First" has always been about support for Nazi ideals, and that has not changed with its reintroduction in the modern era? Which coincides with a significant increase in white supremacist violence in the USA?

Pretty sure I'm not the one playing semantic games, here.

[BronzeCondor]

Hell no, and I've never said otherwise.

You claimed that Democrats, specifically, were "corrupt", yet the data available shows that not to be true.

You tried to rebuff the data on indictments as somehow "proof" of this corruption because so few Democrats had been indicted, as if that was evidence of coverups rather than it just not being as big of an issue in Democratic administrations, I pointed out prosecutions. And now you're here once again moving the goalposts to, "Yeah, well corruption exists!"

Yeah, no duh corruption exists. It will always exist, but the topic we're discussing is the reasonably quantifiable amount of corruption. Which strongly indicates that it's actually very much the Republican party that's "corrupt", and that Democrats are remarkably corruption-free.

Unless we're buying the circular, "They aren't indicted because they're so good at avoiding getting caught!" nonsense, which is unprovable nonsense.

So...China isn't "finding solace" under a Biden administration as you said? I mean the article you even linked, which is more in line with what I've argued rather than your own argument, predates the Biden administration and is analysis of possible futures rather than reporting on the actual events.

Actually, I'm not moving goal posts. You are trying to steer the conversation by putting false emphasis on parts of my post.

Both parties are corrupt, plain and simple. I don't care what the data shows and what you want to stand behind.

And I'm not making any further conclusions as you are alluding to above. I just think it's important that people remember that.

Regarding China, I was stating that China HOPED to find solace in Biden, but didn't find it, thankfully.

By pointing out that "America First" has always been about support for Nazi ideals, and that has not changed with its reintroduction in the modern era? Which coincides with a significant increase in white supremacist violence in the USA?

Pretty sure I'm not the one playing semantic games, here.

Yes, because the America First movement in America isn't concerned with identifying with any Nazism outside of whatever fringe demographics associate with them.

[PhaelixWW]

I agree they're hard to prosecute. I think the reality is both are corrupt, there's no winner for "Most Corrupt" because you get away from the importance of identifying and dealing corruption in the first place, insulating one and prosecuting another.

No, you really don't. Are you imagining some back-halls conversation where a prosecutor is like, "no, wait, maybe we made a mistake on that guy because he's a Democrat" because of labels?

Just no.

The only thing that saying "both sides are equal!" is doing is giving more of a free pass to Republicans who are legitimately, objectively, demonstrably more prone to corruption than Democrats.

The proof is in the goddamn corrupt pudding.

If the Republicans want to stop being seen as more corrupt, then they should be less fucking corrupt. End of.

[Endus]

Both parties are corrupt, plain and simple. I don't care what the data shows and what you want to stand behind.

This is where you demand we accept your completely baseless claim wholesale, and refuse to consider data and evidence that indicate your claim to be false.

That's just being bull-headed and wrong. Not an argument that you're right.

If you "don't care what the data shows", you're not interested in the facts or reality, you're interested only in the story you made up to tell yourself.

[BronzeCondor]

This is where you demand we accept your completely baseless claim wholesale, and refuse to consider data and evidence that indicate your claim to be false.

That's just being bull-headed and wrong. Not an argument that you're right.

Do you consider the historical nature of political corruption to not be tangible data? That's a pretty huge data-set to discount.

No, you really don't. Are you imagining some back-halls conversation where a prosecutor is like, "no, wait, maybe we made a mistake on that guy because he's a Democrat" because of labels?

Just no.

The only thing that saying "both sides are equal!" is doing is giving more of a free pass to Republicans who are legitimately, objectively, demonstrably more prone to corruption than Democrats.

The proof is in the goddamn corrupt pudding.

If the Republicans want to stop being seen as more corrupt, then they should be less fucking corrupt. End of.

I'm not here trying to prosecute anyone, I'm stating a universal truth in the event someone thinks their trash doesn't stink.

[Endus]

Yes, because the America First movement in America isn't concerned with identifying with any Nazism outside of whatever fringe demographics associate with them.

This is just trivially false, and I've already debunked it by pointing to the strong history of exactly such connections.

- - - Updated - - -

Do you consider the historical nature of political corruption to not be tangible data? That's a pretty huge data-set to discount.

I'm fully willing to accept it.

You are the one who explicitly stated you didn't care what that data said. You "don't care what the data shows", in your own words.

[Benggaul]

I don't care what the data shows

QED
/youpeg

[Endus]

I'm not here trying to prosecute anyone, I'm stating a universal truth in the event someone thinks their trash doesn't stink.

Universal "truths" that are contradicted by the data are not "truths" at all, they're comforting lies you tell yourself.