Trump47 First Week & Beyond Catch-All

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 24K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
WTF? You posted an analysis that was incomplete. You were doing so, presumably, to convince people that the pardon of Ulbrecht was justified. And thus you put your opinions out in public to be tested. It's not my fault you left out that exceedingly important part of the story.

It. is. OK. to. admit. you. were. wrong.
Click to expand...

No, it had already been discussed ad nauseum, the point you were trying to make had already been made, and you came in with a snarky jab at the end trying to be the fucking complete know it all you always try to be. You're fucking insufferable, always. Sometimes it's so fucking obvious you know you're being an annoying know-it-all but you post it anyway because you just can't help yourself. Or because you just wrote a fucking novel nobody will ever read and you can't stand the idea of it going to waste.
 
Last edited:
WaynetheDrain said:
I wouldn't have been able to contain myself. I'd have said, "You dumb fuck, what did you actually think was going to happen? Enjoy losing your family, asshole. I hope the cheap eggs are worth it."
Click to expand...
Eggs were $3.73 a dozen at Costco, of course that was in a pack of 5 dozen. They can probably buy some for the trip south.
 
LosPollosHermanos said:
No, it had already been discussed ad nauseum, the point you were trying to make had already been made, and you came in with a snarky jab at the end trying to be the fucking complete know it all you always try to be.
Click to expand...
This is not remotely true. Not a single poster had made that point after your post and before mine. nycfan copied the text of a news article that made reference to it, but I didn't read it all.

And it had obviously not been discussed at all, because multiple posters said things like, "that does seem harsh for a drug dealer." that is, they were accepting your errant characterization of the issue. I doubt any one of them would have protested the life sentence if they had known about that attempted murders-for-hire.

So your participation on this thread has been: 1) untrue characterization of Ross Ulbrecht; 2) a gratuitous insult at me (note: the language I used is standard for message boards); and 3) now you're telling untruths about what happened. Aces! You're doing great.

I get really fucking tired of people blaming me and/or lashing out at me just because they fucked up. It is not in any way my fault that you posted bullshit. If you don't want to get called out on bullshit, don't post bullshit. It's not hard.

I don't try to be anything. I post what I think. I'm not here because I'm looking for affirmation. You could never give it to me anyway. See, e.g,. Hegel's parable of the master and the slave.
 


“… DHS has several advisory committees, including panels that offer advice to department personnel on issues including natural disaster and emergency preparedness, critical infrastructure, artificial intelligence and cybersecurity.

Among them is the Cyber Safety Review Board — a body designed to emulate the National Transportation Safety Board. The group was conducting a comprehensive investigation into the hack of American telecom companies by Beijing actors dubbed "Salt Typhoon."

…
In a statement, Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon said the move "waved a white flag to Chinese hackers."

"Disbanding the Cyber Safety Review Board while it's in the middle of investigating the most damaging breach of America's phone system in recent memory is a massive gift to the Chinese spies who targeted Trump, JD Vance and other top political figures," he added.

Also among the committees eliminated was the Homeland Security Advisory Council. Members of the committee included former secretaries of Homeland Security, DEA administrators, police union presidents and CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. …”

——
Maybe some of these committees are for show more than substance but it appears again and again that this administration wants eliminate expertise and the threat of listening to non-MAGA voices.
 

Trump hits NIH with ‘devastating’ freezes on meetings, travel, communications, and hiring​

Researchers facing "a lot uncertainty, fear and panic"​



“… Today, for example, officials halted midstream a training workshop for junior scientists, called off a workshop on adolescent learning minutes before it was to begin, and canceled meetings of two advisory councils. Panels that were scheduled to review grant proposals also received eleventh-hour word that they wouldn’t be meeting.

…
The hiring freeze is governmentwide, whereas a pause on communications and travel appears to be limited to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), NIH’s parent agency. Such pauses are not unprecedented when a new administration comes in. But some NIH staff suggested these measures, which include pulling job ads and rescinding offers, are more extreme than any previously.

NIH travel chief Glenda Conroy sent an email to senior agency officials early today notifying them of an “immediate and indefinite” suspension of all travel throughout HHS with few exceptions, such as currently traveling employees returning home.

Researchers who planned to present their work at meetings must cancel their trips, as must NIH officials promoting agency programs off site or visiting distant branches of the agency.

“Future travel requests for any reason are not authorized and should not be approved,” the memo said.

… Separately, HHS announced a communications ban through 1 February in a memo issued yesterday. (The Washington Post and Associated Press first reported the memo’s existence.) It orders a stop on the publishing of regulations, guidance documents, grant announcements, social media posts, press releases, and other “communications,” and the canceling of speaking engagements. Any exceptions must be applied for and approved through the president’s appointees.

…
Even more troubling to many researchers is a pause on study sections that many received word of today. Without such meetings, NIH cannot make research awards.

Previous administrations have imposed communications pauses in their first days. And the administration of Barack Obama continued a cap on attendance at scientific meetings first imposed by the George W. Bush administration, which in some cases meant staff canceled trips to meetings. [Great Recession related]

But an immediate, blanket ban on travel is unusual, says one longtime researcher in NIH's intramural program. “I don't think we've ever had this and it's pretty devastating for a postdoc or graduate student” who needs to present their work and network to move ahead in their career, the researcher says.

Another consequence of the communications pause, according to an NIH staffer involved with clinical trials at NIH's Clinical Center, is that agency staff cannot meet with patient groups or release newsletters or other information to recruit patients into trials. Another unknown is whether NIH researchers will still be allowed to submit papers to peer-reviewed journals. …”
 
superrific said:
This is not remotely true. Not a single poster had made that point after your post and before mine. nycfan copied the text of a news article that made reference to it, but I didn't read it all.

And it had obviously not been discussed at all, because multiple posters said things like, "that does seem harsh for a drug dealer." that is, they were accepting your errant characterization of the issue. I doubt any one of them would have protested the life sentence if they had known about that attempted murders-for-hire.

So your participation on this thread has been: 1) untrue characterization of Ross Ulbrecht; 2) a gratuitous insult at me (note: the language I used is standard for message boards); and 3) now you're telling untruths about what happened. Aces! You're doing great.

I get really fucking tired of people blaming me and/or lashing out at me just because they fucked up. It is not in any way my fault that you posted bullshit. If you don't want to get called out on bullshit, don't post bullshit. It's not hard.

I don't try to be anything. I post what I think. I'm not here because I'm looking for affirmation. You could never give it to me anyway. See, e.g,. Hegel's parable of the master and the slave.
Click to expand...
If you want to get into the real facts instead of the bullshit you base your uninformed opinion on, why not bring up the fact that those alleged five paid hits didn't get into evidence at all and were only allowed in the sentencing phase? Because last I checked, federal prosecutors with good evidence of five murders for hire usually charge Conspiracy to Commit Murder. Why leave that out? Aren't you a lawyer? You want allegations that aren't good enough for actual charges, that aren't even good enough to get into evidence, affecting the sentencing?

Why chime in about the appellate court affiriming without mentioning the fact that they specifically stated they thought the sentence was harsh but they left it alone because it was within guidelines? Why would you just say an appellate court upheld it and leave that out?

The bottom line is you are absolutely compulsive about pretending to know everything about everything. And sometimes you write a pity party post about yourself realizing that at least something is wrong with you, and then you go back to doing the same annoying shit you always do within a couple of days.

Let's just make an agreement. I won't respond to any of your posts any more, including ones about licking your wife's clit, and you don't respond to any of mine. Capisce?
 
Last edited:
LosPollosHermanos said:
If you want to get into the real facts instead of the bullshit you base your uninformed opinion on, why not bring up the fact that those alleged five paid hits didn't get into evidence at all and were only allowed in the sentencing phase? Because last I checked, federal prosecutors with good evidence of five murders for hire usually charge Conspiracy to Commit Murder. Why leave that out? Aren't you a lawyer? You want allegations that aren't good enough for actual charges, that aren't even good enough to get into evidence, affecting the sentencing?

Why chime in about the appellate court affiriming without mentioning the fact that they specifically stated they thought the sentence was harsh but they left it alone because it was within guidelines? Why would you just say an appellate court upheld it and leave that out?

The bottom line is you are absolutely compulsive about pretending to know everything about everything. And sometimes you write a pity party post about yourself realizing that at least something is wrong with you, and then you go back to doing the same annoying shit you always do within a couple of days.

Let's just make an agreement. I won't respond to any of your posts any more, including ones about licking your wifes clit, and you don't respond to any of mine. Capisce?
Click to expand...
1. The appeals court did not say the sentence was harsh. Again you lie. Here is the Second Circuit's discussion of this point:

Accordingly, while a life sentence for selling drugs alone would give pause, we would be hard put to find such a sentence beyond the bounds of reason for drug crimes of this magnitude. But the facts of this case involve much more than simply facilitating the sale of narcotics. The district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Ulbricht commissioned at least five murders in the course of protecting Silk Road's anonymity, a finding that Ulbricht does not challenge in this appeal."

Thus are you incorrect.

2. The reason he wasn't charged with murder was that the government didn't think it could prove beyond a reasonable doubt after it was revealed that the two agents were shaking down criminals for money. That was sheer luck on the part of Ross -- he did what he did, and that the cops had issues was a blessing. Otherwise, he would have been convicted for murder.

The lack of charges means nothing. It doesn't change whether he did it. And he did, as the district court AND three appeals court judges found. They described the evidence as ample and unambiguous.

3. Why would I take that deal? If you're bullshitting, and I know that, then other posters deserve to know that you are bullshitting to them. If you don't post bullshit, then we have no quarrel.

4. I think what's really going on here is that you realized that you got played by the documentaries. And you don't want to admit it to yourself, so instead you lash out at me. It's common bullying. The sin you claim was correcting you; somehow you twisted that into "realizing that at least something is wrong with you, and then you go back to doing the same annoying shit you always do within a couple of days" -- which is not at all an acceptable thing to say, its incredible stupidity notwithstanding. Basically, you're a classic toxic masculinity case.

As a general rule, I think that posts intended to be intentionally hurtful, without any rhetorical connection to the discourse, should warrant discipline. Like this series from the chicken brothers. It's not something we should tolerate. It's bullying. It's pathetic. It reflects poorly on all of us should we indulge this conduct.
 


“I want to get to the economy. I’m running out of time “

“I don’t care. This is more important because right now the economy’s going to do great…”

So doesn’t care about running out of time, fair (talks over Hannity saying “they” are yelling in his ear - probably to get Trump back on track in the time left) but then makes answer also that Biden not pardoning himself (not clear on his beef, TBH) is more important than the economy(?)



Longer clip, I think Trump is in part saying that Biden should have pardoned himself but since he didn’t he should be investigated/prosecuted (for something? I guess he assumes no super presidential immunity for Biden?).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top