If thou gazest long into the Pit, the Pit will also gaze into thee

Only one has trolling as one of many KPIs

The primary arguments against the Amazon warehouse in NYC were firstly the inadequacy of local infrastructure to deal with a bunch of new commuters and the complete lack of a plan to deal with it (but all signs pointed to the city having to cough up yet more money), and secondly that the jobs promised would likely go to out of state hires and not the locals who would be footing the tax bill and getting little out of it but extra traffic and maybe slightly quicker delivery on their Prime orders.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Only one has an office in Congress.

I love the conservative obsession with AOC. Despised by actual Democratic leaders and clear outliers in the party, for the distraction-from-Trump's-stupidity crowd, she's a wonder horse. This is a disingenuous whataboutism wherein suddenly she is the face of the Democrats. Pretty amazeballs if you ask me.

So let's indulge thos whataboutism by looking at Republican Representatives stupidity. But because that's such a broad, deep topic, could you nail down what aspect you'd most like? We have science denialism, Christian family values actually screwing male prostitutes, insane economic theories, blatant lying, nepotism, bribery, political vengeance, philandering, and incest. I'm sure I've left out a few as well, choose your vice, and there's a Republican scandal to match! So then we'll pretend that they're the face of Republicans and laugh at the insanity of the whole party, as they're clearly represented by the nutty outliers.

Or, you know, just not. It's dishonest and simply an attempt to score "points" in a stupid game. Both parties have insane outliers, as that's the nature of the beast.

Or let's look at Trump's own words from his speech last Friday.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... on/582904/

Trump announced the move in a rambling, free-associative appearance in the White House Rose Garden that was more MAGA rally than presidential announcement. Even by the standards of this president, his remarks were confusing, untruthful, and often off topic, with strange ad-hominem attacks on other politicians and sharp exchanges with reporters. Despite claiming that the nation faces an acute crisis that requires immediate attention, the president meandered through a long preamble about trade deals and North Korea. When he finally got to the point, he struggled to stay focused.

“We’re going to be signing today and registering national emergency,” he said. “And it’s a great thing to do, because we have an invasion of drugs, invasion of gangs, invasion of people, and it’s unacceptable. And by signing the national emergency, something signed many times by other presidents, many, many times, President Obama, in fact, we may be using one of the national emergencies that he signed having to do with cartels, criminal cartels. It’s a very good emergency that he signed … And what we really want to do is simple. It’s not like it is complicated. It’s very simple. We want to stop drugs from coming into our country. We want to stop criminals and gangs from coming into our country. Nobody has done the job that we have ever done.”

:lol:

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Only one has an office in Congress.

I love the conservative obsession with AOC. Despised by actual Democratic leaders and clear outliers in the party, for the distraction-from-Trump's-stupidity crowd, she's a wonder horse. This is a disingenuous whataboutism wherein suddenly she is the face of the Democrats. Pretty amazeballs if you ask me.

So let's indulge thos whataboutism by looking at Republican Representatives stupidity. But because that's such a broad, deep topic, could you nail down what aspect you'd most like? We have science denialism, Christian family values actually screwing male prostitutes, insane economic theories, blatant lying, nepotism, bribery, political vengeance, philandering, and incest. I'm sure I've left out a few as well, choose your vice, and there's a Republican scandal to match! So then we'll pretend that they're the face of Republicans and laugh at the insanity of the whole party, as they're clearly represented by the nutty outliers.

Or, you know, just not. It's dishonest and simply an attempt to score "points" in a stupid game. Both parties have insane outliers, as that's the nature of the beast.

Between Jihadies and Commies the Dems have erected all three rings.

Then we have the Presidential nominees and their bum-fight to be the most weird. :burn:

The sooner Biden declares and turns his hose on the crazies the better. Though I guess he gets to inherit one clown as running mate. Which makes his 76 years (and counting) cause for sober consideration.

Jesus he won his first office the year man stepped on the moon and Nixon was elected. Old white male indeed. Heads will explode.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Or let's look at Trump's own words from his speech last Friday.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... on/582904/

Trump announced the move in a rambling, free-associative appearance in the White House Rose Garden that was more MAGA rally than presidential announcement. Even by the standards of this president, his remarks were confusing, untruthful, and often off topic, with strange ad-hominem attacks on other politicians and sharp exchanges with reporters. Despite claiming that the nation faces an acute crisis that requires immediate attention, the president meandered through a long preamble about trade deals and North Korea. When he finally got to the point, he struggled to stay focused.

“We’re going to be signing today and registering national emergency,” he said. “And it’s a great thing to do, because we have an invasion of drugs, invasion of gangs, invasion of people, and it’s unacceptable. And by signing the national emergency, something signed many times by other presidents, many, many times, President Obama, in fact, we may be using one of the national emergencies that he signed having to do with cartels, criminal cartels. It’s a very good emergency that he signed … And what we really want to do is simple. It’s not like it is complicated. It’s very simple. We want to stop drugs from coming into our country. We want to stop criminals and gangs from coming into our country. Nobody has done the job that we have ever done.”

:lol:

There seems to be an inverse correlation between the use of teleprompters /beatific beaming at the cameras - and decision making.

At least old mate has found time for new friends without needing to flex for politics.

https://image.iol.co.za/image/1/process ... =3500x1960

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Only one has an office in Congress.

I love the conservative obsession with AOC. Despised by actual Democratic leaders and clear outliers in the party, for the distraction-from-Trump's-stupidity crowd, she's a wonder horse. This is a disingenuous whataboutism wherein suddenly she is the face of the Democrats. Pretty amazeballs if you ask me.

So let's indulge thos whataboutism by looking at Republican Representatives stupidity. But because that's such a broad, deep topic, could you nail down what aspect you'd most like? We have science denialism, Christian family values actually screwing male prostitutes, insane economic theories, blatant lying, nepotism, bribery, political vengeance, philandering, and incest. I'm sure I've left out a few as well, choose your vice, and there's a Republican scandal to match! So then we'll pretend that they're the face of Republicans and laugh at the insanity of the whole party, as they're clearly represented by the nutty outliers.

Or, you know, just not. It's dishonest and simply an attempt to score "points" in a stupid game. Both parties have insane outliers, as that's the nature of the beast.

Between Jihadies and Commies the Dems have erected all three rings.

Then we have the Presidential nominees and their bum-fight to be the most weird. :burn:

The sooner Biden declares and turns his hose on the crazies the better. Though I guess he gets to inherit one clown as running mate. Which makes his 76 years (and counting) cause for sober consideration.

Jesus he won his first office the year man stepped on the moon and Nixon was elected. Old white male indeed. Heads will explode.

Sigh. You never tire of your game, do you?

There are two teams on the field.

It appears “my game” is a group activity. Different words. Same message.

He’s too old and he’ll die in office for a two term run. He isn’t crazy-left enough (“too centrist”). He’s too tired and lacks passion. However he sees the kindergarten grade capacity of the alternatives (no OS experience and they are housewreakers requiring “bridging”).

So if he runs, it’ll be an unwilling, eyes shut, pity-fuck for the Party.

http://i.imgur.com/z4A23Xi.jpg

Brive1987 wrote: ↑
Between Jihadies and Commies the Dems have erected all three rings.

Either you still think all Muslims are Jihadis or you are just making shit up at this point, I'm not sure which. Honestly neither would surprise me.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Only one has an office in Congress.

I love the conservative obsession with AOC. Despised by actual Democratic leaders and clear outliers in the party, for the distraction-from-Trump's-stupidity crowd, she's a wonder horse. This is a disingenuous whataboutism wherein suddenly she is the face of the Democrats. Pretty amazeballs if you ask me.

So let's indulge thos whataboutism by looking at Republican Representatives stupidity. But because that's such a broad, deep topic, could you nail down what aspect you'd most like? We have science denialism, Christian family values actually screwing male prostitutes, insane economic theories, blatant lying, nepotism, bribery, political vengeance, philandering, and incest. I'm sure I've left out a few as well, choose your vice, and there's a Republican scandal to match! So then we'll pretend that they're the face of Republicans and laugh at the insanity of the whole party, as they're clearly represented by the nutty outliers.

Or, you know, just not. It's dishonest and simply an attempt to score "points" in a stupid game. Both parties have insane outliers, as that's the nature of the beast.

Lets do Louis Gohmert (R-Tx) (as presented in a Houston Chronicle article):

"So when [caribou] want to go on a date, they invite each other to head over to the pipeline. ... So my real concern now [is] if oil stops running through the pipeline ... do we need a study to see how adversely the caribou would be affected if that warm oil ever quit flowing?"
...
After the massacre in Aurora, Colo., Gohmert determined that the cause of James Holmes's rampage wasn't, say, mental health issues, or some form of social trigger -- but, rather, that he didn't have the appropriate fear of a vengeful, unforgiving God: "You know what really gets me, as a Christian, is to see the ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian beliefs, and then some senseless crazy act of terror like this takes place. ... We've threatened high school graduation participations, if they use God's name, they're going to be jailed ... I mean that kind of stuff. Where was God? What have we done with God? We don't want him around. I kind of like his protective hand being present."
...
Last week, Gohmert went to WorldNetDaily, one of the only conspiracy sites giving Alex Jones a run, to spout, once more, a belief that the enemies have already reached our shore: "This [Obama] administration has so many Muslim Brotherhood members that have influence that they just are making wrong decisions for America."

https://www.houstonpress.com/news/the-f ... es-6740337

Of course, if you look at the last one, it seems that Gohmert and Brive might have some beliefs in common.

Old_ones wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑
Between Jihadies and Commies the Dems have erected all three rings.

Either you still think all Muslims are Jihadis or you are just making shit up at this point, I'm not sure which. Honestly neither would surprise me.

It’s cliched that you didn’t go with how dare you think all democratic socialists are communists

I'm surprised Brive hasn't fallen in with Qanon yet.

Apocalyptic, anti-immigrant and thinkin' Trump's a sooper jean-yus.

Really need that wall!

Those Qanon guys seem to really parallel certain thinking here...

This is fine.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ I'm surprised Brive hasn't fallen in with Qanon yet.

Your confusion doesn’t confuse me. I’d expect nothing less.

:naughty:

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ I'm surprised Brive hasn't fallen in with Qanon yet.

Your confusion doesn’t confuse me. I’d expect nothing less.

:naughty:

Surprise =/= Confusion.

surprise noun
sur·​prise | \ sər-ˈprīz , sə-\
variants: or less commonly surprize
Definition of surprise (Entry 1 of 3)
1a : an attack made without warning
b : a taking unawares
2 : something that surprises
3 : the feeling caused by something unexpected or unusual

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/surprise

I'll take number three, thanks.

Returning to top is. McCarren was used to stop P. Trudeau from entering the United States. So it clearly had its uses.

“Topic”

Brilliant, isn't it? At least he sorta, kinda likes dogs.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ I'm surprised Brive hasn't fallen in with Qanon yet.

Your confusion doesn’t confuse me. I’d expect nothing less.

:naughty:

Surprise =/= Confusion.

surprise noun
sur·​prise | \ sər-ˈprīz , sə-\
variants: or less commonly surprize
Definition of surprise (Entry 1 of 3)
1a : an attack made without warning
b : a taking unawares
2 : something that surprises
3 : the feeling caused by something unexpected or unusual

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/surprise

I'll take number three, thanks.

I would have taken you as a number 2 “please sir, can I use the word to be defined in the definition” kind of guy. :)

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ https...://mobile.twitter.com/ddale8/status/1097199478627598336

Brilliant, isn't it? At least he sorta, kinda likes dogs.

Worst scripted speech ever. It almost reads like a natural conversation. His audience must have been appalled.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ https...://mobile.twitter.com/ddale8/status/1097199478627598336

Brilliant, isn't it? At least he sorta, kinda likes dogs.

Worst scripted speech ever. It almost reads like a natural conversation. His audience must have been appalled.

It sounds a lot like my father-in-law, and he has dementia. It does not sound...presidential.

Speaking of not sounding presidential...

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ https...://mobile.twitter.com/ddale8/status/1097199478627598336

Brilliant, isn't it? At least he sorta, kinda likes dogs.

Worst scripted speech ever. It almost reads like a natural conversation. His audience must have been appalled.

It sounds a lot like my father-in-law, and he has dementia. It does not sound...presidential.

Reads like the transcript of a BBQ conversation. Occurring between two friends. So yeah. Not Presidential.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Speaking of not sounding presidential...

Remember when Stuckey (sp?) did that AOC “interview”. And the libs lost their minds because it didn’t have “satire” plastered all over it?



It all right when we do it ....

The zealous “liberals owning the ‘pubs” push works far beyond memes. It harnesses MSM - which forces a decision between MSM retaining respect or letting its hair down and going full toxic partisan. I think the libs believe they can have both.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Speaking of not sounding presidential...

Remember when Stuckey (sp?) did that AOC “interview”. And the libs lost their minds because it didn’t have “satire” plastered all over it?
Snip

No, I can't seem to recall this. Was it all the libs? Or are you nutpicking again?

No, I can't seem to recall this.

Me neither. I guess we libs were so badly triggered we got stress amnesia. :drool:

free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑

No, I can't seem to recall this.

Me neither. I guess we libs were so badly triggered we got stress amnesia. :drool:

Looks like it.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/24/1760 ... atire-news

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/24/con ... ez-satire/

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/ ... opponents/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... 46dc0dcdc9

See? Every single one of them. Not a lib that didn’t go ‘tard.

But in all seriousness, there was a sufficient breadth of dogpile as to form an acceptable liberal media consensus.

Can you prove every FTB SJW supported Stollznow? Did it really matter?

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑

No, I can't seem to recall this.

Me neither. I guess we libs were so badly triggered we got stress amnesia. :drool:

Looks like it.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/24/1760 ... atire-news

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/24/con ... ez-satire/

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/ ... opponents/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... 46dc0dcdc9

The only one of those lib sources I read is the Wapo, and I couldn't evaluate the article you posted b/c paywall.
In fact I've only heard of and looked at is The Intercept rather than the other 2, and I find Glenn Greenwald to be a demented anti liberal that worships socialist and other dictators, or at least will never criticize them.
This is getting nearly as bad as trying to tell an intersectional feminist that not all men are bad.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ See? Every single one of them. Not a lib that didn’t go ‘tard.

But in all seriousness, there was a sufficient breadth of dogpile as to form an acceptable liberal media consensus.

Can you prove every FTB SJW supported Stollznow? Did it really matter?

I may be mistaken but didn't Rebecca Watson kind of not support and kind of made it known Stollz and her weren't friends? I could be wrong and it doesn't matter.
At any rate, I don't recall there was much of a dogpile.

free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑

No, I can't seem to recall this.

Me neither. I guess we libs were so badly triggered we got stress amnesia. :drool:

Looks like it.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/24/1760 ... atire-news

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/24/con ... ez-satire/

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/ ... opponents/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... 46dc0dcdc9

The only one of those lib sources I read is the Wapo, and I couldn't evaluate the article you posted b/c paywall.
In fact I've only heard of and looked at is The Intercept rather than the other 2, and I find Glenn Greenwald to be a demented anti liberal that worships socialist and other dictators, or at least will never criticize them.
This is getting nearly as bad as trying to tell an intersectional feminist that not all men are bad.

You don’t need to explain falling outside the informed liberal loop. It’s ok.

Point is a chorus of left-lib voices who currently bewail Trump (pointing out media collusion) turned snowflake ❄️ on behalf of the new girl in the class.

Watson didn’t challenge or abstain from the Radford dogpile. She did her knifing and then turned around and stabbed stollie when the bitch sided with that Aussie skeptic chick who had in turned harassed Wato with dead animals (postage paid).

Those were the days.

So, every liberal, huh? You have to know this is a disengenous game, and that nutpicking and guilt by association isn't going to end well.

Explain how everyone on the liberal side is inextricably in lockstep, but there's an exceedingly fine distinction on the right, wherein one can clearly delineate between Lauren Southern and the MAGAbomber. Moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans have more in common with each other than either does with AOC or Steve King. Yet you choose to ignore this in favor of demonizing one side, whilst playing No-True-Scotsman for your team. Just so you know, this smacks of tribal thinking.

Also, I'd really like to know where you stand on Trump's anti-vax and climate demialism.

I wonder what would cause that? Disregarding the most extensive intelligence service in the world for a for of the U.S.? Weird, huh?

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Also, I'd really like to know where you stand on Trump's anti-vax and climate demialism.

I’m anti anti-vax.

And I’m horrified that the vaccines kids need to go to daycare and school are federally mandated. When did that happen?

Im also horrified that all the amazing work done over 8 years and rammed through both houses by Obama will be wiped.
Actually it’s a pity Obama waited so long (2014) to even start on the CPP. And that it’s continued relevance required a Hillary in the White House.

Obama may not have been a denier (though Trump has since walked back the concept of ‘hoax’) - but he definitely didn’t make it a priority. Which produced a similar outcome.

But ignore me. As usual. So here is the high trust, left leaning take from “The Hill”.

Nothing horrifies the intelligentsia more than President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change. But, based on new information on China’s emissions, it increasingly looks like the president made the right call.

China is key. It is by far the world’s biggest source of carbon emissions, producing more than one quarter of the global total and 81 percent more than the United States. The U.S. is the second-largest; India a distant third.

Unlike China, emissions from the United States have trended lower in recent years. The peak occurred in 2005; overall net emissions in 2016 were 12.1-percent lower than in 2005, and the International Energy Agency reports another drop in 2017.

https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-envi ... -agreement

While we are discussing foibles. I don’t like Trump’s approach to his marriage vows.

And his hair is weird. And apparently his penis looks like a mushroom. Plus he eats two scoops of ice cream, and can’t apply tan very well. Finally what’s with his long ties?

Impeach.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I wonder what would cause that? Disregarding the most extensive intelligence service in the world for a for of the U.S.? Weird, huh?

Ive got no idea where this negativity from McCabe or distrust from Trump might be coming from.

The former acting director of the FBI has become the first public official to publicly confirm US government officials held meetings to discuss the option of removing Donald Trump from the presidency in the days after James Comey was fired.

Andrew McCabe, fired as deputy FBI director last March, told US 60 Minutes that following the removal of Mr Comey as FBI director in May 2017, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) met to discuss whether the vice president and Cabinet members could be gathered to remove Mr Trump under the US Constitution's 25th Amendment.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ So, every liberal, huh? You have to know this is a disengenous game, and that nutpicking and guilt by association isn't going to end well.

Explain how everyone on the liberal side is inextricably in lockstep, but there's an exceedingly fine distinction on the right, wherein one can clearly delineate between Lauren Southern and the MAGAbomber. Moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans have more in common with each other than either does with AOC or Steve King. Yet you choose to ignore this in favor of demonizing one side, whilst playing No-True-Scotsman for your team. Just so you know, this smacks of tribal thinking.

Double posts are usually a mistake.

Brive said: See? Every single one of them. Not a lib that didn’t go ‘tard.

But in all seriousness, there was a sufficient breadth of dogpile as to form an acceptable liberal media consensus.

You sound very dour today. RUOK?

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I wonder what would cause that? Disregarding the most extensive intelligence service in the world for a for of the U.S.? Weird, huh?

Ive got no idea where this negativity from McCabe or distrust from Trump might be coming from.

The former acting director of the FBI has become the first public official to publicly confirm US government officials held meetings to discuss the option of removing Donald Trump from the presidency in the days after James Comey was fired.

Andrew McCabe, fired as deputy FBI director last March, told US 60 Minutes that following the removal of Mr Comey as FBI director in May 2017, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) met to discuss whether the vice president and Cabinet members could be gathered to remove Mr Trump under the US Constitution's 25th Amendment.

It was McCabe's duty to discuss this, as he didn't swear an oath to uphold the POTUS, but rather the constitution. This was entirely lawful, indeed necessary. There's a good deal of evidence that Trump is compromised by the Russians. That's kinda the FBI's wheelhouse.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Also, I'd really like to know where you stand on Trump's anti-vax and climate demialism.

I’m anti anti-vax.

And I’m horrified that the vaccines kids need to go to daycare and school are federally mandated. When did that happen?

Im also horrified that all the amazing work done over 8 years and rammed through both houses by Obama will be wiped.
Actually it’s a pity Obama waited so long (2014) to even start on the CPP. And that it’s continued relevance required a Hillary in the White House.

Obama may not have been a denier (though Trump has since walked back the concept of ‘hoax’) - but he definitely didn’t make it a priority. Which produced a similar outcome.

But ignore me. As usual. So here is the high trust, left leaning take from “The Hill”.

Nothing horrifies the intelligentsia more than President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change. But, based on new information on China’s emissions, it increasingly looks like the president made the right call.

China is key. It is by far the world’s biggest source of carbon emissions, producing more than one quarter of the global total and 81 percent more than the United States. The U.S. is the second-largest; India a distant third.

Unlike China, emissions from the United States have trended lower in recent years. The peak occurred in 2005; overall net emissions in 2016 were 12.1-percent lower than in 2005, and the International Energy Agency reports another drop in 2017.

https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-envi ... -agreement

While we are discussing foibles. I don’t like Trump’s approach to his marriage vows.

And his hair is weird. And apparently his penis looks like a mushroom. Plus he eats two scoops of ice cream, and can’t apply tan very well. Finally what’s with his long ties?

Impeach.

Oh, dear gods. "The Hill" isn't left-leaning, and that opinion piece you posted was from a Fox News contributor and full-on conservative. "The Hill" only seems left-leaning to somebody that thinks anything critical/factual about Trump automatically makes it a leftist rag.

Trump is a conman. He thinks his gut is better than actual informed thinking. He, for some inexplicable reason, trusts Putin over his own intelligence agencies. It isn't a foible to be an anti-science president, it's an outright detriment, a disqualifier.

We haven't even ventured into emoluments violations yet. And election law violations. Nor has nepotism been brought up lately. Curious loans from foriegn banks.

Oh, and I'm fine, thanks for asking.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02 ... hite-house
That ain't right.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ Also, I'd really like to know where you stand on Trump's anti-vax and climate demialism.

I’m anti anti-vax.

And I’m horrified that the vaccines kids need to go to daycare and school are federally mandated. When did that happen?

Im also horrified that all the amazing work done over 8 years and rammed through both houses by Obama will be wiped.
Actually it’s a pity Obama waited so long (2014) to even start on the CPP. And that it’s continued relevance required a Hillary in the White House.

Obama may not have been a denier (though Trump has since walked back the concept of ‘hoax’) - but he definitely didn’t make it a priority. Which produced a similar outcome.

But ignore me. As usual. So here is the high trust, left leaning take from “The Hill”.

Nothing horrifies the intelligentsia more than President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change. But, based on new information on China’s emissions, it increasingly looks like the president made the right call.

China is key. It is by far the world’s biggest source of carbon emissions, producing more than one quarter of the global total and 81 percent more than the United States. The U.S. is the second-largest; India a distant third.

Unlike China, emissions from the United States have trended lower in recent years. The peak occurred in 2005; overall net emissions in 2016 were 12.1-percent lower than in 2005, and the International Energy Agency reports another drop in 2017.

https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-envi ... -agreement

While we are discussing foibles. I don’t like Trump’s approach to his marriage vows.

And his hair is weird. And apparently his penis looks like a mushroom. Plus he eats two scoops of ice cream, and can’t apply tan very well. Finally what’s with his long ties?

Impeach.

Oh, dear gods. "The Hill" isn't left-leaning, and that opinion piece you posted was from a Fox News contributor and full-on conservative. "The Hill" only seems left-leaning to somebody that thinks anything critical/factual about Trump automatically makes it a leftist rag.

Trump is a conman. He thinks his gut is better than actual informed thinking. He, for some inexplicable reason, trusts Putin over his own intelligence agencies. It isn't a foible to be an anti-science president, it's an outright detriment, a disqualifier.

We haven't even ventured into emoluments violations yet. And election law violations. Nor has nepotism been brought up lately. Curious loans from foriegn banks.

Oh, and I'm fine, thanks for asking.

I did my pre-checks.

http://i.imgur.com/kIZw6yZ.jpg

Maybe the “media bias” service is a Trump front. It’s probably turtles all the way down.

Your point could only have been helped by indicating actual error of fact or interpretation of said facts.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ https...://mobile.twitter.com/jonswaine/status/1097574608692264961

Are you seriously suggesting Stone is a kook? I guess maybe Trump was right to fire his ass back in 2015.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ ....

I understand the whole 25th thing is a bomb waiting to explode.

It also fails to define what constitutes inability, or how questions concerning inability are to be resolved

I guess we are going with serious TDS and partisan-bias as just cause eh?

In the real world, anything short of a certified medical incident constitutes probable treason. Perceived incompetence doesn’t cut it.

https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-ratings Most peg it center or center- right. And indeed the opinion piece you posted was from a right-wing pundit.

Man with two watch never know time.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ ....

I understand the whole 25th thing is a bomb waiting to explode.

It also fails to define what constitutes inability, or how questions concerning inability are to be resolved

I guess we are going with serious TDS and partisan-bias as just cause eh?

In the real world, anything short of a certified medical incident constitutes probable treason. Perceived incompetence doesn’t cut it.

Partisan bias? The people discussing removing Trump were Republican. McCabe, Rosenstein, Sessions...all Republican. And no, medical reasons aren't the only fitness-for-office test, not by a longshot. It isn't treason to discuss the 25th and invoking it, or it would be a useless amendment. This shouldn't be hard.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Peek
Here's a Peek (pun intended) at who penned that opinion piece you posted from "left" The Hill. Surprise! She's an energy consultant for the petroleum industry! Who would've guessed! And she's impressed that Trump pulled us out of the climate accord. Who would've thought that a petroleum shill would have liked that?

Brive1987 wrote: ↑ Man with two watch never know time.

Man calibrates most accurate time by looking at all watches to see which ones skew most most out of line with the others.
-Ku-ung Fu Tzu

https://mobile.twitter.com/lizpeek?ref_ ... r%5Eauthor

If you had any lingering doubts as to her political leanings...

Brive1987 wrote: ↑T

And to call him late at night...and suggest that his arrest was a "lynching."
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nat ... 1128-story.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/29/trump-p ... -case.html

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑

Brive1987 wrote: ↑T

And to call him late at night...and suggest that his arrest was a "lynching."
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nat ... 1128-story.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/29/trump-p ... -case.html

The deep state tried and failed to kill Roger with polonium and blame it on Russia so now they are going to lynch him instead.
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/united- ... ims-he-was

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Peek
Here's a Peek (pun intended) at who penned that opinion piece you posted from "left" The Hill. Surprise! She's an energy consultant for the petroleum industry! Who would've guessed! And she's impressed that Trump pulled us out of the climate accord. Who would've thought that a petroleum shill would have liked that?

I’m more interested in whether Chinese emissions are decreasing in line with America’s. If that’s not the case I’ll thank her for the information and maybe never engage with her again. If it is the case I’ll craft a strongly worded teeet to The Hill about fake news.

And never engage with her again.

Brive1987 wrote: ↑

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Peek
Here's a Peek (pun intended) at who penned that opinion piece you posted from "left" The Hill. Surprise! She's an energy consultant for the petroleum industry! Who would've guessed! And she's impressed that Trump pulled us out of the climate accord. Who would've thought that a petroleum shill would have liked that?

I’m more interested in whether Chinese emissions are decreasing in line with America’s. If that’s not the case I’ll thank her for the information and maybe never engage with her again. If it is the case I’ll craft a strongly worded teeet to The Hill about fake news.

And never engage with her again.

There's an old saying "As goes California, so goes the U.S. As goes the U.S., so goes the world." I think it was a mistake to pull out, as it gives China an out on their own emission control.