The 2024 Elections in the US, mostly Harris vs. Trump

[kentington]

To me, having a confirmed victim of Jeffery Epstein record in an affidavit for court that Trump sexually assaulted her as a minor is much stronger evidence of sexual assault.

Ah yeah, that one does Trump it. I did read that one, or at least what was made public, maybe all of it?

I already wrote him off as 'should be in jail.' I just don't like left overs. I do think the Tara Reade testimony was believable. Is there a reason why most seem to ignore that?

The shower scenario, yeah depends on the age. The thing that gets me is that she thought it was inappropriate. Maybe times have changed, but I think when the kid is able to realize it's weird, it's weird.

Holding the kids and sniffing them and doing the same to other ladies. I know this is anecdotal, but when I was young there was a guy who behaved this same way and ended up in jail for the kind of stuff we are discussing. He was so far gone in private that he didn't realize that is not okay to everyone else.

[mookiemcgee]

To me, having a confirmed victim of Jeffery Epstein record in an affidavit for court that Trump sexually assaulted her as a minor is much stronger evidence of sexual assault.

Ah yeah, that one does Trump it. I did read that one, or at least what was made public, maybe all of it?

I already wrote him off as 'should be in jail.' I just don't like left overs. I do think the Tara Reade testimony was believable. Is there a reason why most seem to ignore that?

The shower scenario, yeah depends on the age. The thing that gets me is that she thought it was inappropriate. Maybe times have changed, but I think when the kid is able to realize it's weird, it's weird.

Holding the kids and sniffing them and doing the same to other ladies. I know this is anecdotal, but when I was young there was a guy who behaved this same way and ended up in jail for the kind of stuff we are discussing. He was so far gone in private that he didn't realize that is not okay to everyone else.

I don't totally discount the Tara Reade story, but it's very wishy washy. Her initial story she told the press changed a year later to a much more serious accusation a year later and there hasn't been a good explanation for why (outside of the first version didn't generate enough press interest). The one person she claims she told the too 2 years after it happened also initially told the press a fairly G rated version and then changed the story when Tara did a year later to being one of actual sexual assault. There also hasn't been any other women who have come forward to make similar claims, which regardless of the voracity of their claims is somewhat unusual in cases like this. Regardless of how you view the strength of the claims of the women, dozens of women has made claims that Trump sexually assaulted them. So idk, even the reported Laura McGann who kinds broke this story and interviewed Tara for this story 5 years ago in her last published article on the story just kind of leaves it open ended like she isn't sure if she's believes it happened or not. I think it's pretty similar to how the Brent Kavanaugh story played out, in the end there was no evidence just accusations that could potentially have been motivated politically (Tara Reade stuff came out during the primaries and she openly supported Bernie Sanders)

As far as the shower stuff goes, she has never answered any questions publicly, outside of saying the diary was stolen. We don't know if she was 2 or was 14 and that kinda makes a huge difference in how someone might interpret things. So again unless or until she directly address the issue I don't know there is much more that can be said. I don't really have much more to say about the hair sniffing... it's weird but not criminal.

who are we doing next? Can we do Matt Gaetz?

[kentington]

As far as the shower stuff goes, she has never answered any questions publicly, outside of saying the diary was stolen. We don't know if she was 2 or was 14 and that kinda makes a huge difference in how someone might interpret things. So again unless or until she directly address the issue I don't know there is much more that can be said. I don't really have much more to say about the hair sniffing... it's weird but not criminal.

Yep, I did say anecdotal and I feel strongly about that, but it isn't really an argument.

I agree, a lot of these accusations can be politically motivated. Brett was an odd one. That story changed every time I heard it. I will say that if a woman sees another woman make an accusation and not be believed it would definitely hinder their desire to air the dirty laundry. So, I don't think few accusations means he hasn't done anything. It doesn't mean he has either.

That goes for both Brett and Biden.

who are we doing next? Can we do Matt Gaetz?

Seriously, should we just get a list of all the representatives. Put their picture up first. (This assumes people don't know what everyone in the GOV looks like)

Step 1 : Guess their political affiliation
Step 2 : Guess their guilt level - Fraud, Sex, Lies, Drugs, Rock and Roll, Serial Killing
Step 3 : Reveal the identity and gather evidence.

[jusplay4fun]

Who is lying?

The Associated Press deleted a tweet Thursday aimed at Ohio Republican Sen. J.D. Vance after fact checkers called them out for misrepresenting his comment on school shootings.

The tweet linked to an article about Vance, implying that he’d called school shootings a “fact of life” shortly after a deadly shooting at Apalachee High School in Georgia on Wednesday. The AP replaced the story roughly 90 minutes with correct context, that Vance said he “laments that school shootings are a ‘fact of life’ and says the U.S. needs to harden security to prevent more carnage” like the attack in Georgia.

Community Notes called out The AP’s original tweet for the “misleading headline,” including an accurate quote.
Despite The AP’s retraction of the original tweet, both Vice President Kamala Harris’s and her running-mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, still have posts up that completely misrepresent Vance’s statement to their combined 22.1 million followers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ap-deletes-jd-vance-tweet-after-fact-checkers-call-them-out/ar-AA1q7DO2?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=9581fb1675f94054c74d13d57588efdc&ei=15

[saxitoxin]

Is Kamala drunk in this video?

https://x.com/Cobratate/status/1832295110521881065

There have been rumors she has a severe alcohol problem.

[Votanic]

Is Kamala drunk in this video?

https://x.com/Cobratate/status/1832295110521881065

There have been rumors she has a severe alcohol problem.

I see a hairspray chugging scandal looming on the horizon. Kitty Dukakis 2.0.

[Pack Rat]

Who is lying?

The Associated Press deleted a tweet Thursday aimed at Ohio Republican Sen. J.D. Vance after fact checkers called them out for misrepresenting his comment on school shootings.

The tweet linked to an article about Vance, implying that he’d called school shootings a “fact of life” shortly after a deadly shooting at Apalachee High School in Georgia on Wednesday. The AP replaced the story roughly 90 minutes with correct context, that Vance said he “laments that school shootings are a ‘fact of life’ and says the U.S. needs to harden security to prevent more carnage” like the attack in Georgia.

Community Notes called out The AP’s original tweet for the “misleading headline,” including an accurate quote.
Despite The AP’s retraction of the original tweet, both Vice President Kamala Harris’s and her running-mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, still have posts up that completely misrepresent Vance’s statement to their combined 22.1 million followers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ap-deletes-jd-vance-tweet-after-fact-checkers-call-them-out/ar-AA1q7DO2?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=9581fb1675f94054c74d13d57588efdc&ei=15

The biggest killer of children are guns! JD Vance stance is the same old same old b.s.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2201761

Here's the speech he made and commentary.





Nothing like having an AR15 as a birthday gift from Daddy (even after being warned by the FBI, that their son is sending disturbing messages on social media) and going to school with his special "show and tell".

[saxitoxin]

Is Kamala drunk in this video?

https://x.com/Cobratate/status/1832295110521881065

There have been rumors she has a severe alcohol problem.

I see a hairspray chugging scandal looming on the horizon. Kitty Dukakis 2.0.

[jusplay4fun]

Who is lying?

The Associated Press deleted a tweet Thursday aimed at Ohio Republican Sen. J.D. Vance after fact checkers called them out for misrepresenting his comment on school shootings.

The tweet linked to an article about Vance, implying that he’d called school shootings a “fact of life” shortly after a deadly shooting at Apalachee High School in Georgia on Wednesday. The AP replaced the story roughly 90 minutes with correct context, that Vance said he “laments that school shootings are a ‘fact of life’ and says the U.S. needs to harden security to prevent more carnage” like the attack in Georgia.

Community Notes called out The AP’s original tweet for the “misleading headline,” including an accurate quote.
Despite The AP’s retraction of the original tweet, both Vice President Kamala Harris’s and her running-mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, still have posts up that completely misrepresent Vance’s statement to their combined 22.1 million followers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ap-deletes-jd-vance-tweet-after-fact-checkers-call-them-out/ar-AA1q7DO2?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=9581fb1675f94054c74d13d57588efdc&ei=15

[b]Nothing like having an AR15 as a birthday gift from Daddy (even after being warned by the FBI, that their son is sending disturbing messages on social media) and going to school with his special "show and tell".

Hence the father of the shooter in GA is charged with murder, too.

[Pack Rat]

The future Police State:

[jusplay4fun]

The future Police State:

p-brat has yet to learn the First Lesson by "The Master"

Tips to Be a Success in the CC Forums
Postby saxitoxin on Tue Aug 20, 2024 1:55 pm

I, saxi, am known for ... [edit] Tips
(...)

Here are some tips that will help you be a CC Forums Game success.

Tip 1/10: When making a forum post, it's a little stupid to make like a three word comment that depends on the content of 45 minutes worth of embedded videos with the expectation someone is going to actually sit through them prior to responding to your idiotic post. If no one is responding to your moronic posts, it's because no one is doing the pre-response homework you assigned, asshat. Embed a single, short video whose content complements your post and then provide an enticing textual hook!

[saxitoxin]

Hard to imagine, just a few years ago, that the Democratic Party would be high-fiving themselves for turning themselves into the kind of party that these guys feel comfortable joining ...



The world's biggest group of unindicted war criminals.

[Votanic]

Hard to imagine, just a few years ago, that the Democratic Party would be high-fiving themselves for turning themselves into the kind of party that these guys feel comfortable joining ...



The world's biggest group of unindicted war criminals.

For decades, numerous pundits and scholars have explained how the elites of both parties were really in cahoots with each other to maintain their own powers and privileges.
But it has taken a REAL game-changer like Trump to show just how very true that always was, ... and of course, they now persecute him beyond all reason because of that.

[saxitoxin]

Hard to imagine, just a few years ago, that the Democratic Party would be high-fiving themselves for turning themselves into the kind of party that these guys feel comfortable joining ...



The world's biggest group of unindicted war criminals.

For decades, numerous pundits and scholars have explained how the elites of both parties were really in cahoots with each other to maintain their own powers and privileges.
But it has taken a REAL game-changer like Trump to show just how very true that always was, ... and of course, they now persecute him beyond all reason because of that.

I mean, honestly, during the Bush Administration, the Rats were having wet dreams about prosecuting Bush and Cheney for war crimes. Now they've completely rehabilitated this duo and they're heroes. Bernie Sanders was just cheerleading Cheney today. In 10 years the Democratic Party will be building statues to Trump and screaming about prosecuting their new foil-of-the-hour.

These people can't hold their own attention for three seconds before their leaders flash the next shiny thing in front of them.

[Dukasaur]

For decades, numerous pundits and scholars have explained how the elites of both parties were really in cahoots with each other to maintain their own powers and privileges.
But it has taken a REAL game-changer like Trump to show just how very true that always was,

Fair enough, but just because somebody changes the game, doesn't mean they're changing it for the better.

In fact, most revolutions kick out a relatively mild asshole, only to bring in a really big asshole.

[Dukasaur]

I mean, honestly, during the Bush Administration, the Rats were having wet dreams about prosecuting Bush and Cheney for war crimes. Now they've completely rehabilitated this duo and they're heroes.

"Heroes" is a bit of an overstatement, but if they can do something good for the world, it will be one small step towards making amends for their war crimes.

Churchill had to work with Stalin. Sometimes, saving the world requires working with people you wouldn't want near your children.

[kentington]

"Heroes" is a bit of an overstatement, but if they can do something good for the world, it will be one small step towards making amends for their war crimes.

Churchill had to work with Stalin. Sometimes, saving the world requires working with people you wouldn't want near your children.

I don’t know your stance in the election and I am not implying a specific stance this is a general question.

If working with war criminals is required to save the world, then would working with Trump/Biden be worth saving the world? Doesn’t them being willing to work with you concern you? What about your stance would entice them?

I don’t think war criminals really change. Especially not without a public apology.

What is worse rape and fraud of a few or war crimes against millions? Isn’t it sad that this is even a question?

Note on the above question: This is not to open a discussion on whether Trump/Biden did these things. Generally people have believed these things about at least one of them. If you believe neither have I still think it’s a valid question.

[Pack Rat]

The future Police State:

p-brat has yet to learn the First Lesson by "The Master"

Tips to Be a Success in the CC Forums
Postby saxitoxin on Tue Aug 20, 2024 1:55 pm

I, saxi, am known for ... [edit] Tips
(...)

Here are some tips that will help you be a CC Forums Game success.

Tip 1/10: When making a forum post, it's a little stupid to make like a three word comment that depends on the content of 45 minutes worth of embedded videos with the expectation someone is going to actually sit through them prior to responding to your idiotic post. If no one is responding to your moronic posts, it's because no one is doing the pre-response homework you assigned, asshat. Embed a single, short video whose content complements your post and then provide an enticing textual hook!

Don't be such a sensitive dork jusplay4MAGA.
The video is what 60 seconds?

Your copy/paste articles is legendary here and puts many of us to sleep.

I can announce, The World is Flat and go ahead and copy/paste articles I found on the internet and proclaim (as you do) that posters with other points of views are LIARS! and the articles that others use is biased!

Trump knows he is losing and now is proclaiming the election is being stolen and texts his supporters that 20% of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania are fraudulent.

The Cheneys are endorsing and voting for Harris. They are not approving any policy of a future Harris administration, but supporting democracy.

[mookiemcgee]

"Heroes" is a bit of an overstatement, but if they can do something good for the world, it will be one small step towards making amends for their war crimes.

Churchill had to work with Stalin. Sometimes, saving the world requires working with people you wouldn't want near your children.

I don’t know your stance in the election and I am not implying a specific stance this is a general question.

If working with war criminals is required to save the world, then would working with Trump/Biden be worth saving the world? Doesn’t them being willing to work with you concern you? What about your stance would entice them?

I don’t think war criminals really change. Especially not without a public apology.

What is worse rape and fraud of a few or war crimes against millions? Isn’t it sad that this is even a question?

Note on the above question: This is not to open a discussion on whether Trump/Biden did these things. Generally people have believed these things about at least one of them. If you believe neither have I still think it’s a valid question.

Love the discussion, but for better or worse I'm pretty sure the supreme court just ruled a president is immune from any crimes as long as they are doing it as part of their official function (vs a personal act). So under US law a president cannot be guilty of war crimes period/fullstop. I guess an effort could be made to try from Den Hague, but let's be real they wont in our lifetimes.

No clue if the same protections would apply to VP like newest member of the democrat party Dick Cheney, I'm guessing they would

[kentington]

If working with war criminals is required to save the world, then would working with Trump/Biden be worth saving the world? Doesn’t them being willing to work with you concern you? What about your stance would entice them?

What is worse rape and fraud of a few or war crimes against millions? Isn’t it sad that this is even a question?

Love the discussion, but for better or worse I'm pretty sure the supreme court just ruled a president is immune from any crimes as long as they are doing it as part of their official function (vs a personal act). So under US law a president cannot be guilty of war crimes period/fullstop. I guess an effort could be made to try from Den Hague, but let's be real they wont in our lifetimes.

No clue if the same protections would apply to VP like newest member of the democrat party Dick Cheney, I'm guessing they would

I adjusted my quote for brevity.

Assume for the sake of discussion that we are answering these questions morally. I feel like most of the politicians up there right now are advocating that they are a more moral choice, along with other policies. So, even if you won't get a conviction, you as a politician/voter/citizen have decided to make a judgment call on their moral quality (is that a thing?)

Hopefully that mess of words actually makes some sense.
--
For transparency I will try to answer it myself. I am not trying to take the moral high ground, I am trying to figure out what that even is.

My moral ranking from worst to best ( that sounds terrible)
killing/murder > rape/sexual abuse > fraud (although this can lead to death as well, which would move this to the front if it did)

I think these all have broad spectrums which increase or decrease the morality. Where some killing/murder is less evil than rape/sexual abuse. But let's just go with face value because there are a lot of situational aspects that would change this ranking. I just wanted to acknowledge that I am aware of that.

For this example I am going to say Bush Jr vs Trump
Bush was responsible for the "War on Terror"
According to Wikipedia (which yeah that is what I have right now)
4.5 million related deaths (direct and indirect) I would love to know how many were militant and not
38 million people displaced
$8 TRILLION cost to the USA

Is that worse than Trumps rapes, frauds, cons, etc.? (can you put a question mark after ect.?)
Did his fraud equate to $8 Trillion or anywhere near?
Did his rapes equate to 30 people affected? ( I am trying for a high ballpark here) How does that equate to 4.5 million deaths?
Does the fact that Trump acted alone in these decisions versus Bush who had multiple people advising affect the numbers in some way?

I think Trump has a higher moral ground to stand on. Again I know how bad that sounds. This is like deciding who is further down in a barrel of sludge but they are all covered with sludge and entangled with each other.

Let's now take Dick Cheney

Code: Select all

From Wikipedia: He was an early proponent of invading Iraq, alleging that the Saddam Hussein regime possessed weapons of mass destruction program and had an operational relationship with Al-Qaeda; however, neither allegation was ever substantiated. He also pressured the intelligence community to provide intelligence consistent with the administration's rationales for invading Iraq.

There are other things he was doing that I think are morally questionable, but let's stick with these for now.

Is it really better to say "Yay! Cheney supports us!" and "Yay! Siding with Cheney is a better option than Trump!" ?

I wouldn't even be bringing this example up if they had said, " I hate Cheney and what he stands for. It's funny that even this guy doesn't like Trump."
Instead:

Code: Select all

The vice-president is proud to have the support of Vice-President Cheney, and deeply respects his courage to put country over party,” said campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon.

BBC article: Former Vice-President Dick Cheney to vote for Kamala Harris
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz07zlr58vvo

--
I know this is long, but I don't think a short post would be able to do it. I was trying to find an example where partisanship would be lower. Hence the republican vs republican. I probably missed some things.

[mookiemcgee]

I think it's harder to judge the 'morality' of decisions made in your official capacity as an elected official vs the morality of the decisions you make in your day to day life. I'd also point out that many of Trump decisions while president could be viewed as wrong and having cost lives, even if they weren't a direct result of 'war'. His response to covid-19 for example early on was slow, and in the early months he repeated many times that nothing big was happening and it would all 'be gone' in a few weeks. Covid 19 cost the US way way way more than 8 trillion dollars (most of the estimates I can find are 14+Trillion). If you are going to say 'anyone that died after iraq was invaded are deaths attributable to Bush/Cheney', I think you can just as easily say 'any US deaths due to covid 19 since it's start, are attributable to Trump.
Now you don't have to agree with that, and I don't even agree with it as a blanket statement. You are entitled to your opinions around morality, but I'm just saying the waters of morality are very muddy. Bush/Cheney would say those deaths are attributable to Al Quida and that there response was morally justified (I don't know if anyone would believe that anymore, but I think they did 15-20 years ago), and Trump would say (did say many times) that the 'kung flu' was China's fault and he bears no responsibility for deaths in the US... but Chinas policies resulted in per capita incredibly smaller numbers of deaths (if you actually believe Chinas numbers are honest). So idk, I think when it's actually time to vote it all matters and everyones 'morality calculators' are going to weigh things differently.

[kentington]

COVID-19 is a whole other beast. I mean there is a lot of misinformation out there. But both the US and China seem to have had a hand in the creation/modification of the virus. I need to re look at all of the articles and do some research to see who ended up right.

I will say that I don't believe the 'vaccine' was good. I am not an anti-vaxxer, I am one of those who doesn't believe the vaccine helped. At first they said that if you get the vaccine you won't spread it and you wouldn't get COVID. That absolutely wasn't true. Whether they knowingly lied or not is something else.

Maybe I am misremembering, but I thought Trump wanted to shutdown travel and people gave him crap about that. Then he shut it down and it was too late. I think whoever had that presidency was going to be crapped on for it no matter what.

Second, our lower borders still had people crossing and there is no way they were getting a vaccine or a COVID test. I think the shutting down of restaurants and businesses cost a lot of people their livelihoods. But like all of your points above, most data points are murky. Nothing is cut and dry, which is why I mentioned that Bush/Cheney had a lot more people involved and maybe that should skew the numbers.

One also needs to decide whether people knowingly did any of these things or whether they were misinformed, wrong, or trying to pull a fast one.

[HitRed]

Never vaxxed

[Pack Rat]

Been vaxxed 3 times without side eFfectS

[jusplay4fun]

I think it's harder to judge the 'morality' of decisions made in your official capacity as an elected official vs the morality of the decisions you make in your day to day life. I'd also point out that many of Trump decisions while president could be viewed as wrong and having cost lives, even if they weren't a direct result of 'war'. His response to covid-19 for example early on was slow, and in the early months he repeated many times that nothing big was happening and it would all 'be gone' in a few weeks. Covid 19 cost the US way way way more than 8 trillion dollars (most of the estimates I can find are 14+Trillion). If you are going to say 'anyone that died after iraq was invaded are deaths attributable to Bush/Cheney', I think you can just as easily say 'any US deaths due to covid 19 since it's start, are attributable to Trump.
Now you don't have to agree with that, and I don't even agree with it as a blanket statement. You are entitled to your opinions around morality, but I'm just saying the waters of morality are very muddy. Bush/Cheney would say those deaths are attributable to Al Quida and that there response was morally justified (I don't know if anyone would believe that anymore, but I think they did 15-20 years ago), and Trump would say (did say many times) that the 'kung flu' was China's fault and he bears no responsibility for deaths in the US... but Chinas policies resulted in per capita incredibly smaller numbers of deaths (if you actually believe Chinas numbers are honest). So idk, I think when it's actually time to vote it all matters and everyones 'morality calculators' are going to weigh things differently.

COVID & War:
I understand the morality discussion and sort of its tangents. But to make a war (any war) equivalent to the COVID outbreak is not valid. A nation chooses war and a war is started, by men (and rarely, by a woman). COVID was due to a VIRUS, and its exact origins are not really relevant here. Now, the response to war and the response to viral or bacterial pandemic may have some similarities. There were many unknowns at the start of the COVID outbreak and pandemic. It is still NOW up for debate as to the proper response; should we have shut down businesses and school and public gatherings? To the extent that we did? Unsure, and I am not sure the data is clear, even now, some 4 years later. The same for masks and public distancing and, to some extent, the value of the COVID vaccines. As stated by me many times, this virus has become more widespread and less virulent over time. I think the vaccine did "stem or turn the tide" of the virus as it evolved into its most virulent varieties. Once its virulence diminished, I saw (and still see) less of a need for follow-up vaccines.

PART 2: Is a war justified? We have some criteria. World War 2 by the Allies is; the Ukraine response to invasion by Russia seems to meet that criteria, too. Even the IDF invasion of Gaza may meet that threshold. I doubt the war against Iraq and those Muslim extremists meet that criteria. The war in Afghanistan is SOMEWHAT justified to get Osama bin Laden, but once we "got him" (i.e., killed him) we should have made serious efforts to withdraw, which we did NOT, under Obama. Killing one or many individuals or troops in self-defense is usually considered justified.