ChrisWeigant.com

Friday Talking Points [488] -- Suffer The Little Children

[ Posted Friday, June 15th, 2018 – 18:20 PDT ]

Fox News unwittingly (how else?) spoke a deep truth this week. Or perhaps a deep fantasy -- it's tough to tell, coming from Fox anchors. As President Trump descended the stairs from Air Force One in Singapore, Fox And Friends gushed: "This is history. Regardless of what happens in that meeting between the two dictators, what we are seeing right now -- this is history." Um... how many dictators was that, again? The host later tried to walk back her unintentional gaffe, but is it really all that far off the mark?

Consider the following, just from the past week alone:

  • North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat (oh, excuse me, that should be "a Nuclear Threat"), because Trump said so. All hail the Dear Leader! No, not that one -- our Dear Leader!
  • Speaking of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, Trump recently said: "He speaks and his people sit up at attention. I want my people to do the same."
  • There is a "special place in Hell" for world leaders who stab Donald Trump in the back, because apparently Trump got promoted to God, or something. And speaking of things biblical, Jeff Sessions is ordained by God to do whatever he (Sessions, that is) feels like doing -- and if you don't agree, you probably aren't a good Christian.
  • Not to be outdone by the Hermit Kingdom, the White House created its own North Korea propaganda film. When it played -- with no explanation -- just before Trump's press conference, the reporters present thought it actually was North Korean propaganda. The video was purportedly from "Destiny Pictures," but nobody at the White House Propaganda Office bothered to find out that this is actually a real production company (who immediately disavowed the film). Maybe they'll sue? That would make an amusing court case, that's for sure.
  • Getting in the spirit of dictatorial regimes and totalitarian propaganda, the chair of the Republican National Committee tweeted out: "Complacency is our enemy. Anyone that does not embrace the @realDonaldTrump agenda of making America great again will be a mistake."
  • The State Department is getting in on all the totalitarian fun, too, as a senior advisor has been "quietly vetting career diplomats and American employees of international institutions to determine whether they are loyal to President Donald Trump and his political agenda, according to nearly a dozen current and former U.S. officials." Can loyalty oaths to Trump be all that far behind, really?
  • At a detention facility for immigrant children, there is a mural of Dear Leader Trump complete with a quote (in both English and Spanish) from his book, where he is talking about that time when he unsuccessfully tried to evict some tenants. You just can't make this stuff up, folks.
  • Ronald Reagan famously promised to "trust, but verify" with the Soviet Union. Donald Trump now so completely trusts Kim Jong Un that any questions about why there was nothing about verification in the agreement are, according to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, "silly" and "insulting and ridiculous and frankly ludicrous." Because the Dear Leader has spoken, of course.
  • The president is for the so-called "moderate" Republican immigration bill in the House. Oh, wait -- now the president will not sign the moderate bill. No, that can't be right -- the president didn't understand the question, and now will indeed sign the bill. All in the space of a few hours. One assumes Trump's Ministry of Truth is working overtime to deal with all of this.
  • Obama bowing to a Saudi was the worst diplomatic mistake ever made, but Trump saluting a North Korean general was just "showing him respect."
  • There are two people who make more than $65,000 a year whose job it now is to tape all the papers back together than Trump keeps ripping into pieces. Nobody can stop Trump from doing this, but the papers have to be preserved, by law.

Putting all of this evidence together, the obvious conclusion is that maybe that "two dictators" gaffe isn't all that far off the mark. But let's put all that aside for the moment, because there was one big issue this week where Trump's attempts to get everyone to believe in his own personal reality are falling flat, as he flails around attempting to defend his own policy of separating children from their parents at the border.

Trump has convinced himself that there is a dastardly law that was passed by Democrats that forces children to be separated from their parents, even for asylum seekers (in other words, not just for people who illegally enter the country). There is no such law. The Washington Post fact checker actually called this claim "violently divorced from reality." When pressed about the issue, the people at the White House whose unenviable job it is to try to match actual reality with the president's various uninformed idiocy could only come up with a court ruling and a law which unanimously passed Congress and was signed by that well-known Democrat, George W. Bush. Neither the law nor the court case address the heart of the new policy, which was a Trump administration decision alone. One that Jeff Sessions used to brag about, in fact, just a few months ago.

But now Trump's getting lots of bad press over the policy, so somehow Democrats must be responsible -- since the Dear Leader is incapable of making a mistake, of course. Jeff Sessions tried to help by explaining how it was all God's will:

Persons who violate the law of our nation are subject to prosecution. I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13 to obey the laws of the government, because God has ordained them for the purpose of order. Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves and protect the weak and lawful.

Only one problem: that particular Bible verse hasn't been used in American politics since slave-owners used it to justify slavery. Maybe it was flagged in the Sessions family Bible or something?

Church leaders immediately piled on in disgust, from the Pope on down. The Vatican tweeted:

"The Bible teaches that God 'loves the foreigner residing among you, giving them food and clothing. And you are to love those who are foreigners, for you yourselves were foreigners in Egypt' (Deuteronomy 10:18-19)." Pope Francis

One bishop at the U.S. Conference of Cardinals suggested that any Catholic who participated in the child-removal policy should be denied communion because it is so sinful. He helpfully pointed to Romans 12, and noted: "The fact that the Apostle Paul, who wrote Romans, wrote several epistles from jail suggests that he was occasionally on the wrong side of an unjust law."

Evangelist Franklin Graham, normally a staunch Trump supporter, said: "I think it's disgraceful, it's terrible to see families ripped apart and I don't support that one bit." The Southern Baptist Convention issued a strongly-worded statement (chock full of Bible citations that refute Sessions in various ways) which included the following: "We declare that any form of nativism, mistreatment, or exploitation is inconsistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ."

Just one of the Bible quotes they cited was Matthew 25:37-40, where Jesus is warning that God will sort out the goats from the sheep:

Then the righteous will answer him, "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?"

The King will reply, "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."

It's pretty hard to square that with removing a breastfeeding baby from her mother's embrace, really. Some Republicans are aware of how bad this all looks, politically. In fact, they hastily added a "don't split up families" provision to their immigration bill, because they know full well how this is going to play in November with the crucial suburban women demographic.

With press this bad, no wonder Trump is blaming a non-existent law forced on him by Democrats, rather than his own hard-hearted policy. Again, Jeff Sessions used to be proud of this policy, at least before the backlash happened. Suffer the little children, indeed.

OK, this is already running long, so let's just whip through some of the rest of the political news of the week, then move along to the awards and the talking points. The week began, of course, with Trump picking an inane fight with Canada's Justin Trudeau, after Trump left the G-7 meeting early. In the short time he was there, he managed to antagonize pretty much all the other world leaders, but the Trudeau thing was notable for the level of Trump's pointless rage. Senator Tim Kaine had the best response: "The Trump administration is filled with people with glass jaws who they love to punch people, but if somebody punches back? They just can’t believe it. They're crybabies. President Trump can name-call everybody all day long. And somebody gets in his face a little bit and they melt into a pool of lukewarm water."

The Justice Department Inspector General put out a report this week on the F.B.I. investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails. It ripped into James Comey, but the main conclusion was that there was "no evidence that the conclusions by department prosecutors were affected by bias or other improper considerations." Oh, and just for irony's sake, the report also noted that James Comey used a private email account for official F.B.I. business, which was precisely what Clinton was being investigated for.

The attorney general of New York filed a lawsuit against the Trump Foundation, for essentially acting as Donald Trump's personal piggy bank. She stated in the lawsuit that "oversight of spending at Trump's foundation was so loose that its board of directors hadn't met in 19 years and its official treasurer wasn't even aware that he was on the board."

In other legal news, Trump just lost his latest appeal to the New York state supreme court, and the defamation lawsuit Summer Zervos brought against him can thus go forward -- which includes a judge's order that Trump be deposed by Summer's lawyers no later than the end of January. So there's that to look forward to.

Paul Manafort is now in prison, since he broke his bail agreement once again. More on this in a moment.

Michael Cohen is widely rumored to be about to flip and start giving evidence against Donald Trump, as well. To use a mixed avian metaphor, if Cohen starts singing like a canary, then Trump's goose is cooked.

In international news, we are now officially in a trade war with China, as Trump levied a 25 percent tariff and the Chinese announced they would retaliate and that their focus will be on soybeans and other farm products. Trump's former top economic advisor, Gary Cohn, had this to say:

Gary Cohn, who served as Trump's director of the National Economic Council but left amid a rift over the president's trade policies, said that retaliatory tariffs between countries could drive up inflation and prompt American consumers to take on more debt, possibly pushing the country into another economic downturn.

"If you end up with a tariff battle, you will end up with price inflation, and you could end up with consumer debt," Cohn, a former Goldman Sachs executive, said at a Washington Post event. "Those are all historic ingredients for an economic slowdown."

Asked if the trade battle could erase the gains to the American economy from the tax law, Cohn said: "Yes, it could."

In election news, another round of primaries happened this Tuesday. Democrats picked up two special election victories in statehouses, which brings them to a total of 44 such seats flipped since Trump took office.

A defender of white supremacists won the nomination in Virginia for a Senate race, which should help a whole lot of down-ballot Democrats in November, if it serves to reduce Republican voter turnout, as expected.

California will be voting this November on whether the state will split into three, but as we noted earlier this week, nobody should be holding their breath waiting for it to actually happen, no matter what the result of the vote turns out to be.

The brothel owner in Nevada who is the star of the Cathouse reality-television show and the author of The Art of the Pimp won his Republican primary for a House seat, because of course he did. He calls himself "The Trump of Pahrump," which is actually kind of catchy (Pahrump is a Nevada town between Las Vegas and Death Valley).

And two more amusing notes to close on. The first was a tweet from an editor at The Atlantic, ostensibly about sports: "Excited for the World Cup opener between Russia and Saudi Arabia. It's a crucial game; the winner gets to run U.S. foreign policy." Heh.

And finally, the Democrats beat the Republicans by a whopping 21-5 at the annual congressional baseball game. Hopefully this will be a harbinger for November!

 

Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

We thought about giving the MIDOTW this week to Barbara Underwood, New York's attorney general, for suing the Trump Foundation over rampant disregard for the rules non-profits are supposed to follow, but we consider this to be a non-partisan decision even if she is a Democrat. While we do applaud her bravery for filing the suit, we think it somehow doesn't qualify for a partisan award.

Instead, for a change, we're not going to award a Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week at all. Because instead we were most impressed this week not by a partisan politician or even technically a partisan idea, but rather by an innovation in voting that seems to be getting more popular with time.

In Maine's primary, voters not only got to use the new "ranked choice" voting system, but they also reaffirmed their support of the new system by passing another ballot initiative in favor of it. The system is somewhat more complicated than the way most Americans vote, because instead of one vote for one candidate, you get to rank your vote for all the candidates. If the candidate who gets your first choice doesn't do so well in the first round of counting, then he drops out of the count and your second-choice vote is used instead. This goes on until one candidate has a clear majority.

While not in use statewide in California, San Francisco just elected its first African-American woman mayor using ranked-choice voting, as well. The ballot-counting in this race went to nine rounds, giving an excellent textbook example of how the system is designed to work.

We do not live in a state or city with ranked-choice voting, so we have no personal experience with it, we should mention. But what we find fascinating is how popular it appears to be for an election innovation (there are plenty of election reform ideas which never reach this level of popularity, in other words), and how where it is used it has already changed the face of political campaigns. Two candidates (Smith and Jones, for example) can even work out a sort of non-aggression pact, where they appear in commercials with Smith saying: "I want your vote, but my own second choice will be for Candidate Jones," while Jones offers her second vote to Smith in her ad. Not only do candidates work for first-rank votes, they also try to convince their opponents' supporters to consider them for second or third place as well.

The only real drawback to the system is that it takes longer to declare a winner, but it isn't all that big an issue. It may take a few more days to see who wins, but nobody has to feel that voting for a minor candidate is "throwing your vote away" -- which outweighs having to wait a little longer, at times.

So we're handing a special Most Impressive Election Reform Of The Week award out this week, to the ranked-choice voting system.

 

Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

Democrats really weren't in the news much this week, for good or for bad. There was so much else going on in Trumpland that Democrats were mostly swept aside. This leaves us without much to choose from for Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week, but we're going to go ahead and give it to the same guy we gave it to last week.

Bob Mulholland, Democratic bigwig from California, won the previous award for comparing a technical change in how superdelegates will vote at the Democratic National Convention to the Civil Rights movement and getting beaten up by thugs.

This week, he's spiraled even further into Looney Tunes Land, by claiming -- without a scintilla of evidence, mind you -- that Vladimir Putin and the Rooskies were behind the proposed superdelegate changes. No, really. Here's the story:

Mulholland, a DNC member and longtime key player in California Democratic politics, sent an email Friday to other DNC members from the Golden State that implied Russian President Vladimir Putin might be behind the reform effort.

The basis for his claim? An activist from West Virginia promoting the changes, who he had seen at two national party gatherings, admitted to him that she was a Green Party member and had voted for its nominee, Jill Stein, in the 2016 election.

"I concluded someone is picking up her expenses but there she and others are, demanding we change our Rules," Mulholland wrote. "The Putin operation is still active."

Contacted by HuffPost on Sunday, Mulholland conceded he had no evidence the woman, who he did not name, was bankrolled by Putin.

But he said that "when people show up who have no connection to the party and they show up at events, requiring transportation of hundreds of miles, I always think they're working for somebody."

He added, "I'm a big believer that Putin has not let off the gas. Anyone who thinks Putin would not be interfering with future elections needs to have their head examined."

Michael Kapp, a fellow DNC member from California, blasted what he called Mulholland's "completely unsubstantiated allegation," saying "it would be laughable if it wasn't so embarrassing."

For embarrassing himself two weeks running, Mulholland is hereby awarded his second consecutive Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week. Is somebody making sure he takes his meds? We're getting a little worried about him, frankly.

[Contact Bob Mulholland through the official California Democratic Party's contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 488 (6/15/18)

Our talking points are all rather negative this week, but then there's a lot of idiocy out there to fight back against, currently. The motto of the story: Every time you think Republicans can't sink any lower, they usually do. And they're usually led there by Trump.

 

1
   Sacrilege!

The Trump team seems to be crossing a rather strange line of late.

"First we had a senior presidential advisor say on national television that there was a 'special place in Hell' for world leaders that don't bow down and publicly kiss Donald Trump's ring, as if Trump himself had been elevated to the position of deciding who goes to Hell and who does not. Then we saw the spectacle of Jeff Sessions attempting to teach religious leaders what was Christian and what was not, as he tried to morally defend the morally indefensible Trump administration policy that he himself implemented of needlessly separating refugee children from their parents. This policy is so mean-spirited and downright cruel that even religious leaders who normally support Trump had to speak out against it. But it didn't stop Sessions from attempting to use a Bible verse last used in American politics to defend slavery in almost blasphemous fashion. What it brought to my mind was the old saying that the Devil himself can quote scripture in his own defense, more than anything else."

 

2
   Cult of personality

There's really only one word for what Trump has managed to create.

"Some Republicans are now bemoaning the hard, cold fact that it is now the Trump Party more than the Republican Party they remember. Bob Corker put it more plainly, saying: 'It's not a good place for any party to end up with a cultlike situation as it relates to a president that happens to be of -- purportedly -- of the same party.' In the same week that Donald Trump became best friends with another totalitarian dictator -- so much that he openly admired the slavish devotion that Kim Jong Un demands from his people -- the phrase 'cult of personality' seems entirely appropriate for what used to be the Republican Party."

 

3
   Manafort? Hardly knew him.

Who? Him? Gosh, I might have met him once, or something....

"In what is becoming almost a cliché, Donald Trump now claims he barely knew Paul Manafort. Maybe he was the guy who went for coffee during the campaign, or something? Manafort was unceremoniously chucked into jail today, to await his multiple federal trials after he -- yet again -- violated the terms of his bail, this time by attempting to get possible witnesses to lie for him. Afterwards, Trump said Manafort was being treated 'very unfairly.' Guess all that law-and-order lock-him-up stuff doesn't apply to people who worked for him, eh? Trump also incredulously stated that Manafort only worked for him 'for a short period of time... 49 days or something?' although Manafort was actually Trump's campaign chairman for 144 days -- meaning Trump understated his tenure by a factor of three. Which included the Republican National Convention. But now Trump can barely remember the guy, of course."

 

4
   King of the Deal?

Trump went with what he knows best with Kim Jong Un, apparently.

"Donald Trump apparently tried to treat nuclear negotiations with the leader of North Korea as just another real estate deal to be made. He created a propaganda video to show Kim Jong Un what wonderful condos at the beach would look like, he talked about what a wonderful real estate location North Korea was in during his press conference ('right between China and South Korea!') and Lindsey Graham even admitted as much on the plane home, saying: '[Trump] is selling condos, that's what he's doing. He's approaching North Korea as a distressed property with a cash-flow problem. Here's how we can fix it.' The only problem was that after the meeting, Trump had given the North Koreans one of the biggest things on their wish list -- an end to America's joint military exercises with South Korea -- and didn't get much of anything in return. If you read the actual language of the agreement they signed, the North Koreans merely 'reaffirmed' a previous agreement to 'work towards complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.' So Trump didn't even get anything new out of the deal, while giving up one of the biggest pieces of leverage the United States had. As the magazine The Economist put it, on their cover: 'Kim Jong Won.' Oh, and it doesn't look like there will be Trump condos on North Korean beaches any time soon, either."

 

5
   Thousands of 110-year-olds?

Speaking of that presser...

"Donald Trump did make history this week, because he gave only the second solo press conference of his entire presidency after meeting with Kim Jong Un. During it, he trotted out a brazen lie that he talked Kim into repatriating American soldiers' remains from the Korean War because thousands and thousands of parents begged him to bring 'their sons' home. The only problem with this is that any parent of a Korean War soldier would have had to have been over 100 years old during the campaign, and more likely over 110 years old. Maybe Trump needs a few propaganda lessons from Kim, because Trump's effort just fell flat on its face."

 

6
   Got your sheet for the rally?

As if coddling dictators wasn't enough for one week, the Republican Party is apparently now openly flirting with white supremacy.

"Bob Corker said this week that the Republican Party was starting to resemble a cult, and there's a very ugly side of that which isn't being given enough attention. A Republican member of Arizona's state government this week got caught on tape saying: 'Sixty percent of public school children in the state of Arizona today are minorities. That complicates racial integration because there aren’t enough white kids to go around.... Immigration today represents an existential threat to the United States.' In New Jersey, the Republican nominee for a House seat went one further: 'The whole idea of diversity is a bunch of crap and un-American.' Diversity efforts, he continued, are 'an excuse by Democrats, communists and socialists, basically, to say that we’re not all created equal, that some people, if somebody is lesser qualified, they will get a job anyway or they’ll get into college anyway because of the tribe that they’re with, what group, what box they fit into.' Tribe? Really? Meanwhile, Representative Steve King retweeted a British white supremacist this week, a man who 'makes YouTube videos ranting about Jews and downplaying the historical significance of slavery and the Holocaust,' and then King refused to talk about it to reporters. And Virginia Republicans just nominated a man to take on Senator Tim Kaine who -- like Trump -- defended the white supremacists in Charlottesville. Trump has already tweeted out his support for the guy. Trump has led the effort to demonize all black and brown people in America, from his announcement he was running for president right up to the present day, so it really should come as no surprise that white supremacy is getting closer and closer to becoming an actual Republican Party plank in their platform. It's a sad state of affairs, but that is precisely where Trump has led the party."

 

7
   Leading by example?

Whoops!

"Fox News, being Fox News, decided to hold a big celebration for Flag Day. They rented a 30-by-50-foot flag and had an Army marching band pass by playing the National Anthem. One assumes this was a not-so-subtle continuation of their extended campaign to show how football players taking a knee is so unpatriotic. But while the band played and marched by, the three Fox morning show hosts sat in their chairs with their hands by their side. By their own reasoning, they must hate America, hate the military, hate all our soldiers, hate the president, and hate apple pie and mothers, for good measure. Right? I mean, they have made such an enormous deal out of castigating others for dishonoring the flag and the anthem, and then they can't even stand for it themselves?!? Oh, the hypocrisy!"

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground

 

193 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [488] -- Suffer The Little Children”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Do we know if Comey's use of private email involved classified information or if he lost a great deal of the information contained in private email, never to be seen again?

    I have to admit, though, that revelation hit me like a ton of bricks. :)

  2. [2] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    wow, that fox news clip is a classic.

  3. [3] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: Speaking of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, Trump recently said: "He speaks and his people sit up at attention. I want my people to do the same."

    My middle finger keeps doing it. Is that sufficient?

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick, that would stooping down - way down - to Trump's level and far beneath you.

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I meant [4] as a compliment to you but, I'm dead tired right now and so I'm not sure it came out that way ... :)

  6. [6] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Another outstanding FTP covering yet another jaw dropping week. I think more and more people are beginning to realize that Trump is mad, bad and dangerous to have around. It's a start.

    It's late and I have to get up early to beat the heat and humidity. I'll give this FTP another reading tomorrow.

  7. [7] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    One question on rank choice voting is how they decide to eliminate candidates.

    Another question would be do you have to rank candidates?

    It would probably differ from place to place.

    For example, would you have to rank a candidate that you didn't want in office at all?

    If you only vote for one or two candidates in a four or five or more candidate election is your vote then eliminated from the total vote when your candidate(s) is eliminated or does it it remain part of the total vote for determining a majority?

    Maybe you don't consider it a drawback, but having my vote eliminated from the total or changed from the candidate I vote for is a drawback to me.

    It seems more like another way to get people thinking they have more choices or can vote for more choices while just changing/channeling votes for third parties and independents to the Current Major Parties at the end when it counts similar to the top two primary scam.

    If Maine wants to try it, we'll see what happens- but an award is premature.

  8. [8] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That was refreshing, sort of ... :)

  9. [9] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Just to be clear, [8] refers to [7].

  10. [10] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    CW-
    Did you see comments 53 and 55 from last FTP?

    According to Will Bunch's article, Lisa McCormick got 157,983 votes (38%) of the vote against Bob Menendez in the recent NJ primary and did it with less than 5000 dollars in small contributions.

    Imagine if there was a national organization that could have brought in more small contributions to help her, who knows what might have happened.

    Either way, that's 157,983 possible non-voters in the general election and 157,983 reasons from NJ alone to give the non-voters of the nation the option of participating in One Demand instead of wasting their vote by not voting in 2018.

  11. [11] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Sorry Liz.

    I hope you didn't expect that good feeling to last. :D

  12. [12] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You can rest assured. Ahem.

  13. [13] 
    sd4david wrote:

    I remember in 1992 people saying "I'd love to vote for Perot, but can't risk Clinton (or Bush) winning." I imagine whoever had the least amount of votes would be removed, and their second choice getting put in the mix and added to the tallies on the other candidates.

  14. [14] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    It's very hard to feel good about anything in America, Don, when thinking of what's happening at the US southern border.

    That an American president is responsible for this reprehensible action against children of all ages and allowed to continue this practice makes me wonder what else he is capable of getting away with in an obvious effort to annihilate the promise of America.

  15. [15] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:

    Ranked choice, also called preferential voting in some places, has a lot to be said for it most of the time, but could you have ranked all the candidates for California senator in this primary? Especially the ones you'd never heard of? Of course this was an exceptional case, but perhaps there ought to be a limit of, say, 10 preferences at the outside.

  16. [16] 
    neilm wrote:

    Interesting old article on voter systems:

    https://www.wired.com/2004/11/the-creative-math-behind-elections/

  17. [17] 
    John M wrote:

    Regarding splitting California up:

    TWICE before in American history has a state been split up into two new states. Both times in connection with the Civil War period and Slavery.

    1) Massachusetts was split to form the new states of Massachusetts and Maine during the Missouri Compromise.

    2) Virginia was split to form the new states of Virginia and West Virginia when the counties making up West Virginia refused to leave the Union with the rest of Virginia.

    In connection with this, it's interesting to note that: Originally North Carolina voted NOT to leave the Union. North Carolina only changed its mind after Virginia left the Union, in order to avoid becoming a Federal enclave surrounded by Confederate territory.

    Also, when Texas was admitted as a state, Congress approved the option of Texas entering the Union as FIVE different states. Given its size, it was thought something similar might happen with Texas as with the former territory of Ohio, where Ohio eventually became the states of: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

    As far as I know, that prior Congressional approval for Texas has never been revoked or rescinded. Though it may be moot at this point, as the original territory of Texas went on to become the states of: Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.

  18. [18] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    John M

    Best system for CA "splitting up" would be for one of their infamous fault lines to open wide and the entire western side to sink into the pacific.

  19. [19] 
    John M wrote:

    [18] C. R. Stucki

    "Best system for CA "splitting up" would be for one of their infamous fault lines to open wide and the entire western side to sink into the pacific."

    People always mention that. Though it's a physical impossibility, given the nature of the actual San Andreas fault system. California cannot "sink" into the ocean either in whole or in part. The most that would happen would be that a sliver would break off and form its own island separated from the mainland. Something similar is also happening to East Africa, where you also have two tectonic plates moving apart past each other.

  20. [20] 
    John M wrote:

    The only other large scale change in territory of an American state, was when the Upper Peninsula of Michigan was taken away from Wisconsin and given to the Lower Peninsula of Michigan as a consolation prize for Michigan losing control of Toledo to Ohio.

  21. [21] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Best system for CA "splitting up" would be for one of their infamous fault lines to open wide and the entire western side to sink into the pacific.

    Your solution for California is to kill tens of millions of people? Nice...

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Splitting up California vs. splitting up families. Hmmm,

    One is certainly easier to talk and joke about than the other.

    The promise of America is officially on its death bed.

  23. [23] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I heard that Trump said that, even if his life depended on it, he wouldn't be able to pick Manafort out of lineup.

  24. [24] 
    neilm wrote:

    Your solution for California is to kill tens of millions of people? Nice...

    Libertarians at their finest.

    Every time a Republican gets in the White House I refresh my emergency supplies, etc. as I expect no help from the rest of the country - we will be on our own here is CA if there is a big earthquake due to standard Republican incompetence (see Katrina, Puerto Rico) and indifference (they vote Democrat so who cares about them).

    No worries, we are the fifth largest economy on the planet, we'll figure it out for ourselves - plus the rest of the country will have to live without our Federal tax surplus for a few years - that should take out a lot of the moocher states (e.g. NC, ND, FL, LA, AL, MI).

  25. [25] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    How do Californians feel about separating children from their mothers?

  26. [26] 
    neilm wrote:
  27. [27] 
    neilm wrote:

    How do Californians feel about separating children from their mothers?

    We were marching on Thursday all over the state - as you probably saw from the link I shared on Thursday showing all the marches around the country.

    It takes a very special type of religious extremism to use the bible to celebrate splitting innocent kids from their parents - you'd probably have more luck in the deep red states in the South if you are looking for people who support Trump and Sessions in this atrocity.

  28. [28] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm very happy to hear that and I'll check out your link!

  29. [29] 
    neilm wrote:

    In one respect Trump is delivering on his promise to take us back to the 1950s - the prices of ag commodities are well on their way there - bet the MAGA crowd didn't expect that part when they went all retro.

  30. [30] 
    neilm wrote:

    I'm very happy to hear that and I'll check out your link!

    I'll make it easy:

    https://familiesbelong.org/

  31. [31] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Too late, I found your link from Wednesday's post.

    Do you think these events will be enough to change the practice?

    I heard that a group of bishops will be heading to the border to protest.

    I can hardly believe this is happening ... :(

  32. [32] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    I heard that at Baskin Robbins they were splitting bananas.

  33. [33] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    They should head to the border with one of their big trucks.

  34. [34] 
    glenn wrote:

    Hi Chris,

    I'd like to nominate Dianne Feinstein for Democrat of the Week for next week. She has introduced legislation to call the bluff of the liar in the oval office. She has introduced The Keep Families Together Act, which is the Democratic fix that the liar in the oval office keeps saying Democrats need to do. Feinstein, and 31 other Democrats, have introduced this legislation, according to a press release that was sent out June 8.

    Why isn't this legislation being reported? Once it is reported, then reporters should be asking McConnell when he is going to bring it to the Senate floor to be voted upon.

    Here is the link: https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases

  35. [35] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Bashi [21]

    Who said anything about killing Californians!! What's your point, you saying they can't swim???

  36. [36] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    John M [19]

    Your mean to tell me that CA has actual "Faults", as in 'geologic splits'??

    I always thought all that "fault" actually talk meant that it's CA's "fault" for everything that's wrong with the country!!!!!

  37. [37] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Republicans, for some reason, have always had a giant blind spot for human suffering. It goes back many years, Katrina and the current border separations are just two glaring examples. That's why they forgot completely about Puerto Rico. That's why it required visits to congress from people in wheelchairs to kill the GOP attack on Obamacare (from which, remarkably, the Republicans learned that they'd have to be more surreptitious when attacking healthcare in the future - doh!).

    Shining a bright light on the problem is the best solution. Enough light on the family separations, and the GOP congress will flee away like cockroaches, as they always do. Whether that will solve anything is a different matter, since Trump and Sessions are still there.

  38. [38] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    Antidisestablishmentarianism is alive and kicking, and for once, I'm glad it is. It's no secret that I consider religion a mental disability, one easily avoided by the correct upbringing. If clinging to the greatest con-job in human history shames Trump and his Trumpettes into abandoning their cruel treatment of refugee children, so be it...Go nutters go.

    LL&P

  39. [39] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Balthasar,

    Shining a bright light on the problem is the best solution.

    I think you're half right - there also needs to be action taken against this practice, on the part of political, religious and other community leaders, in an effort to stop it ... NOW!

  40. [40] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    [37]

    My great hope for this blog is that it will, at some point, attract only commenters of good will and thoughtful disposition.

    Perhaps, one day it will be realized ...

  41. [41] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Stucki-

    If you are going to troll, could you have at least show some understanding of what you are talking about? We know your understanding of economics is shaky, I guess we have to add geology and history to that list as well...

  42. [42] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Bashi [40]

    So what, beyond your standard ignorance-bred ad hominem shit, is your point?? You trying to tell me that Californicators actually can swim?? OK, happy to hear it.

  43. [43] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That will be quite enough rude language from you, CRS!

  44. [44] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Stucki-

    Yawn...

  45. [45] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Liz - there also needs to be action taken against this practice, on the part of political, religious and other community leaders, in an effort to stop it ... NOW!

    I daresay that mobilization is already underway. And summer has only just begun...

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You guys just can't leave it alone, can you?

  47. [47] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Weak!

  48. [48] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Bashi

    You can call that a yawn, but it sounded like a fart, and smelled like a fart. Pretty clear, it did NOT come from your mouth!

  49. [49] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    C.R.Stucki,

    You have been welcomed here as a guest on a blog that demands better behavior than you have shown.

    If you can't act with the level of respect that this blog has always shown, then you need to leave.

  50. [50] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Balthasar,

    I daresay that mobilization is already underway. And summer has only just begun...

    That's good but time is of the essense. In addition to mobilizing and protesting, these leaders need to publically condemn what the president has done.

    I hope these kids and their families don't have to suffer through the summer ...

  51. [51] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Liz M

    You are applying an egregiously unfair double standard to my comments, because you disagree with them.

    I NEVER initiate "ill behaviour".

  52. [52] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The standard that I would apply to comments here, CR, is that they be respectful toward fellow commenters and toward our gracious host.

    Can you live by that standard?

  53. [53] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz (39)-

    Why don't you want anyone to comment here?

    There are more people signed up for One Demand than there are commenters of good will and thoughtful disposition in the world. :D

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    How do Californians feel about separating children from their mothers?

    How did you feel about it when it happened under the Obama administration??

    How did you feel when the Clinton Administration ripped Elian Gonzalez away from his court awarded family at gun point??

    Finally, what do you suggest??

    Send the kids to an adult prison with their alleged "parents"??

    When American citizens commit crimes, they are "ripped" from their families and sent to jail..

    Why should foreign criminals get special privileges???

    The solution to ripping children away from their families is simple..

    "QUIT BREAKING THE LAW, ASSHOLE!!!"
    -Jim Carrey, LIAR LIAR

    The standard that I would apply to comments here, CR, is that they be respectful toward fellow commenters and toward our gracious host.

    Yea... Too bad that standard doesn't apply to people who toe the Party line... :^/

    You don't apply that standard to a user here who has used DOXing, extortion and threats to family of commenters... As such, it's a very telling "standard"...

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    Can you live by that standard?

    Can you apply that standard EQUALLY to *ALL* commenters here in Weigantia..

    If you refuse to, then it's not a "standard" is it??

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    Props to President Trump..

    He will go down in history as the President who had the nerve and leadership to end the Korean War!!

    Now wonder the hysterical NeverTrumpers are batshit crazy... :D

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    No one seemed to have a problem with children being split apart from families when the Odumbo Administration was putting children in cages..

    How come??

    Oh yea... That's right.. It was a DEMOCRAT so it was PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE to rip children away from families and put them in cages....

    Silly me...

  58. [58] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Are you finished, Michale?

    I thought I'd give you time to get it all out of your system.

    I apply the same standard to all of the comments here and, I mostly ignore the ones that don't meet the standard.

    I have become very, very selective in what comments I choose to read so, I don't know what you are talking about with regard to extortion and threats to family. I should think that if that were happening here, then Chris would have put a stop to it - up to and including disallowing them from commenting here.

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Are you finished, Michale?

    Depends on your answer.. :D

    I apply the same standard to all of the comments here and, I mostly ignore the ones that don't meet the standard.

    And yet.... There are commenters here who have committed the afore listed offenses and no one says "boo"...

    Why is that??

    I have become very, very selective in what comments I choose to read so, I don't know what you are talking about with regard to extortion and threats to family.

    I will be happy to point them out.. You know my email... I have all the links and the exact comments made...

    I will be happy to let you judge the content for yourself..

    While that plays out on the back burner..

    Do you want to address the Obama Administration ripping families apart and putting children in cages???

  60. [60] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I don't have your email but, have you asked Chris about what happened? I can't believe he wouldn't do anything about something as serious as you describe ...

    I don't believe the Obama administration ripped families apart except under extraordinary circumstances. Trump has ordered it be done to every family seeking asylum without exception. That is the opposite of what the Obama administration did. You cannot equate the two polices.

    What do you think of the OIG report on the Clinton email investigation?

  61. [61] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Liz M

    "Can you live by that standard?"

    Of course, only too happy to, but only to the extent that others do.

    You tolerate their ad hominems and vulagarities because you are ideologically alligned with them. Gotta lose the double standard.

  62. [62] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Of course, only too happy to, but only to the extent that others do.

    That is such a juvenile response, CR but, not an unsurprising one. You're not the first to use it.

  63. [63] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Liz M

    Yeah, well, most of us octegenarians are just "juveniles at heart".

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    I don't have your email but, have you asked Chris about what happened?

    michale AT em eff see see eff ell dot US

    I don't believe the Obama administration ripped families apart except under extraordinary circumstances.

    And yet, it happened on a regular basis..

    Do you recall see recently released pictures of children in cages?? Those were taken during the Obama administration..

    What do you think of the OIG report on the Clinton email investigation?

    It didn't say anything we didn't already know...

    About the only thing Comey did right was to go directly to the American people regarding Clinton illegal email server...

    Lynch was hopelessly compromised due to her Bubba meet n greet... Comey had no choice but to bypass the normal chain of command and go over the head of the DOJ and the White House and talk directly to the American people..

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    The policies about placing unaccompanied minors with sponsors and separating children from their families were in place during the Obama administration. They go back to the administration of President George W. Bush.
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/05/29/heres-what-happening-immigrant-children-u-s-border/650755002/

    These are the facts, Liz..

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    I seem to recall someone around these here parts saying that Merkel was the leader of the Free World now.. :D

    'We might have a new situation' German MP predicts Merkel could be OUSTED end of NEXT WEEK

    GERMAN Chancellor Angela Merkel could lose her powerful seat in the heart of Europe as soon as next week amid clashes within her coalition Government over EU migration policies, claimed German MP Kai Whittaker.
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/975166/Angela-Merkel-Germany-Bundestag-EU-migration-crisis-Kai-Whittaker

    Seems she is going to be too busy to hold on to her job!!! :D

    Another Obamabot bites the dust.. :D

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    In Chicago, Stormy Daniels muses: 'Should I run for president?'
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-stormy-daniels-20180616-story.html

    The 2020 Democrat Party candidate for President..

    BBBWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  68. [68] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Lynch was hopelessly compromised due to her Bubba meet n greet... Comey had no choice but to bypass the normal chain of command and go over the head of the DOJ and the White House and talk directly to the American people..

    That's right, Michale. If Bill Clinton doesn't board that plane, then Comey doesn't have to break with protocol.

    But, you must stop lying about Obama and separating families at the southern border.

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    But, you must stop lying about Obama and separating families at the southern border.

    Liz, I am not lying..

    Read it for yourself..

    The policies about placing unaccompanied minors with sponsors and separating children from their families were in place during the Obama administration. They go back to the administration of President George W. Bush.
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/05/29/heres-what-happening-immigrant-children-u-s-border/650755002/

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:
  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's right, Michale. If Bill Clinton doesn't board that plane, then Comey doesn't have to break with protocol.

    1000% accurate..

    There were many factors to Hillary's loss, not the least of which was her Romney-esque statement about "deplorables"...

    But if Bubba hadn't met Lynch, it's likely Comey wouldn't have gone directly to the American people and it's possible Hillary would be POTUS today..

    bbrrrrrr I shiver at the thought.

  72. [72] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Yes.

  73. [73] 
    Paula wrote:

    The IG Report clears FBI of hurting Blotus-the-traitor. It leaves hanging all the un-pursued info about how fuckers in NY deliberately hurt Hillary Clinton. The references are in it in several places, but they are not investigated - as yet. Supposedly there is/was going to be another investigation but that was floated but not confirmed.

    Blotus floating his bull about the FBI conspiring against him MAY help bring to light the institutional efforts against HRC -- the ones so easily blown off by Hillary-haters.

    Liz: Comey's rep has taken a major (well-deserved) hit after this report. He blew it, he blew it, he blew it. He tipped the election to a nazi-traitor out of fear of republican-FBI leaker and fear of rightwing media. He thought HRC would win because, like the rest of us, he didn't know the entirely of the forces working against her, from the traitors in the Blotus-campaign and GOP working with Russia to wikilieaks, NY FBI, Berniacs, media, etc. And she still got 3 million more votes.

    Comey helped put a nazi into the WH. That nazi is imprisoning children in addition to his wickedness and stupidity across every front. Hillary Clinton warned the country and those of us not-ripe-to-be-traitors like Trumpers, or ripe-to-be-fooled like Berniers, or ripe-to-be-morons like 3rd partiers, listened. And we were appalled and terrified about what this monster would do.

  74. [74] 
    Paula wrote:

    Republican-FBI-leakers

  75. [75] 
    Paula wrote:

    Blotus is a traitor. Trumpers are traitors -- hostility towards them is skyrocketing. I'm seeing a lot of chatter about how they need to be called out, shunned and rejected. Supporting prison-camps for children is a bridge too far. Trumpers have strutted around thinking hate is their weapon - that everyone else can only receive it from them. But it now surrounds them. They should start paying attention and note how people are receding from them - not inviting them places, cutting them out on social media, not doing business with them, avoiding them. Collecting in little groups and talking quietly, then stopping when they come over. We are talking about them behind their backs. We are leaving churches and other groups where Trumpers collect. We don't want our children near them and feel pity for their children. (Funny note: campus Republican males whining they can't get dates because of their politics - which is their way of saying because-they-are-nazis.) Trumpers have broken the compact that fosters tolerance. Tolerance is a peace treaty and the treaty has been breached. Trust and respect have been shattered. (https://extranewsfeed.com/tolerance-is-not-a-moral-precept-1af7007d6376)

    Trumpers are like fire - hot, violent, dangerous, but dependent on fuel. We are like water. After a point water becomes unstoppable. Force fails - we flow around Trumpers, rising, pushing them onto islands, rising, until there's nowhere left, no higher ground to flee to. Then the flame is extinguished and they are drowned.

  76. [76] 
    Paula wrote:

    [72] He didn't know the entirety -

    IPads are a pain for posting.

  77. [77] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Paula - You can add "predictable" to the list of qualities you ascribe to the Trumpers. Who'd have known that once the Segregationist Elf ramped up his unpopular border policy that the Trumpists would try to blame it on Democrats? Everybody.

    It's so predictable, it hurts your head.

    The Trumpists believe that this is a good policy - they'll categorize it as 'deterrence', of course, completely missing the point that, like so many other Trump initiatives, it completely trashes the international reputation of this country. They don't care about the reputation of this country in the eyes of the rest of the world: they want America to be the sulking asshole in the corner that everyone else wants to call the cops on. They call that 'projection of power', and insist that other presidents simply failed to be big enough assholes to 'earn' that 'respect'. These are the sorts of things one used to hear only from people who were ignorant, malicious, or of low class. Now it's policy.

    But their deflection to "Democrats did it too" betrays their 'consciousness of guilt' in this matter. They're too chickenshit to actually own it.

  78. [78] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Trumpists believe that this is a good policy - they'll categorize it as 'deterrence', of course, completely missing the point that, like so many other Trump initiatives, it completely trashes the international reputation of this country.

    Mexican kids held for months as punishment for border-crossing
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/mexican-kids-held-for-months-as-punishment-for-border-crossing/2015/03/10/311d319a-b2f2-11e4-bf39-5560f3918d4b_story.html?utm_term=.1aa98d3a2dbc

    Funny how you never said a THING about this during Odumbo's reign, eh Balthy??

    This proves that you don't really CARE about what's happening at the border...

    You just want to further your hatred and bigotry and intolerance...

    Sad....

  79. [79] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Paula,

    I think, Paula, you have Comey confused with Bill Clinton.

  80. [80] 
    neilm wrote:

    Wow, even Michale is sickened by the treatment of kids at the border - he is in full "what-about-ism" lie mode.

    Forget what happened in the past Michale (since most of the feel-good stuff you are getting from the right wing crazy sites are lies anyway) - what are you doing to stop this?

    If all you are doing is trying to salve your conscience by swallowing nonsense about how it is Obama's fault then you are part of the problem.

    But of course, your orange dictator-wannabe can't do anything wrong - even when he and his fascist-spouting bible thumping AG are defending this odious practice.

  81. [81] 
    neilm wrote:

    Oh, and if you actually read the WaPo link you posted you'd know that the children being held came across without their families - and were being put through the asylum system.

  82. [82] 
    neilm wrote:

    Trumpers have strutted around thinking hate is their weapon - that everyone else can only receive it from them. But it now surrounds them.

    My friends and family are from the "Look kids, these are the riff-raff that you ignore and avoid, you don't go to their level because it is demeaning. You just smile and remain aloof - stiff upper lip, and all that, remember, you are better than them," training.

    Not any longer, our national pride is on the line. Who we are as decent Americans is under attack, and so this is the time to speak up to the pathetic bullies and call them out.

    And I'm seeing it more and more often. Where bigots would be quietly sidelined and excluded, they are being openly challenged, then sidelined and excluded.

    The trash of America used to suspect that the decent people (who they call the "elites") would look down on them. Now we are making sure they have no doubt we are.

  83. [83] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    The trash of America used to suspect that the decent people (who they call the "elites") would look down on them. Now we are making sure they have no doubt we are.

    And it's about time. Their crass and boorish cult leader has been himself under the delusion for years that he's a part of New York society, when he's really just another loudmouth from Queens. He talks badly about Mexicans: that's all that his followers needed to know about him to catapult him to the top of the Republican heap, making them no better than he is.

    As for the morons who thought that anyone, even Trump, was better than Hillary? I'm personally hoping that they get hit by the counter-tariffs first.

  84. [84] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil

    Forget what happened in the past Michale (since most of the feel-good stuff you are getting from the right wing crazy sites are lies anyway) - what are you doing to stop this?

    What were YOU doing to stop OBAMA from doing the same thing???

    You see, THAT is the point??

    I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you DON'T CARE about these actions...

    If you really cared about these actions, you would have stood up to be counted when OBAMA was doing them..

    You just want a political bludgeon to beat President Trump over the head with..

    You don't give a rat's ass what happens to these criminals or their children..

    This is fact..

  85. [85] 
    Michale wrote:

    Did anyone here speak out against Obama when his administration committed the EXACT SAME ACTIONS ya'all are attacking President Trump for??

    No.. Not a SINGLE person here did..

    Therefore, ya'all have absolutely NO MORAL STANDING to attack President Trump over them...

    You don't really care about the kids and what's happening to them now..

    Yer just USING THEM to further ya'all's own hatred and bigotry...

    Frankly, ya'all should be ashamed of yourselves..

    But your hatred and your bigotry and your intolerance doesn't allow that.. :^/

  86. [86] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh, and if you actually read the WaPo link you posted you'd know that the children being held came across without their families - and were being put through the asylum system.

    Ahhhh So, it's OK to put children in warehouse and in cages, just as long as they are not taken from their families???

    No. It's just OK because the POTUS with the -D after his name did it...

    Does your depravity know ANY depths???

    The policies about placing unaccompanied minors with sponsors and separating children from their families were in place during the Obama administration. They go back to the administration of President George W. Bush.
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/05/29/heres-what-happening-immigrant-children-u-s-border/650755002/

    You people can't win...

    I have the FACTS on my side..

    All you have is hysterical hatred and bigotry...

  87. [87] 
    Michale wrote:

    A beautiful sunrise over the Atlantic Ocean.. Waves crashing on the shore.. The sound of bird calls permeate the crisp clear morning...

    And President Trump is STILL President Of The United States..

    For REAL Americans what an awesome way to start the day... :D

  88. [88] 
    Michale wrote:
  89. [89] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    For REAL Americans...

    For real Americans - those whose ancestors were here before anyone else had even heard of the place - hearing the term 'real Americans' used that way probably sounds too ironic for words.

    Anyway, enjoy the day.

  90. [90] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    STILL not tired of winning

    I'm curious. Just exactly how are you defining that?

    By the way, the Brits are learning lots of interesting things about Cambridge Analytica, the Russians and Brexit. Looks like that might have been the test run for the Democracy-fucking program they ran here in 2016. Roger Stone has popped up in that one too. Who'da thunk, huh?

  91. [91] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    I am fascinated by the Maine voting system, of which I only recently became aware. As soon as I read about it, I recalled the Clinton disgraceful backflip on his nomination to the Civil Rights division of Lani Guinier. While not exactly the same, her ideas are similar. She was 25 years too soon, I guess.
    'Professor Guinier’s solution was a form of proportional representation known as cumulative voting, used frequently for the election of corporate boards. It gives each voter as many votes as there are seats to fill, and allows the voter to cast all the votes for one candidate or spread them out as he wishes. For example, in that city with a population 20 percent black and five councilors, each voter would have five votes. He could cast one for each of five council candidates, or he could give a candidate he especially favors more than one vote—up to five. If black voters used all their votes for one black candidate, he would be assured of election. The advantage of the system, Professor Guinier argued, was that all the councilors would have to think about potential votes throughout the city and hence would be sensitive to voters’ needs regardless of race.'
    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1998/08/13/the-case-of-lani-guinier/

  92. [92] 
    Michale wrote:

    Anyway, enjoy the day.

    You know I will..

    ANY day with Trump as President is a good day.. :D

    By the way, the Brits are learning lots of interesting things about Cambridge Analytica, the Russians and Brexit.

    And any day that hysterical NeverTrumpers whine and bitch and moan about nonsensical things is ALSO a good day.. :D

    Funny thing though. Odumbo used illegal Facebook data to win his elections..

    Funny how you don't care about that..

    Like I said..

    Ya'all don't really CARE about ANY of these things..

    You just want to nullify a free, fair and legal election because YOU LOST...

  93. [93] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Terrified" San Francisco Tourists Shocked By Aggressive Vagrants, Discarded Needles, Dead Bodies
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-17/terrified-san-francisco-tourists-shocked-aggressive-vagrants-discarded-needles-dead

    That's what happens when Democrats are in charge...

  94. [94] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just think… It was three years ago today that businessman Donald Trump and his beautiful wife Melania descended the Trump Tower escalator to announce his candidacy for President of the United States.

    And just three short years later we have:
    ** Record Unemployment rate
    ** Record black, Hispanic and female unemployment rate
    ** Record stock market rally
    ** Peace talks with North Korea
    ** Populists leaders sweeping across Europe
    ** Record consumer confidence
    ** ISIS is decimated
    ** PRIDE IN AMERICA!

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/06/video-three-years-ago-today-donald-and-melania-trump-take-escalator-ride-into-the-history-books/

    It's no wonder the HHPTDS sufferers are so filled with hate and intolerance...

    They predicted an Armageddon, an End Of Days and instead, we got America, back on top where she belongs..... :D

    The Democrat/Obama nightmare is over.. :D

  95. [95] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats really weren't in the news much this week, for good or for bad.

    Really???

    “Fuck you, Melanie. You know damn well your husband can end this immediately...you feckless complicit piece of shit.”
    -Kathy Griffin

    This was AFTER Griffin's racist twit that Kevin Hart should attack President Trump in his stand-up because Hart is black...

    I'm just sayin... :D

  96. [96] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's ironic...

    Racist Twit from Trump supporter.. BAD.. Very very BAD...

    Racist Twit from hysterical NeverTrumper?? Perfectly acceptable...

    Pure, blatant, unadulterated, indefensible hypocrisy...

  97. [97] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Remember when Melania was missing?

    Has anyone noticed how CW has been mostly missing in the comments the last few weeks?

    Has he been too busy working feverishly to research and prepare a long overdue article about the opportunity to mobilize some of the 20-30% of the citizens that vote in presidential elections but don't vote in off year elections to participate in One Demand instead of wasting their vote by not voting in 2018?

    Or is he just hiding out until he can claim that it is too late to get this started in 2018?

    If Paula can claim that Trump and his supporters are traitors, then it should be okay for me to claim that CW ignoring this real opportunity for the citizens in question that are Real Americans is not living up to his claim of being a reality based blogger and that those that don't call him out for this are also ignoring reality and are complicit in his deception.

    Nearly 30% of citizens that voted in 2014 did not vote in 2016.

    They did not vote because they did not want what was offered in 2016. In 2018 many will not vote in the general election for that reason and because of the gerrymandered districts that decide the election the primaries so they don't think their vote will matter.

    Although there is no guarantee, it is possible that some of these voters would consider registering on the One Demand website and writing in their own name to create and demonstrate demand for small contribution candidates in 2020 to set up a national organization to support those candidates a better option than wasting their votes by not voting in 2018.

    Refusing to address this very real possibility MAY not be traitorous to the country, but it is clearly betraying the claim of being a reality based blogger.

    So come on, CW. Why would it NOT be a good thing if the people that were not going to vote in 2018 participated in One Demand instead?

    What harm would it cause if they did and/or what harm would it cause to inform these citizens about this opportunity?

    Are you afraid that citizens that might be considering voting for Democrats they don't like because they have no other choice might actually not vote for Democrats in 2018 if they do have another choice?

    If so, can you justify how the few short term Democrat losses in 2018 outweigh the benefits of actually having the option of small contribution candidates in 2020 or denying those that would not vote at all in 2018 the knowledge if this opportunity outweighs that few that might have voted for Democrats in 2018 if they had not heard about the option of One Demand?

    Do Democrats deserve to win if they only way they can win is by denying citizens the knowledge of other choices?

    I am willing to put my idea to the test, are you willing to put your position on this VERY REAL ISSUE to the test or will you keep hiding?

    "Car 54 where are you?"
    -Car 54 where are you theme song

  98. [98] 
    neilm wrote:

    Just think… It was three years ago today that bigot Donald Trump descended the Trump Tower escalator to spout lies about Mexicans and see how many other bigots would vote for a talent free and hate-driven campaign for President of the United States.

    And just three short years later we have:

    - Trade wars with most of the major economic powers in the World
    - A regime that celebrates ripping kids from their parents and placing them in cages of up to 20 other kids
    - A President that has lied at least 9,000 times
    - Discovered that the "Mexico would pay for the wall" was a complete lie and now we are being told to pay for it
    - Discovered that nobody (except everybody but the President) thought that creating a healthcare system for 350M people "was complicated".
    - A President that calls nazis, including one who mowed down an innocent protester, "fine people".
    - A cabinet that is falling over itself trying to get their corruption in early before they get caught.
    - A President who has never, at any point since his first week in his Presidency, had a positive approval rating

    And I'm only getting started.

    Fortunately the economic engine that Obama created continues to deliver benefits to America, but let's not forget those trade wars and the economy is slowing which is amazing since we shot a $1.5T cash boost into it.

  99. [99] 
    Paula wrote:

    [81] neilm: yep.

    [82] Balthasar: yep.

    [89] Balthasar: Yep - the Brexit heist, the intersection of Russian operatives with British figures who, in turn, meet with American (traitors) operatives - it's all coming into focus. And Cambridge Analytica people (and the company it morphed into) and the Mercers - all of them should be tried for treason against their respective countries.

  100. [100] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Correction 96-

    The " nearly 30% of voters that voted in 2014 did not vote in 2016." should have been "Nearly 30% of the voters that voted in 2012 didn't vote in 2014."

    and "...they did not want what was offered in 2016." should have been "...they did not want what was offered in 2014."

  101. [101] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Nearly 30% of citizens that voted in 2014 did not vote in 2016.

    I wonder how many of those voters would find your comments concerning the gracious host of this blog to be overly self-absorbed, tedious, and a big turn-off to the cause you purport to support ...

    Note: my comment above is NOT about you, Don, but rather is with regard to the comments you type out here, denigrating CW on a regular basis.

    Note to everyone else: the note above outlines how you show respect to your fellow commenters.

  102. [102] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    neilm (81)), Balthy (82), Paula (98)-

    You are all very good at pointing out how well you look down on Trump supporters.

    It's a good thing you tell your kids not to stoop to the level of Trump supporters and provide such shining examples of the proper way to engage in political debate by respectfully debating the actual issues raised in my posts about One Demand rather than avoid addressing the issues at hand and trying to ridicule or demean me and/or One Demand or complain about me posting my opinion.

  103. [103] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Liz M

    We here in Idaho know very well how to 'respect our fellow commen-taters', both the Russetts and the Reds. It's only your buddies that fail to show respect!

  104. [104] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's only your buddies that fail to show respect!

    I have to admit, Liz but CRS does have a very valid point..

    When it comes to not respecting commenters, you only caution those who disagree with you..

    Victoria is the worst when it comes to name-calling and disrespect and she rarely draws your ire..

    Now, I can understand that, give Victoria's propensity for performing opposition research on those who oppose her and using pay-for-info web sites to dig up dirt on people who disagree with her.. So I can understand why you wouldn't want to go up against her..

    But, the fact is, there is PLENTY of hate and bigotry and intolerance coming from your side of the aisle...

    Personally, I think that CW should impose a hard and fast rule of no name-calling and no personal attacks whatsoever against commenters and those who violate this get a "time out" in the form of a temp ban and, if they persist, the temp ban becomes a perm ban..

    It's understandable that such is not imposed because then there would only be two NeverTrumpers, 1 Trump supporter and one One Demand supporter.. :D

    Irregardless of all that, the simple fact is that the NeverTrumpers are far FAR more guilty of the name-calling and personal attacks than myself and CRS combined...

    I'm just sayin'....

  105. [105] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    You are correct..

    I did leave a lot out....

    * Record black and Hispanic support for a republican president

    * Embassy move to Israel's capitol

    *KSA liberalizing and pledging to fight radical Muslims

    * Ending the TrainWreckCare mandate

    * Tearing up that horrendous Paris Climate scam

    * Renegotiating NAFTA

    * Walking away from TPP

    * The Keystone pipeline

    * 350,000 new manufacturing jobs, that were allegedly "never coming back"

    * Corporate reluctance to open new factories in Mexico and Canada

    * Eurotrash nations stepping up to pay more for NATO

    * And, of course, Numero Uno. Tax cuts for working families coupled with millions of new jobs

    Face the facts, Neil..

    Ya'all's GLOOM AND DOOM prediction hasn't come true... Ya'all were WRONG..

    The *ONLY* gloom and doom is the Democrat Party's chances of actually taking the House and Senate has gone up in smoke.. :D The Dems blew an almost 20% lead in the Generic Poll... Now they are BEHIND the GOP...

    You guys REALLY know how to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!!! :D

    This is the reality, Neil... :D

  106. [106] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz-
    I wonder how many of those voters would wonder, just as I have with questions on why CW won't address this opportunity since he won't address the opportunity, why he won't address the opportunity and what the opportunity is that they have not been informed about.

    Certainly not all my questions were denigrating.

    In fact, out of the 11 questions in comment 96, only two could be considered denigrating at all as I ASKED if he was hiding.

    The rest are all legitimate questions and are in no way denigrating.

    I did make a statement that it MAY not be traitorous to the country to not address this opportunity, that implies it could be to challenge CW to do the right thing, but the part about betraying the claim about a reality based blog is my opinion and not in any denigrating.

    While your comment was more respectful than many other commenters, labeling legitimate questions as denigrating is not. And frankly asking a question or making a statement that may be taken as SLIGHTLY denigrating to challenge CW to address this opportunity that he has ignored is not really inappropriate in my opinion when it could have been avoided had CW just addressed the opportunity or explained why he won't instead of continuing to ignore the opportunity.

    It certainly does not even come close to labeling Trump supporters as traitors.

  107. [107] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Michale-
    While I appreciate the sentiment, I may have had less time outs- but I suspect I would not have been immune.

  108. [108] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Certainly not all my questions were denigrating.

    None of them should be. It's not that hard.

  109. [109] 
    Michale wrote:

    "June 18 (UPI) — Satisfaction with the direction the United States is heading reached a 12-year high in June, a Gallup poll released Monday revealed."

    I know how much ya'all love polls.. :D

    Face reality doods.. Everyone is happy about the direction of this country except for those who want to see this country fail..

  110. [110] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Personally, I think that CW should impose a hard and fast rule of no name-calling and no personal attacks whatsoever against commenters and those who violate this get a "time out" in the form of a temp ban and, if they persist, the temp ban becomes a perm ban..

    That has a great deal of merit, Michale. It certainly deserves serious thought, discussion and debate.

  111. [111] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz-
    None them would be if CW had just addressed this opportunity.

    I guess I am supposed to be grateful that I can pick up a sandwich at the back door even though I can't sit at the counter and be served.

  112. [112] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz-
    Do any of my 9 non-denigrating questions have any merit worthy of serious thought, discussion and debate?

    Or do you only care to comment on what you don't like about my comments?

  113. [113] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Don, you know what else I hate about this site?

    All of the juvenile, hypersensitive, and otherwise senseless comments.

    Not sure how much more of this I can take ...

  114. [114] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz (112)-
    I agree.

    Do you mean senseless comments like directing your question in 112 at me, only commenting on what you don't like about my comments and you not calling out CW for ignoring reality when you have no problem calling me out for expressing my opinion and complaining about it?

  115. [115] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-109

    Our Benevolent Overlord for Life has heard similar proposals before and has declined to respond publicly- at least as far back as I can remember. I take this to mean that he tolerates a lot of rough and tumble in the discourse. Call it the "The Outback Steak House Doctrine" for want a better term. In the immediate future, things will probably get worse around here before they get whole lot worse. It is the Age of Trump.

  116. [116] 
    Michale wrote:

    Not sure how much more of this I can take ...

    Then lets change the subject..

    Have you seen the new AVENGERS INFINITY WARS yet???

  117. [117] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Liz is now hitting her head against a brick wall ...

    I think I'm done here.

    P.S. I think you may be a girl, Don. :)

    This girl thing of mine harkens back to a time when Bill Maher referred to the dreaded "feminization of America", referring to the super hyper-sensitivity of Americans in their daily discourse leading to people having to walk on eggshells when discussing anything with hypersensitive people in an effort not to offend their sensibilities on any given issue.

    At one time, I disagreed with him on the use of "feminization" and suggested a new phrase ... the hyper-sensitization of America. But, later on, because the hypersensitivity seemed to be coming from a lot of women, I thought, feminization is a good word for it.

    And, now, here at CW.com, whenever I can't resist the urge to call out a hyper-sensitive comment, such as the last part of [113], I ask if the commenter is a girl. Just to be funny, you understand, even if it was kind of private joke.

  118. [118] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    TS [114],

    Indeed.

  119. [119] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    By the way, TS, I don't mind a little rough and tumble in the comments section, you know. In fact, I engage in that all the time. :)

  120. [120] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Have you seen the new AVENGERS INFINITY WARS yet???

    Not yet, Michale but, I'm looking forward to seeing it soon. Is the Cap in this one?

  121. [121] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz-
    How exactly is asking you to be consistent or pointing out where your argument comes up short being hyper-sensitive?

    Why do you feel the need to walk on eggshells when discussing anything with me?

    And how is that any reason to avoid addressing the content of the comment in 113?

    How does me complaining about you or CW not addressing/discussing an issue and asking for it to be addressed/discussed justify your fear of addressing /discussing the issue?

    Perhaps you should be checked for concussion symptoms.

    And it is Monday.

    I am only a girl on the weekends. :D

  122. [122] 
    Michale wrote:

    TS,

    In the immediate future, things will probably get worse around here before they get whole lot worse.

    Yep.. When Democrats fail to take the House and Senate and the GOP actually increases their hold, people in here will be 20X worse than they are now...

  123. [123] 
    Michale wrote:

    Not yet, Michale but, I'm looking forward to seeing it soon. Is the Cap in this one?

    Yep.. Full contingent of both the Avengers and the Guardian crew.. I read someplace that there are 74 super heros/villans in this movie.. :D

  124. [124] 
    Michale wrote:

    And let me tell you, it's one helluva ride!! :D

  125. [125] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    If things don't get worse before they get even worse it won't be from a lack of effort on my part! :D

  126. [126] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    And speaking of things getting worse...

    Many of the 30% of voters that voted in 2012 but didn't vote in 2014 and previous off year elections are poised to repeat the same mistake in 2018 that led to things getting worse in 2016- not voting.

    Can anyone here that keeps telling me to try something different when what I am doing is not working please explain why me telling those citizens to try something different in 2018 is wrong?

  127. [127] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    4/5

    Kick, that would stooping down - way down - to Trump's level and far beneath you.

    *grins and laughs* I hear you.

    The fact is, I'm not actually one that would display my finger in such a manner, but I did truthfully identify the single part of my person that would stand at attention for the likes of Benedict Donald. :)

  128. [128] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz-

    I call people that are afraid to address/discuss something pussies.

    Not to be funny. Just being honest.

    And I don't care if the person or people it is directed at are too hyper-sensitive to handle it.

    If you can't stand the heat- stay out of the kitchen.

    But standing on the other side of the kitchen criticizing the person willing to work the stove/oven is even less courageous and respectable than not being in the kitchen at all.

  129. [129] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    10

    According to Will Bunch's article, Lisa McCormick got 157,983 votes (38%) of the vote against Bob Menendez in the recent NJ primary and did it with less than 5000 dollars in small contributions.

    We've been over this with Buddy Roemer wherein you didn't do your homework and just claimed that Buddy only took "small contributions," and here we are again where a search that takes seconds reveals that Lisa McCormick will happily allow people to donate far in excess of your "One Demand."

    https://lisamccormicknj.nationbuilder.com/donate

    Imagine if there was a national organization that could have brought in more small contributions to help her, who knows what might have happened.

    Regardless, she still wouldn't meet your purity test.

    Either way, that's 157,983 possible non-voters in the general election and 157,983 reasons from NJ alone to give the non-voters of the nation the option of participating in One Demand instead of wasting their vote by not voting in 2018.

    Imagine a world where people are free to vote without participating in "One Demand"... because we're already living in it. :)

  130. [130] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya'all remember San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz, who shot to liberal fame after criticizing Trump's hurricane response in Puerto Rico??

    Ya'all remember how ya'all flocked to her rescue and supporter her in attacking President Trump??

    San Juan Mayor Who Criticized Trump Now Being Investigated for Corruption
    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2018/06/13/san-juan-mayor-who-criticized-trump-now-being-investigated-for-corruption-n2490312

    What *IS* it about you people that you are always backing the WRONG horse???

  131. [131] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Don, you are making a mistake when you conflate hypersensitivity with name-calling. The latter is immature behavior while the former prevents an intelligent discussion about the issues.

  132. [132] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    23

    I heard that Trump said that, even if his life depended on it, he wouldn't be able to pick Manafort out of lineup.

    Did he say that? He said something similar about Felix Sater.

    I know this will come as a great shock to everybody, but Trump is lying. He has known Paul Manafort and Roger Stone for decades... introduced by his former attorney, Roy Cohn.

  133. [133] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That was a little attempt at a joke, Kick. :)

    I'm glad I tested here, though, 'cause it would have fallen flat, obviously. :(

  134. [134] 
    Paula wrote:

    Blotus under fire over his concentration camps policy. Question: where are the girls? WHERE ARE THE GIRLS?

    Republican-collaborators also under fire - their various weak-ass-milquetoast objections not impressing anyone. All Dem Senators sign on to Sen. Feinstein's bill. No Repubs so far. The GOP owns America's Concentration Camps. Will they draft a couple of safe-seaters to sign on and get them all out of this mess? We'll soon see.

    Calls for the liar-head-of-Homeland Security to resign. When the dust clears may she be prosecuted, along with Sessions.

    Canada and other countries may impose sanctions directly on Blotus a la the Magnitsky act - that would be cool but it is also why POTUS' are supposed to divest when taking office. But traitor-dRump didn't.

    Trumpers remain traitors.

    Senate Judiciary Committee starts hearings on IG report. Who leaked to Giuliani? To Nunes? (Traitors, both.) They note there were lots of leaks over Clinton, zero over Rump-Russia. NY FBI Clinton-haters are the law-breakers.

    The word "treason" is starting to bob up.

  135. [135] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The word treason is certainly bobbing up here. Do we know what it means?

  136. [136] 
    Paula wrote:

    [134] Definition: "the crime of betraying one's country".

  137. [137] 
    Kick wrote:

    michale AT em eff see see eff ell dot US

    OMG. The only person on the board who has posted Michale's personal information has done it again.

    Cry me a "eff" river. :)

  138. [138] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    #133 is exactly why it's impossible to take anyone seriously here..

    Either by commission or omission, Every Weigantian subscribes and supports this blatant, fact-less hysteria...

    You say you want serious conversations and discussions here..

    Yet, #133 is a PERFECT example of what is considered "serious"....

    Even YOU must be able to see the inherent hypocrisy...

  139. [139] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Paula,

    Treason is a serious charge and should not be thrown around in a non-serious manner.

    Here is the definition of treason: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

  140. [140] 
    Paula wrote:

    [138] "or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort".

    Blotus - Putin.

    Treason is a serious charge. Yep.

    And Trumpers remain traitors.

  141. [141] 
    Michale wrote:

    Paula,

    Rate the following crimes from worst to less worse..

    Rape
    Arson
    Murder
    Treason
    Armed Robbery

    And Trumpers remain traitors.

    Ahhhhh, so EVERY Trump supporter is a "traitor"...

    {{{sssiiiggghhhh}}}

    You see, Liz??

    THIS is why there are no more "serious" discussions here in Weigantia..

    Because (either by commission or omission) hysterical nutjobs are the "norm" here...

  142. [142] 
    Michale wrote:
  143. [143] 
    Paula wrote:

    Although the zero-tolerance policy was officially announced last month, it has been in effect, in more limited form, since at least last summer. Several months ago, as cases of family separation started surfacing across the country, immigrant-rights groups began calling for the Department of Homeland Security (D.H.S.), which is in charge of immigration enforcement and border security, to create procedures for tracking families after they are split up. At the time, D.H.S. said that it would address the problem, but there is no evidence that it actually did so. Erik Hanshew, a federal public defender in El Paso, told me that the problems begin at the moment of arrest. “Our client gets arrested with his or her child out in the field. Sometimes they go together at the initial processing, sometimes they get separated right then and there for separate processing,” he said. “When we ask the Border Patrol agents at detention hearings a few days after physical arrest about the information they’ve obtained in their investigation, they tell us that the only thing they know is that the person arrested was with a kid. They don’t seem to know gender, age, or name.”

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-government-has-no-plan-for-reuniting-the-immigrant-families-it-is-tearing-apart?mbid=social_twitter

  144. [144] 
    Michale wrote:

    OMG. The only person on the board who has posted Michale's personal information has done it again.

    Except for the person who has THREATENED to post not only my personal information but my FAMILY's personal information if I didn't toe your line...

    And it's not information that I posted, it's information that you dug up thru those PAY-FOR-INFO websites...

    It would serve you well to keep in mind that a commenter on this board knows exactly who you are and can keep you honest when you decide to get all up on your high horse...
    I know you know what I'm talking about...

    Kick, chrisweigant.com/2017/02/15/too-little-from-congress-too-much-from-trump/#comment-94665

    Awwwww. Here are the facts. Anyone like you who has provided their personal information and that of their family online has no one to blame but themselves if people can pull up their multiple mugshots... yes, we do both know it as does anyone with two brain cells to rub together.
    Kick, chrisweigant.com/2018/02/09/ftp471/#comment-115730

    I lost count of the family mugshots; you must be so proud of your crime family... a regular little Trumpian group of criminals except the flat broke and living in a double wide in Shithole, Florida part.
    Kick, chrisweigant.com/2018/02/02/ftp470/#comment-115168

  145. [145] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz-
    You still have to explain how anything in comment 113 is being hyper-sensitive and now you have to explain how I have conflated name-calling with hyper-sensitivity.

    One can only assume since you are not that stupid that these senseless comments are you just pretending to be stupid as an excuse to avoid addressing the issue at hand. There is too much of that around here already. Isn't that part of what your constant complaints are about?

  146. [146] 
    Paula wrote:

    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/you-guys-are-finally-going-to-get-that-bitch

    This is notable. According to testimony in the IG Report, one reason for the harsh criticism of Secretary Clinton in James Comey’s June 2016 statement was to assuage the concerns of FBI employees who said “You guys are finally going to get that bitch. We’re rooting for you.”

    Read the rest.

  147. [147] 
    Paula wrote:

    Hillary Clinton today:

    Meanwhile, what's happening to families at the border is horrific. Nursing infants being ripped away from their mothers. Parents being told their toddlers are being taken to bathe or play, only to realize hours later they aren't coming back. Children incarcerated in warehouses and, according to one account, kept in cages. This is a moral and humanitarian crisis. Every one of us who's ever been a parent or grandparent, an aunt, a big sister, any one of us who's ever held a child in our arms, every human being with a sense of compassion and decency should be outraged. [Applause]

    You know, I warned about this during the debates and on the campaign trail that Trump's immigration policies would result in families being separated, parents being sent away from their children, people being rounded up and loaded into trains and buses. And now as we watch with broken hearts, that's exactly what's happening. And let's be very clear. This is not happening because of the, quote, Democrats' law, as the White House has claimed. Separating families is not mandated by law at all. That is an outright lie. And it is incumbent on all of us, journalists and citizens alike, to call it just that. [Applause]

    And so is the president's attempt today to stoke fear of immigrants, not only in our country, but around the world, by claiming that migrants in Germany are causing crime. In fact, I know not everybody pays attention to, or even likes to hear facts, but I'm still kind of devoted to them. In fact, crime in Germany is at its lowest level since 1992. Nor are these policies rooted in religion. In fact, those who selectively use the bible to justify this cruelty are ignoring a central tenet of christianity. I went to a lot of years of Sunday school. I even taught it from time to time. I've studied the bible, both the old and the new testament. And what is being done using the name of religion is contrary to everything I was ever taught. Jesus said, suffer the little children unto me. He did not say, let the children suffer. [Applause]

    So, the test of any nation is how we treat the most vulnerable among us. Laura Bush made that case eloquently in the Washington Post this weekend, writing, "This zero tolerance policy is cruel, it is immoral, and it breaks my heart." And she is absolutely right. [Applause]

    We are a better country than one that tears families apart, turns a blind eye to women fleeing domestic violence, and treats frightened children as a negotiating tool as a means to a political end. These actions are an affront to our values and they undermine America's reputation as a beacon of hope and freedom in the world. So, yes, these are perilous times with no shortage of problems for us to solve. These problems transcend borders and so must our solutions. And the women in this room know that better than anyone. This is a support network. This is a network of problem solvers. And our country has never needed you more.

    Watch the video for the applause.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=islnDe8inZI

  148. [148] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    132

    That was a little attempt at a joke, Kick. :)

    Well, I did laugh when I first read it, but the fact is that Donald Trump testified under oath in a deposition in 2013 regarding Sater: "If he were sitting in a room right now, I really wouldn't know what he looked like," which is obvious perjury.

    So I was laughing right up until I realized that I wouldn't put it past Trump to claim that he doesn't know Manafort because he testified under penalty of perjury something identical about his business partner, Felix Sater, a person he knows very well.

    I'm glad I tested here, though, 'cause it would have fallen flat, obviously. :(

    I promise I was laughing... right up until I realized I wouldn't put it past BLOTUS to make such a claim. The constant "gaslighting," lying, and attempted conning is a Trump and Trumpian trait.

    I saw a clip from a TV show yesterday where Steve Bannon actually claimed that Donald Trump never lied to the American people. Seriously. :)

  149. [149] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick-
    see comment 144.

    So quoting an article is not good enough?

    Just so you know, one of the first things I do when I check a candidates website is to look at the donation page to see if that candidate will accept donations larger than the limit for One Demand.

    That is why I did not send her any money.

    But your "evidence" does not show what contributions she did take. And if the less than 5000 dollars in the article is correct and it was as the article said mostly small contributions there isn't much room left for more than a few contributions larger than the one demand limit.

    The article was also not specific about what constitutes a small contribution.

    Remember, unless you are just pretending to be stupid, that I conceded your point about Buddy Roehmer because it was not the main point of the argument I was making and it was one mistake not worth wasting the time on extensive research.

    Remember how I pointed out that another commenter had made a mistake about something I said in that very comment thread and I said that that commenter's one mistake does not make everything else he says wrong unless it is a pattern of mistakes that he keeps repeating and does not acknowledge.

    Remember how it shows whenever you bring it up that you are proving that you are getting desperate because you have no credible argument?

    How do you know that if there was a national organization that she would not meet the criteria? (labeling it a purity test is another debunked argument that shows you have no credible argument. That's pretty stupid to keep repeating it and if you are only pretending to be stupid then you can't complain about being called stupid because then you are clearly asking for it.)

    But I did vote for her anyway. I made the decision because there were not enough people participating in One Demand yet to make writing in my own name preferable to voting for a candidate that was closer to what I wanted but not perfect, like when I voted for Bernie or Stein.

    Isn't that what all of you want me to do and say I never do?

    Or does that only apply if I vote for a candidate that you approve of?

    Will you attack me for that, too and provide more evidence of your stupidity and inconsistency?

    We are already living in a world where people can vote without participating in One Demand is something you actually got right.

    I not exactly sure how citizens having the opportunity to know about and participate in One Demand would mean that people would no longer be free to vote without participating in One Demand.

    The only way that would be in any way be true is if people found out about One Demand and so many people participated that anyone not participating would be an insignificant minority. That would mean that One Demand is working.

    And by the way, the world without One Demand is the one that made Trump president.

    You are really going to have to come up with better arguments unless you enjoy looking stupid or pretending to be stupid.

  150. [150] 
    Paula wrote:

    Serial-liar SH Sanders ducks presser - I guess even she couldn't swallow concentration camps. Nazi-Nielsen lies instead.

  151. [151] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    143

    Except for the person who has THREATENED to post not only my personal information but my FAMILY's personal information if I didn't toe your line...

    I never threated to post your personal information or that of your family. I posted that if you continued to post lies about me that I would post the truth about you. Nothing more than that. Then you got creative and accused me of all kind of other things that never happened.

    Asking someone to stop posting lies about them is not the equivalent of asking them not to post at all or your bullshit claim of someone trying to extort you into silence. You had already posted your own personal information all over the blog as you continue to do as evidenced above, and you let your imagination run away with itself and assumed the other bullshit you keep claiming.

    Nothing more.

    And it's not information that I posted, it's information that you dug up thru those PAY-FOR-INFO websites...

    Another lie from you. I don't pay for information. Continuing to repeat your lies doesn't make them true. It just proves you have a creative imagination, a victim complex, and don't mind lying on a repetitive basis.

    It would serve you well to keep in mind that a commenter on this board knows exactly who you are and can keep you honest when you decide to get all up on your high horse...
    I know you know what I'm talking about...

    Nice post. I guess it never occurred to your pea brain at the time you freaked out that you identified yourself and your family on this board long before that and on multiple occasions and that anyone on the board could post the exact same thing and it still be a factual statement.

    Awwwww. Here are the facts. Anyone like you who has provided their personal information and that of their family online has no one to blame but themselves if people can pull up their multiple mugshots... yes, we do both know it as does anyone with two brain cells to rub together.

    So by you getting so upset about this, I can only assume your family does have mugshots. Lucky guess on my part.

    I lost count of the family mugshots; you must be so proud of your crime family... a regular little Trumpian group of criminals except the flat broke and living in a double wide in Shithole, Florida part.

    You live in Florida? Who knew? Everyone here since you had already posted it about a zillion times.

    Conflating those comments with extortion and threating your family is utter nonsense. You posted your own personal information, and then you freaked out when somebody called you stupid for doing it. Cry me a river. :)

  152. [152] 
    Paula wrote:

    Traitor-Blotus can end his policy in a phone call. He hasn't. Repubs can sign-on to Feinstein's bill. They haven't.

    Nielsen repeats Blotus lie trying to pin their concentration camps on the Dems.

    All they do is lie, dodge responsibility, lie, lie, lie some more, hurt people, lie some more, deflect responsibility, and start another round of lies.

  153. [153] 
    Michale wrote:

    You see, Liz...

    As long as you support and tolerate people like Victoria, you will never have the Weigantia we used to have...

    As long as scumbags like Victoria are accepted and acceptable, as you see Weigantia now, so shall it always be so...

    You have my email if you want to take it private...

    I made my case... But I know it's to no avail..

    Apparently the ONLY thing that matters here is Party slavery and bigotry...

  154. [154] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    148

    see comment 144.

    Pound sand.

    But your "evidence" does not show what contributions she did take. And if the less than 5000 dollars in the article is correct and it was as the article said mostly small contributions there isn't much room left for more than a few contributions larger than the one demand limit.

    You held her out as an example of how "One Demand" can work, Don, even though she does not fit your definition.

    The article was also not specific about what constitutes a small contribution.

    Does not change the fact that she was soliciting for far in excess of your "One Demand."

    Remember, unless you are just pretending to be stupid, that I conceded your point about Buddy Roehmer because it was not the main point of the argument I was making and it was one mistake not worth wasting the time on extensive research.

    Wrong, Don. You claimed Buddy Roehmer was proof that "One Demand" could work in the exact same fashion that you're claiming with Lisa McCormick. "Unless you are just pretending to be stupid," you could have easily looked either or both of them up in the same fashion to find out whether or not they did support your theory before presenting them as candidates who did... when neither of them actually were.

    Remember how I pointed out that another commenter had made a mistake about something I said in that very comment thread and I said that that commenter's one mistake does not make everything else he says wrong unless it is a pattern of mistakes that he keeps repeating and does not acknowledge.

    No because I quit reading all the mistakes that you keep repeating and do not acknowledge.

    How do you know that if there was a national organization that she would not meet the criteria?

    It doesn't matter; my entire point was that she doesn't meet the criteria of your "One Demand."

    Or does that only apply if I vote for a candidate that you approve of?

    I couldn't care any less who you vote for, Don, which is more than I can say for you. It's actually you who keeps preaching ad nauseam to everyone else on the blog about candidates who meet your approval based on your imposed criteria, and I couldn't care less if you don't like the term "purity test," but that's exactly what your bullshit is. :)

  155. [155] 
    TheStig wrote:

    LM - 118

    Rough and tumble? I never noticed.it before. :)

    \ / \ / \ / \ / .....that's me waggling my index finger at you in disappointment. For shame!

  156. [156] 
    Paula wrote:

    Sanders weighs in, after all. With more lies. Well, at least she's consistent.

  157. [157] 
    Kick wrote:

    Paula
    151

    All they do is lie, dodge responsibility, lie, lie, lie some more, hurt people, lie some more, deflect responsibility, and start another round of lies.

    Gaslighting, lying, the constant whining, and their shared grievance and victimhood ad nauseam is exactly who they are. They'll never take responsibility for their own actions when they can whine and point the finger at somebody else for their own actions and/or ignorance.

  158. [158] 
    Paula wrote:

    [156] Kick: "They'll never take responsibility for their own actions when they can whine and point the finger at somebody else for their own actions and/or ignorance."

    Yep.

  159. [159] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick-
    Thank you for once again proving my point that you are stupid ot pretending to be stupid.

    I am not going to bother with the point to point as you have proven yourself an idiot and a coward without a credible argument all by yourself.

    You really should try to at least be accurate and truthful and comment 156 is neither. Just more made up bullshit, inaccuracies and complete lack of comprehension.

  160. [160] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Michale-

    Kick is right. If you go out handing out business cards, you can't expect to remain anonymous. Once information is on the internet, it's there to stay. Your name link to your business and your business website probably still exists on the internet archive even if the business no longer exists. Long before you put a link in your name, I figured out who you are, who your family is, what your business was and looked at a close up of your house through google maps purely because you posted a picture of yourself in a Star Trek costume. I did it with free, built in to the internet tools and that anyone can use and google. The only reason I did it was because you were prating on about how you are a security expert and the rest of us were unqualified to comment on such matters, and I decided to put it to the test. Needless to say, I have never taken said expertise seriously since. Nor your computer expertise for that matter.

    The whole "The Imbecile", EQ and lets just say less savory aspects of your history I found by accident and was your own dam fault. You were being a pretentious prick and trying to back up some silly argument via google search. I was testing out silly google searches using your name and random derogatory terms to see which would return the most results to demonstrate how dumb proof by google search was, and, well lets just say it opened up an interesting worm hole...

    How long are you going to play the victim card? The reality is a DOXing here would have almost no chance of anything bad happening. A few readers might get a chuckle out of it. Contrary to Elizabeth's protestations, for an unmoderated forum, this is a remarkably civilized backwater of the internet. Now if you had pissed off people in some of less savory parts of the internet, every email address and phone number of you, your entire family, friends, acquaintances, business associates would be bombed with offensive and threatening messages, probably at the first posting of a picture. If you follow these stories, someone showing up at your house to do violence is almost unheard of. The worst that would happen would be a SWATting, which can be quite bad. Yes, there are consequences to being a pompous ass on the internet and anonymity must be worked for and not assumed. Considering your posting history before you found CW, I would have thought you would have learned that lesson by now.

    Now the only question is which is the most beaten dead horse: Michale's victim card or One Demand?

  161. [161] 
    Kick wrote:

    As long as you support and tolerate people like Victoria, you will never have the Weigantia we used to have...

    You sure don't mind the name calling as long as it's either you or CRS or anyone else doing it to "Odumbo" or "Bubba" or fill in the blank with your oft repeated derogatory terms. You also don't mind referring to anyone who doesn't support your views as un-American, etc.

    You are what I call a "snowflake troll," one who can sure dish it out daily but isn't so good when it gets dished out in your direction. Boo hoo.

    So now you've taken to conflating, gaslighting, and outright lying in order to try to get a poster banned... all while whining about somebody trying to silence you. If that isn't just the textbook definition of "projection," then what is?

    As long as scumbags like Victoria are accepted and acceptable, as you see Weigantia now, so shall it always be so...

    Cry me a river some more, "snowflake troll."

    You have my email if you want to take it private...

    Everyone here has your email... duh... as well as all the other personal information you already posted on multiple occasions with zero help from anyone else. Next you'll be whining that I threatened to post your email.

    I made my case... But I know it's to no avail..

    Because you're conflating one thing with another. Somebody asking you to stop posting lies about them is not the equivalent of "extortion." No one asked you to stop posting altogether or tried to silence you beyond your fabricated bullshit about them. On the other hand, you've obviously taken steps on multiple occasions now to recruit other commenters to your side in an attempt to have me silenced. Whiney snowflake troll trying to recruit other posters to have a poster banned.

    What's really sad is that you're seemingly oblivious to the fact that what you're attempting is obvious... to likely everyone except yourself. Pathetic.

  162. [162] 
    Kick wrote:

    BashiBazouk
    159

    Word.

  163. [163] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    The worst that would happen would be a SWATting

    That should read: could happen. SWATting seems to be in decline as, thankfully, police departments are getting better of recognizing these situations as they happen and tracking down the scumbags afterword...

  164. [164] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bashi,

    If you go out handing out business cards, you can't expect to remain anonymous.

    So, basically, what you are saying is that you and Victoria believe that, since the girl wore a short skirt, she deserved to be raped..

    That's pretty pathetic, even for you..

    I mean, honestly. What kind of SICK FUCK has to opposition research a commenter because the can't address the FACTS...

    And what kind a pathetic people actually find that acceptable??

    Sad...

  165. [165] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Almost like he WANTED to get caught. AKA drama queen.. What kind of sick fuck indeed!

  166. [166] 
    Michale wrote:

    Almost like he WANTED to get caught.

    Whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night..

    I said what I said before because I was amongst friends..

    And then scumbags like you and Victoria came along and totally destroyed any semblance of decency and camaraderie this forum had...

    You low lifes are like a cancer..

    But I guess cancer is what everyone here wants...

  167. [167] 
    TheStig wrote:

    -166

    Busted! Victoria and I cooked up your internet depantsing during one of our black sabbaths. We sacrificed a goat....good times. Gotta run, kid has to get to his luge lesson at the Evil YMCA.

    Yes, I do toggle the blocking routine now and then.

  168. [168] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes, I do toggle the blocking routine now and then.

    In other words, you were lying when you said you blocked me.. :D

    Figures....

  169. [169] 
    Michale wrote:

    So by you getting so upset about this, I can only assume your family does have mugshots. Lucky guess on my part.

    But you SAID there were mugshots of my family..

    that of their family online has no one to blame but themselves if people can pull up their multiple mugshots...

    I lost count of the family mugshots; you must be so proud of your crime family...

    You said there were mugshots... NOW you are saying you were just guessing..

    Either you were lying then or you are lying now..

    The fact is, there ARE no mugshots...

    As usual, you are full of shit and lying out your ass...

  170. [170] 
    TheStig wrote:

    -168

    Never said I always blocked you. I have said you put words into other people's mouth....like you just did. You are nothing more than a bag of Sophist tricks. I have stated thst many times. I stand by my evaluation.

    You are acting the Internet version of a school yard bully...and a capable women just beat the hell out of you.. Kick is your Drill Thral. I'm not sure if that bothers you or if it is a kinky pleasure. Why did you leave so many clues, Mr. security and internet expert? How far are you willing to go in order to play the victim?

    Being called a scumbag by the likes of you is almost as good as being knighted by The Queen.

  171. [171] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    So, basically, what you are saying is that you and Victoria believe that, since the girl wore a short skirt, she deserved to be raped..

    What are you blabbing on about? You don't understand how the internet works. Period.

    I mean, honestly. What kind of SICK FUCK has to opposition research a commenter because the can't address the FACTS...

    Interestingly enough I was addressing FACTS. In the first case I disproved you were any sort of security expert. FACT busted! And in the second I was addressing your complete lack of FACTS in backing up an argument when YOU handed it to me on a silver platter. No research required.

    And what kind a pathetic people actually find that acceptable??

    The same kind that pathetically tries to twist linguistic flourishes when I post even though the post is on subject and not directed at you.

    Look in the mirror, Michale, look in the mirror.

  172. [172] 
    Michale wrote:

    What are you blabbing on about? You don't understand how the internet works. Period.

    Nice dodge...

    I'll spell it out for you because you are obviously a moron...

    You posted personal information so it's your own fault that people used that to dig up MORE personal information and try to extort you
    -Scumbag Bashi

    That girl wore a short skirt and low cut so it's her own fault she got raped..
    -Scumbag Rapist

    Do you need me to draw you a picture???

    Moron...

  173. [173] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why did you leave so many clues, Mr. security and internet expert?

    So, like scumbag Bashi, you think it's perfectly acceptable to rape a woman because she wore a low cut top...

    Yep, that's pretty much what I expected from you...

  174. [174] 
    Michale wrote:

    .and a capable women just beat the hell out of you

    WHat does Victoria being a woman have to do with anything??

    Ahhhh So, on top of being a rape supporter, you are also a misogynist....

    Again, it's not surprising whatsoever...

  175. [175] 
    Michale wrote:

    TS,

    For someone who has claimed to block me, you sure are hanging on my every comment..

    BBWWAJHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Guess I have PROVEN you to be the scumbag liar you are.. :D

  176. [176] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Michale-

    Please point out where I have EVER tried to extort you. I never mentioned the existence your personal information (identity/family/work/home) until others found it. Then I even defended you, pointing out that DOXing was generally considered bad form.

    I did needle you a little with "The Imbecile" (hey, it was hilarious) but over a year after I found it, and again defended you when others found your history by pointing out much of the really bad stuff was likely spoofed.

    Do you need me to draw you a picture???

    No, but you understanding written English would help...

  177. [177] 
    Michale wrote:

    Never said I always blocked you.

    You said you block me.. You didn't specify any other factor..

    You lied.

    You obviously DON'T block me...

  178. [178] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Michale [177]

    Just another case of you not understanding written English. The tool collapses threads. You can un-collapse at will and your posts still show up in others replies. I always thought you should install it yourself, as it makes it quick to get to the bottom of a thread. I used it for awhile but the tool was too needy for my tastes. Wanted to be updated consistently.

  179. [179] 
    Michale wrote:

    Please point out where I have EVER tried to extort you.

    Point out where I said that YOU tried to extort me??

    You can't, because it never happened..

    Then I even defended you, pointing out that DOXing was generally considered bad form.

    Fair enough.. Then why did you allow Victoria's threat of exposing my "family mugshots" to go uncommented??

    If DOX is "bad form", surely doxing a commenter's family is worse, no??

  180. [180] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    You can't, because it never happened..

    Fair enough. But I was very subtle about the imbecile thing making it look like an ad homium to those not in the know. I seriously doubt it contributed to others finding your info. Especially when you already posted enough info yourself.

    Fair enough.. Then why did you allow Victoria's threat of exposing my "family mugshots" to go uncommented??

    For one, you have become a mass posting bully. TheStig is correct in that, and in the end I don't really care. Second, it looked more she was (successfully) pushing your buttons than threats of real disclosure. Have you posted mugshots of your family over the internet? Have you and your family committed crimes that they would be in a publicly accessible data base? If so, it's your fault, not anyone elses. If not, then call her bluff...

  181. [181] 
    Michale wrote:

    Fair enough. But I was very subtle about the imbecile thing making it look like an ad homium to those not in the know. I seriously doubt it contributed to others finding your info. Especially when you already posted enough info yourself.

    I never had any complaint about you and my private info.. If I gave that impression, then I apologize..

    Second, it looked more she was (successfully) pushing your buttons than threats of real disclosure. Have you posted mugshots of your family over the internet? Have you and your family committed crimes that they would be in a publicly accessible data base? If so, it's your fault, not anyone elses. If not, then call her bluff...

    Have you and your family committed crimes that they would be in a publicly accessible data base?

    What does my family have to do with ***ANYTHING*** here in this forum??

    Why should my family be ANY topic of discussion??

    THAT is what you simply don't get.. There is absolutely NO REASON to bring a person's family into ANY of these discussions... ESPECIALLY to attack them...

    Wwhat kind of sick person would do that or even THREATEN to do that???

    I have posted pictures of my grandchildren here on this forum because I am so damn proud and they are to cutest grandkids in the world. I DID so at a time when we were all, more or less, friends..

    Does that give Victoria the RIGHT to attack my grandkids and disseminate their pictures all over the place with disgusting attacks???

    Surely your answer isn't "yes"....

    THAT is my point..

    My family has absolutely NOTHING to do with anything here..

    That's how I feel about it and I thought every civilized person here would feel the same..

    I guess I was wrong...

  182. [182] 
    Michale wrote:

    If not, then call her bluff...

    Oh, Victoria doesn't have shit and she knows it..

    But my point is, the threat is sufficient to expose her for the low life she is..

  183. [183] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'll re-iterate what I said above..

    The best thing to happen for Weigantia is to make a hard and fast rule..

    No name-calling or personal or family attacks on commenters or commenters' family....

    First violation is a temp ban... 7 Days...

    Second violation is a permanent ban...

    That will eliminate 95% of the problems here and has the best chance to get Weigantia back to it was at the beginning..

    Friends who disagree vehemently but than can easily go out for a beer afterwards...

  184. [184] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    What does my family have to do with ***ANYTHING*** here in this forum??

    It was rhetorical. If you have not put the information out there, then no one else has either. Aside from poorly setup facebook accounts and the like...

    Does that give Victoria the RIGHT to attack my grandkids and disseminate their pictures all over the place with disgusting attacks???

    Did she? No. She pushed your buttons, just like you do to others...

    No name-calling or personal or family attacks on commenters or commenters' family....

    But then you would have to admit you are just as much part of the problem as anyone else. Are you ready to look in the mirror?

    That will eliminate 95% of the problems here and has the best chance to get Weigantia back to it was at the beginning..

    Try reading some threads from the beginning, you know, back when you wrote in full paragraphs instead of stream of consciousness sentences. That's what you need to do to bring this place back to the beginning. And I would not be surprised if many here followed suit.

    If you make it your mission to stick it to the left, don't be surprised if they stick it right back at you.

  185. [185] 
    Kick wrote:

    But you SAID there were mugshots of my family..

    You've posted on this forum multiple times that you met your wife when you arrested her. Anyone who believes there are no mugshots must believe you're a liar.

    You said there were mugshots... NOW you are saying you were just guessing..

    No, I said "lucky guess on my part," but it was you who outed your family with your multiple posts. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to read and comprehend the written word. It was you who reported on this forum multiple times that you met your wife when you arrested her... among many other things about your family.

    Either you were lying then or you are lying now..

    I am constrained to point out that you were the one who reported your family's arrests.

    The fact is, there ARE no mugshots...

    You're a liar.

    As usual, you are full of shit and lying out your ass...

    You've posted ample information about your family so that anyone can look this up and determine the truth. Unlike you, the pictures don't lie.

  186. [186] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bashi,

    It was rhetorical.

    No, it's not rhetorical..

    It's the very heart of the issue..

    What does ANYONE's family have to do with the political discussions here???

    Did she?

    Yes, she did..

    If I call your family a "criminal family", wouldn't you consider that an attack on your family??

    But then you would have to admit you are just as much part of the problem as anyone else. Are you ready to look in the mirror?

    I have already readily admitted that, yes, I contribute to the problem. But ONLY in retaliation..

    Are you ready to support the no name-calling rule??

    If you make it your mission to stick it to the left, don't be surprised if they stick it right back at you.

    Fine.. STICK IT BACK TO ME..

    But leave my fucking family out of it...

    Let me give you an example..

    Michale: It is well documented that the immigration policies pursued by the Trump administration were enacted during the Bush Administration and were used during the Obama Administration...

    VICTORIA: Yea, well your family is a criminal family and if you don't shut up, I am going to post pictures of their mugshots!!!

    Now, you tell me.. How is that acceptable??

    Don't bother trying to say Veronica didn't say that because that is what she said..

  187. [187] 
    Michale wrote:

    You've posted on this forum multiple times that you met your wife when you arrested her. Anyone who believes there are no mugshots must believe you're a liar.

    BBWWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Fine.. Post the mugshot, you lying bitch..

    Prove to everyone what a lowlife you are or you prove to everyone what a LIAR you are..

    You ain't got shit, bitch and you and I both know it..

    You've posted ample information about your family so that anyone can look this up and determine the truth. Unlike you, the pictures don't lie.

    SO, you admit you DO have pictures???

    You know you ain't got shit, you lying slut...

    When you DON'T post them, you'll prove to everyone what a lying pile of diseased filth you really are...

  188. [188] 
    Kick wrote:

    So, basically, what you are saying is that you and Victoria believe that, since the girl wore a short skirt, she deserved to be raped..

    Obviously, you have simply confused Bashi and I with Your Orange Worship.

    Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the...

    Bashi would never, and I believe I've made it obvious that I do not and will not tolerate fools who make light of physical assault.

    I would say that's pretty pathetic, even for you, but that about sums up your daily modus operandi.

    You can sure dish it out, but you can't take it.

  189. [189] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the...

    THEY LET YOU DO IT

    Has nothing to do with rape..

    Once again, you are proven to be a complete and utter lying bitch..

  190. [190] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, Veronica.. You said you had some photos to post??

    Of course you don't.. You are nothing but a lying scumbag bitch

  191. [191] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh I know what yer doing..

    You're digging out your credit card so you can log onto those websites and pay for more dirt on my family..

    What a complete and utter waste of skin you are, Victoria...

  192. [192] 
    Kick wrote:

    You seem completely unaware and uninformed regarding the fact that the State of Florida allows anyone to search their criminal databases for free, and you were kind enough to supply your information for free on numerous and multiple occasions.

    And since you brought up the subject of "waste of skin," me and my "skin" nor the "skin" of my family can be found in multiple free and freely searchable online databases of criminals. :)

  193. [193] 
    Kick wrote:

    After all, the agreement was for commentaries going forward. :)

Comments for this article are closed.