U.S. Politics, Elections & Culture issues

[tchaiku]

^ I was not just talking about the old tape.
"Mexican migrants are mostly rapists and some are good people."
"Blood comming out of her wherever."
"Hillary Clinton can't statisify her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America."

Those were said during and after 2015.

And yes him being a President is the key difference, I have met radical Muslims, neo-Nazis and many other similar creatures. Some of them wanted to wipe the Jews, it's not that I am thin skinned.

If he kept his mouth shut and commit his promises he would have received less backflash. About 25% of the wall was finished, and yet that has gotten less attention than some of his dumb tweets.

Many right-wing American sites report the crimes done by migrants but never by the natives in Western Europe. Why do rightists complain about left-wing biased media when they follow right-wing biased media? Why do they complain about Soros when it's OK for conservative billionaries to donate to the conservative cause?

[Risto the Great]

https://twitter.com/RenShen888/status/1348004803708809218?s=01

This is why there's something that stinks in USA. This woman is so clever.

[Karposh]

This is why there's something that stinks in USA.

And the stench is starting to get unbearable. More and more videos are surfacing of Antifa members dressed up as Trump supporters and draped with the flag they were burning only a few months ago, leading the charge to the Capitol Hill building. The stench coming from the "storming of Capitol Hill" narrative is getting stronger and stronger but is conveniently being ignored by mainstream media.

The whole thing is starting to look as though it was staged. Many of the police who were meant to be guarding the building have revealed that they were told to go home on the morning of the Trump rally by their superiors which they found to be extremely odd while those that remained can be clearly seen waving (beckoning) "Trump supporters" through the gates which they voluntarily opened themselves.

You can actually see in some of the videos Trump supporters (genuine ones) trying to prevent those bent on destruction and vandalism. Speaking of destruction of property, Trump supporters, those dirty domestic terrorists, crossed a line apparently when they broke that window which has been continuously played on a loop since the "storming" of the hill. That was enough to earn them the tag "domestic terrorists".

As for Candace Owens, I absolutely love this woman. So brilliant and courageous. Good on her for making a stand against the shutting down of free speech.

Candace Owens:

His website...went after my content personally and so I'm going after him personally

Love it!

[Soldier of Macedon]

^ I was not just talking about the old tape.
"Mexican migrants are mostly rapists and some are good people."

That is a false quote. I am not going to waste my time endlessly fact-checking you. Start quoting properly and in context.

"Blood comming out of her wherever."
"Hillary Clinton can't statisify her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America."

Both of those ladies tried to make him look like a fool on a number of occasions. He struck back. What would you do if others habitually insinuate that you're a racist, fascist, sexist, etc.? Is it possible that after a while you may temporarily lose your composure and say something that might lead others to want to knock your teeth out?

And yes him being a President is the key difference, I have met radical Muslims, neo-Nazis and many other similar creatures. Some of them wanted to wipe the Jews, it's not that I am thin skinned.

Are you suggesting that Trump is comparable to radical Muslims or Neo-Nazis and that he wants to wipe out the Jews? If not, what is the point of the above paragraph? Do you think Obama, Clinton (x2), Harris and Biden have ever said something hyperbolic, behaved inappropriately or outright lied? Or do they all meet the tick of approval for your obscure moral criteria?

Many right-wing American sites report the crimes done by migrants but never by the natives in Western Europe. Why do rightists complain about left-wing biased media when they follow right-wing biased media? Why do they complain about Soros when it's OK for conservative billionaries to donate to the conservative cause?

Often, the bias of a right-wing or left-wing site is overt and obvious. MSM is supposed to be objective. During his presidential campaign, a number of women had accused Joe Biden of inappropriate touching and kissing. Doing their best to avoid using terms like "sexual assault", the MSM used softball-euphemisms like "women who feel like their space has been invaded". Kamala Harris was asked about the matter prior to becoming Biden's pick for Vice President. Given that you're so fond of quotes, here is part of her response: "I believe them". Afterward, she became his running mate. Soon she will be his partner in the presidency. The right can be accused of some hypocrisy but it is dwarfed in comparison to the opportunistic hypocrisy of the left. So spare me the song and dance about Trump. As for conservative billionaires, who are you referring to, what causes are they donating to and how are they trying to change the world?

[VMRO]

If some ordinary person said anything what Trump said about women for your close female relative or friend I am pretty sure you would knock his teeth out.
Media attacks him because he behaves. A president has no right to be a clown. Plain and simple.

And I am white and not a Muslim.

Would you also knock Biden if he sniffs your close relative?

[tchaiku]

That is a false quote. I am not going to waste my time endlessly fact-checking you. Start quoting properly and in context.

I didn't quote directly any of those. I know it was not the exact one, but it has the same meaning. OK, if instead of 'rapists' we should write 'criminals', even though he did mention rape too.
“They are not our friend, believe me,” he said, before disparaging Mexican immigrants: “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Both of those ladies tried to make him look like a fool on a number of occasions. He struck back. What would you do if others habitually insinuate that you're a racist, fascist, sexist, etc.? Is it possible that after a while you may temporarily lose your composure and say something that might lead others to want to knock your teeth out?

I don't know fully about his history with Hillary Clinton. (even though his comment was uncalled for)
But Megyn Kelly in an easy one, since their interactions were more limited. While she did make him a provocative question (which was caused by Trump's behavior itself).
Journalists and interviewers make provocative question to silly celebrities all the time and let alone the president. I would give him a pass if he were a movie actor or a singer but a president?

Are you suggesting that Trump is comparable to radical Muslims or Neo-Nazis and that he wants to wipe out the Jews? If not, what is the point of the above paragraph? Do you think Obama, Clinton (x2), Harris and Biden have ever said something hyperbolic, behaved inappropriately or outright lied? Or do they all meet the tick of approval for your obscure moral criteria?

Not at all, my point was that I have quite of experience with those people therefore I have been shown up to their opinions and got used to it. So my disappointment with Trump is more of a reflection of his obnoxious personality rather my "sensitivity".

Often, the bias of a right-wing or left-wing site is overt and obvious. MSM is supposed to be objective. During his presidential campaign, a number of women had accused Joe Biden of inappropriate touching and kissing. Doing their best to avoid using terms like "sexual assault", the MSM used softball-euphemisms like "women who feel like their space has been invaded". Kamala Harris was asked about the matter prior to becoming Biden's pick for Vice President. Given that you're so fond of quotes, here is part of her response: "I believe them". Afterward, she became his running mate. Soon she will be his partner in the presidency. The right can be accused of some hypocrisy but it is dwarfed in comparison to the opportunistic hypocrisy of the left. So spare me the song and dance about Trump.

MSM has definitely been baised towards Trump but he brought it to himself. I don't think it was unfair in most cases (but not always). If you are gonna argue that Biden deserves the same, then fine. Kamala Harris is indeed a hypocrite. I can't talk about parties but in generals liberals have been more pleasant and rational than the conservatives in my experience.

As for conservative billionaires, who are you referring to, what causes are they donating to and how are they trying to change the world?

My point was this:

"It's important to gain some perspective on Soros' actual power. Soros' net worth is $8.3 billion as of 2019, and $32 have been spent by him on philanthropy previously; totally, $40 billion.[3] Charles and David Koch, two multi-billionaires who regularly donate to conservative causes, could buy and sell Soros' peasant ass two times over due to having a combined net worth of $90 billion.[4] Moreover, in 2001-2012, 92 out of 100 richest U.S. billionaires contributed to a political cause; they have combined wealth of $2200 fucking billion, and they mostly contributed to conservative causes[5]. Why all the fuss about Soros, not about them?"

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/George_Soros

[tchaiku]

Would you also knock Biden if he sniffs your close relative?

I would.

[Soldier of Macedon]

“They are not our friend, believe me,” he said, before disparaging Mexican immigrants: “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Great, now you've graduated from false quotes to half quotes. Here's an original idea for you, rather than doing a copy and paste after a quick google search, why don't you actually listen to the speech? You may hear him say "when Mexico sends it's people, they're not sending their best" and "it's coming from more than Mexico, it's coming from all over south and Latin America and it's coming probably from the Middle East. But we don't know because we have no protection." Then you might start grasping the fact that he was actually disparaging the actions of Mexico as a country (i.e., their government) for it's weak border security, which enabled people to illegally cross into the U.S with relative ease and along with the good, there are of course nefarious types that would be taking advantage of that predicament. He didn't refer to Mexican immigrants. He was referring to illegal immigrants, be they from Mexico or elsewhere, who use Mexico as a transit point to illegally enter to the U.S. Despite his somewhat poorly worded and impromptu statement, his main point was completely valid, every country should properly police their borders.

I don't know fully about his history with Hillary Clinton. (even though his comment was uncalled for) But Megyn Kelly in an easy one, since their interactions were more limited. While she did make him a provocative question (which was caused by Trump's behavior itself).

You don't know how he was insulted, but it's still his fault. He was provoked, but he deserved it. TDS much? You've no criticism for Clinton who habitually referred to him as a (fill the blank)-ist or for Kelly who tried to railroad his candidacy with her stupid question about his public feuds with stupid celebrities. It's all Trump's fault. He should've just sat there and took the abuse. But he didn't. And he became president.

MSM has definitely been baised towards Trump but he brought it to himself.

Like I said above, it's all Trump's fault. It couldn't have anything to do with 99% of MSM personalities and virtual-signaling hypocrites looking like fools for claiming that he would lose in a landslide then having to eat their own words for 4 years whilst mocking him and peddling conspiracy theories about Russians, Macedonians, Ukrainians, the diet cokes and big macs he consumed or how he holds a bottle of water - all actual stories told by the MSM, by the way.

My point was this:

Don't give me wiki links. Give me specifics. What conservative causes? Are they socially conservative, economically conservative, or both? Do you think that conservatism should be equated with the ethos of the establishment element within the Republic Party in all cases? Do you know that the Koch brothers actively worked against Trump on a number of issues?

Why all the fuss about Soros, not about them?

Both of them have power and influence disproportionate to most others on this planet. If they choose to use it to support causes that align with their worldview, then that is their choice. When that power and influence begins to determine political outcomes, then it is a problem. Soros has done this in several countries, including Macedonia.

[tchaiku]

Great, now you've graduated from false quotes to half quotes. Here's an original idea for you, rather than doing a copy and paste after a quick google search, why don't you actually listen to the speech? You may hear him say "when Mexico sends it's people, they're not sending their best" and "it's coming from more than Mexico, it's coming from all over south and Latin America and it's coming probably from the Middle East. But we don't know because we have no protection." Then you might start grasping the fact that he was actually disparaging the actions of Mexico as a country (i.e., their government) for it's weak border security, which enabled people to illegally cross into the U.S with relative ease and along with the good, there are of course nefarious types that would be taking advantage of that predicament. He didn't refer to Mexican immigrants. He was referring to illegal immigrants, be they from Mexico or elsewhere, who use Mexico as a transit point to illegally enter to the U.S. Despite his somewhat poorly worded and impromptu statement, his main point was completely valid, every country should properly police their borders.

I thought that was already clear (that he was talking about illegals) for both of us?
I don't think equating most illegal migrants as drug dealers and rapists, is morally OK. Illegal migrantion is illegal by definition, therefore wrong (exculding the circumstances in an ideal world). But wrong doings have their own weight. Rape and illegal migration are not the same thing.

I, personally, am neutral about the wall. And yes it is his poor wording the issue; I would not mind: "Illegal migration has increased crime" or "Illegal migration has harmed the country" instead of "they're rapists".

I don't think any of us, two, consider him incapable to express his opinions into what it actually means. Sure people do mistake. But does he regret those words? Not likely. (And besides I find most public apologies to be fake anyway but that's just me.)

I once had the same discussion with an American of Southern Italian ancestry. He "corrected" me that he was talking about illegal migrants; I asked him what if a northern Italian said that for illegal southern Italians (I know they are in the same country that is not the point) how would you feel?

He did not respond me.

You don't know how he was insulted, but it's still his fault. He was provoked, but he deserved it. TDS much? You've no criticism for Clinton who habitually referred to him as a (fill the blank)-ist or for Kelly who tried to railroad his candidacy with her stupid question about his public feuds with stupid celebrities. It's all Trump's fault. He should've just sat there and took the abuse. But he didn't. And he became president.

Megyn Kelly did not shoot him with a gun. Her provocative question was:
“You've called women you don't like fat pigs, dogs, slobs and disgusting animals,”
"Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women’s looks. You once told a contestant on the Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president? And how do you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton – that you are part of the war on women?"

Which part was so unfair? Don't journalists in general act this way?
And would you oppose those words from Megyn Kelly in this case if instead of Trump it was a liberal Democrat?

Like I said above, it's all Trump's fault. It couldn't have anything to do with 99% of MSM personalities and virtual-signaling hypocrites looking like fools for claiming that he would lose in a landslide then having to eat their own words for 4 years whilst mocking him and peddling conspiracy theories about Russians, Macedonians, Ukrainians, the diet cokes and big macs he consumed or how he holds a bottle of water - all actual stories told by the MSM, by the way.

Besides the Russian one, I haven't really heard of the others. And about the conspiracy theories again what matters is if many people in general believe in them.

I don't really want the Russian-link to be true, TBH, but he really is little soft when it comes to Russia. Has very rarely addresses that part even though he's well known for speaking his mind. (I can be wrong.)

What about Obama conspiracy theories? And also many right wing conspiracy theories have caused more violence compared to the left wing ones.

Before 2020, ANTIFA has not really killed anyone (unless that article I read was lying), but there were are anti-Jewish/Marxist nonsense conspiracy theories which have end up in hate crimes especially towards the Jews, including death.

--
As for Conservative causes, I don't know exactly in what they contributed but what I do know is that I rarely hear (actually never heard but to be more precise) any liberal play the victim because of it or grow boogeyman fantasies as the Alt-Right does with "Globalists".

[Carlin]

FBI Warns of Plans for Nationwide Armed Protests Next Week

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-01-11/fbi-warns-of-plans-for-nationwide-armed-protests-next-week?context=amp

WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI is warning of plans for armed protests at all 50 state capitals and in Washington, D.C., in the days leading up to President-elect Joe Biden's inauguration, stoking fears of more bloodshed after last week's deadly siege at the U.S. Capitol.

An internal FBI bulletin warned, as of Sunday, that the nationwide protests may start later this week and extend through Biden’s Jan. 20 inauguration, according to two law enforcement officials who read details of the memo to The Associated Press. Investigators believe some of the people are members of extremist groups, the officials said. The bulletin was first reported by ABC.

“Armed protests are being planned at all 50 state capitols from 16 January through at least 20 January, and at the U.S. Capitol from 17 January through 20 January,” the bulletin said, according to one official. The officials were not authorized to speak publicly and spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity.

[Risto the Great]

It was a memo, then a bulletin and they spoke to AP on condition of anonymity.
I am not sure "nothing to see here" could ever have been put more succinctly.

[Soldier of Macedon]

I thought that was already clear (that he was talking about illegals) for both of us?

You wrote "Mexican migrants". The quote you cited mentioned "Mexican immigrants". It either wasn't clear to you or you were deliberately trying to blur the line between illegal and legal immigrants. The difference isn't subtle. Be specific if you want to be taken seriously.

I don't think equating most illegal migrants as drug dealers and rapists, is morally OK.

No sane person would, although nobody is in a position to determine the percentage of bad guys among the illegal immigrants that have crossed the border, for obvious reasons.

I him what a northern Italian said that for illegal southern Italians (I know they are in the same country that is not the point) how would you feel?

This topic isn't about feelings. The tension between northern Italians and southern Italians is irrelevant. They're in the same country so even if one group refers to the other as illegal, by law, they aren't. And there is a difference between the way they view each other and the way they view the thousands of illegal immigrants that are currently in Italy.

Megyn Kelly did not shoot him with a gun.

She wasn't interested in his answer or what led to his clash of words with others. Her idea of professional research that day was limited to a google search on the ride in. She joined the panel, exhibited a bit of faux feminism and gotcha journalism, then the crowd cheered for Trump anyway. Great job. And I don't oppose her asking those questions of any politician, but that's the point, she didn't ask the other candidates similar questions, be they on the left or right. As for the rest, the manner in which you formulate some of your posts is somewhat typical of the intellectual laziness of the modern left. You don't do any real research or critical thinking so you're ignorant of the faults on the left and have only a superficial understand of the problems on the right. So I will keep it succinct. Most conspiracy theories are stupid. Some conspiracy theories turn out to be factual. I don't have time to go through all of them with you, but perhaps you can make like Megyn Kelly and do a google search. It wasn't right-wing groups that spent much of 2020 burning and looting American cities. Your view on ANTIFA is a bit misguided. Depending on your definition of Globalism, there may be some positives but they are outweighed by the negatives (at least these days and the way things are looking).

[Soldier of Macedon]

Indirectly related to U.S. politics, here is a short clip from Tucker which outlines yet another example of hypocrisy and the lack of self-awareness, this time from big tech and their involvement in the Ugandan elections.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71MykifaVSU

More information on this development below.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/...-for-elections

Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has said his government shut down social media two days before the country heads to the polls, accusing Facebook and unnamed outside groups of “arrogance” after the social media giant this week removed Ugandan accounts linked to his re-election campaign. “That social channel you are talking about, if it is going to operate in Uganda, it should be used equitably by everybody who wants to use it,” Museveni said of Facebook in a national address on Tuesday. “If you want to take sides against the [ruling party], then that group will not operate in Uganda.”

[Risto the Great]

The Ugandan president has a whole lot more sense than those in USA. A perfect chess move there if you ask me.

[JPMKD]

Really hoping cooler heads prevail here and that those organizing political violence are thwarted.
Too much keyboard warrioring taken seriously. The US fighting internally only benefits their global rivals.