Vae on 17/10/2020 at 01:03
Quote Posted by Renzatic
Another coup? We had one before?
Quote Posted by Vae
:laff:...I know what you mean. That's a hilarious collection of oppositional media propaganda....The good thing is, the joke will be on any susceptible fool who believes that Trump has colluded with Russia, and will be impeached for it.
The Trump administration decided to launch an independent investigation, lead by Robert Mueller,
who is not a prosecutor that is building a criminal case against Trump or any other person.
The goal of the investigation is to determine the actions and intentions of a foreign power, to the extent that it bears on the national interest of the United States.Again,
this is an information-gathering investigation, not a criminal investigation. Robert Mueller will be informing President Trump and other policy-makers as to what other foreign powers have been up to concerning the national interest of the United States.
The Trump administration assigning Robert Mueller as an independent, non-criminal intelligence-gathering investigator,
is a counter-measure to the to the
soft coup that is being attempted against the President of the United States. Once the independent investigation is concluded, and finds that there is in fact no collusion between Russia and Trump, the false narrative and political coup attempt will shatter into a thousand pieces, because the oppositional forces will not be able to discredit the conclusion of an independent investigation, like they would have, had it been a non-independent investigation.
Quote Posted by Renzatic
I love the subtly of this oh so very slightly implied threat.
I am simply observing the reality of the current circumstances. Any "implied threat" is only the product of your imagination.
Quote:
Anyway, $5 says he never replies to this. He doesn't want to risk fraternizing with the enemy.
You now owe me five U.S. dollars. However, you can keep it...as you will likely need it more than me.
Renzatic on 17/10/2020 at 01:06
Define coup for me please, Vae.
Quote Posted by Vae
I am simply observing the reality of the current circumstances. Any "implied threat" is only the product of your imagination.
I don't know what's more insulting, your passive-aggressiveness, or the fact you think we're stupid enough to fall for your transparent bullshit.
Renzatic on 17/10/2020 at 01:27
And par for the course, he bails. Vae rarely ever sticks around long enough to debate his positions in detail. He merely presents the facade of an informed opinion, yet rarely ever risks having it challenged.
Vae on 17/10/2020 at 02:21
Quote Posted by Renzatic
Define coup for me please, Vae.
A coup d’etat is defined as, “a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics, especially the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group”.
The existing government of the United States was attempted to be overthrown by a small group from within the state. There was never any collusion between Trump and Russia, and these officials likely knew that all along. That their coup attempt failed makes it no less of an attempt.
Although this was not a traditional third-world coup which is characterized by military forces sweeping into the halls of power to swiftly arrest the former leader, it was, in effect, a
soft coup. To put it plainly, if elements of state security services pushed to oust a leader in any other country, we would readily define that as a coup.
Quote:
I don't know what's more insulting, your passive-aggressiveness, or the fact you think we're stupid enough to fall for your transparent bullshit.
Ironically, you are the one that has instigated passive-aggressive insults...and it would behoove you to be more constructive.
Quote Posted by Renzatic
And par for the course, he bails. Vae rarely ever sticks around long enough to debate his positions in detail. He merely presents the facade of an informed opinion, yet rarely ever risks having it challenged.
Your false premise (time of response), has produced an erroneous conclusion, based on your own prejudice. You still haven't learned that an ad hominem attack only makes you look weak, and does nothing to further the conversation.
Renzatic on 17/10/2020 at 02:51
Quote Posted by Vae
A coup d'etat is defined as, “a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics, especially the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group”.
The existing government of the United States was attempted to be overthrown by a small group from within the state. There was never any collusion between Trump and Russia, and these officials likely knew that all along. That their coup attempt failed makes it no less of an attempt.
Although this was not a traditional third-world coup which is characterized by military forces sweeping into the halls of power to swiftly arrest the former leader, it was, in effect, a
soft coup. To put it plainly, if elements of state security services pushed to oust a leader in any other country, we would readily define that as a coup.
Okay, now explain to me how Trump's impeachment would've represented a true usurpation of the government in the real world. Maybe I'm missing out on some key fact here, but I've been laboring under the impression that if those dastardly leftist democrats were successful in their endeavors, Pence would have become president, and the republicans would still control the senate. There would have been no shift in power benefiting those pushing for impeachment, no real change in the structuring of the government beyond removing Trump from office. Things would be roughly the same as they are now.
The only thing I can think of that would have benefited the democrats here would be that it would push Pelosi one step closer to the presidency, but that's assuming that Pence isn't allowed to fill the space between him and the speaker of the House with a vice president of his own choosing in the meanwhile.
...so how was the Russian collusion investigation in any way an attempted coup, even a "soft" coup, especially when you consider that for it have any chance at success, it'd require roughly half of the republicans in the senate to go along with it?
The absolute worst you could say about it is that it was an attempt by the democrats to use the investigative powers of the House for nothing more than a cheap political stunt, but hell, this is hardly the first time that's happened, and...you know, it doesn't sound nearly so dramatic as a
coup.
Some of us are playing pretend revolutionaries these days. Gotta use the scary dramatic words.
Quote:
Your false premise (time of response), has produced an erroneous conclusion, based on your own prejudice. You still haven't learned that an ad hominem attack only makes you look weak, and does nothing to further the conversation.
That's not an ad hominem attack, fuckwit.
Starker on 17/10/2020 at 03:16
Obligatory ad hominem reading: (
https://laurencetennant.com/bonds/adhominem.html)
Anyways, looks like Project Lincoln is branching into music videos now:
[video=youtube;h0xSJQDRH2Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0xSJQDRH2Q[/video]
june gloom on 17/10/2020 at 05:40
Quote Posted by SubJeff
"Patriarchal" is not a totally unfair assessment, I'll give you that. I'm just a bit of a lefty authoritarian and the lefty liberals find that hard to swallow.
You're about as left-leaning as Hitler's right nut. This isn't even an attack on you, I'm just saying you should just be honest about what you are.
SubJeff on 17/10/2020 at 06:04
I dunno man. I've only ever voted Labour or Lib Dem, both parties that are further left than the US Democrats could dream of, and I've taken the Political Compass test several times over the years and always score about the same as the modelling of Gandhi. I'm also pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-affirmative action, pro-women's rights and equality, pro-equal pay, pro-welfare, pro-state funded healthcare, anti-nationalist, anti-facist... I could go on. I don't know how I'm perceived by anyone as being right wing. I think extreme liberals like you find my authoritarianism hard to swallow is all. Despite everything else I think society should still run on a set of rules, and if you break them you should be punished. But the rules would be fairly chill. I'm pro-legalisation, for example, but until it it happens stick to the damn rules.
june gloom on 17/10/2020 at 06:34
"Extreme liberal" is an oxymoron. Liberals are centrists. Yes, even the ones in the UK.
Anyway, I'm no liberal, though I'll grant I might be considered "extreme" by your standards: you're center-right at best and you've never been anything but. You pay lip service to equality but then you turn around and spew some TERF nonsense and argue in earnest that bad-faith actors deserve a platform. You're not even a tankie, tankies sometimes make the occasional valid point amidst all the trying to rehabilitate the image of dictators.
Also imagine caping for legalism like that, unironically.
[ETA] Also Gandhi forced his grandnieces to sleep in the nude with him, mate. You might wanna pick a better role model to claim to be similar to.
rachel on 17/10/2020 at 08:50
I think you might have a different meaning of liberal he does.
I've always taken the word to mean Left in English and SubjEff's post makes sense to me.
(Fun fact: In French to be "libéral" is conservative.)
