Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by MueR

  1. My reply, yes.. about 6 hours ago
  2. Unfortunately I'm unable to investigate tonight. Will have a look tomorrow.
  3. Quick note, it might take a bit of time before it works for you.. please give it an hour or two.
  4. Apparently there was a problem with email confirmations (thanks for reporting it Doro). Fixed now.
  5. No, by not locking up people in massively overcrowded cells is how you are a decent human being. Or by not locking up underage kids or even babies in cages without proper healthcare is how you are a decent human being. Or by not constantly inciting hate. Or by making not constantly rubbing shoulders with billionaires while shafting the workers you supposedly care about at your campaign rallies. George W Bush was a horrible president, but he at least had a good amount of decency and moral fiber. Trump has none.
  6. I think Doro is referring to the fact that while many people over the past decade have seen their unemployment finally end (after the great recession), they're not seeing much if any improvement in their financial situation. The majority of the wealth keeps shifting towards the already wealthy. The overwhelming majority (>90%) of the wealth in the US is in the hands of the top ~10% income levels, with over 40% in the hands of the "1%" and with the GOP tax cuts of 2017 the balance shifts even more towards them, leaving a massive deficit Or to put it visually:
  7. Well.. this migration was a little ad hoc, true, but of slightly smaller scale.. they can hire me though
  8. Okay, we're back. The migration/upgrade process went much faster than expected. Unfortunately, during the upgrade process 2 posts were lost. One in this topic, one in the US elections topic. Sorry about the inconvenience.
  9. Soo.. time to kick this back up. Tomorrow evening will be the day. I expect to shut the forum down temporarily at 22.30 GMT. Expected downtime is anywhere between 15 and 45 minutes.
  10. Having seen Trump giving live commentary on the impeachment trials and actually confessing to obstruction of congress at a press conference in Davos while the opening statements were made in his trial.. I sincerely doubt he knows what if any game he is playing. Or if he even knows what he did 2 hours ago. On the subject of deferrals, yes the president has the legal right to request a referral, but (s)he must do so via a request through Congress. This was not the case. The GAO has ruled so.
  11. You're basically saying fuck people who have a debilitating or chronic illness, I don't care, just don't make me pay a dime to help others. Let charities do it. Newsflash: charities work by donations by people who can miss the money. Another newsflash: it's usually those who can miss only a few bucks that do. I think I'm not even going to respond to you any more. You are a selfish, heartless, egoistic person. Sincerely, fuck you.
  12. Right. Now also watch the Democratic counsel's questioning. But yes really, Trump illegally held funds approved by Congress. Whatever the reason might have been, it was an illegal hold. He does not have that power. Not ignoring the investigation into Bursima, which was opened by a previous prosecutor general in the Ukraine. Shokin (the one that was dismissed after pressure from the US, EU and various financial institutions) however let that investigation die off. He was accused by many, both internally in the Ukraine and abroad, of protecting big business interests and the political elite, a theme common in former Soviet countries. That is why he was dismissed. As for Hunter Biden's qualifications to be on the board of a gas company... He's a lawyer, so in terms of expertise in the day to day business of an oil/gas company he has no qualifications. However, that's not what a board of directors is for. They are there to oversee the daily management, the CEO, the CFO, the COO. Look at any big corporation in the world, you'll see lawyers, politicians, former government officials. Yes, they are recruited for status. A former treasury secretary here, a former senator there, a public figure here, someone related to a public figure (or even carrying the same name) there. It's a PR thing. They need to be just smart enough to not dive the company off a cliff, the rest is status. But hey, if you think that there was corruption there, by all means, investigate. Have the Senate or House investigate. Have Ukraine investigate. Whataboutism however is no defense against Trump's actions. Next the Trump team is going to bring up Hillary's emails in the proceedings again even though that has been debunked about 5 times now by various branches of government.. I mean jeesh.. Stick to the facts please. Investigate Hunter Biden and Joe Biden all you want. Call them as witnesses if you want. Just not in the impeachment trial, because that is not, will not ever be, about any of the Bidens. Nepotism is not something that can even remotely be brought up in defense of Trump (and "yeah but look what that other person did" is NEVER a valid legal defense). For pete's sake, he rammed through security clearances for the only woman he ever loved (Ivanka), not to mention Jared, who was blackballed by several security clearances. I mean really, if you want to bring up Hunter Biden's qualifications for being on the board of a company, can we then also discuss a failed real estate heir's qualifications to "fix the Middle East", "reform the criminal justice system", "make a trade deal with China" and let's not forget "build the wall". I mean really... The Israel/Palestine conflict is something that's been dragging on for decades, with people deeply involved and knowledgable have spent decades on trying to broker some form of peace, and you expect Ivanka's toyboy with 0 knowledge of the region, 0 knowledge of foreign policy to actually get a peace agreement? Come on. My personal opinion of Joe Biden: he's a bit of an oaf. A loveable oaf at that. Doesn't strike me as the type that can fix the US, so I hope he doesn't get the Democratic ticket.
  13. Actually, economic studies have shown that the cost of single payer healthcare systems generally are in the negative, meaning a significant cost reduction. Sources: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003013 https://www.healthcare-now.org/single-payer-studies/listing-of-single-payer-studies/ there's about 20 national and 40 state-level studies here, varying from people like Gerald Friedman who is close to the Sanders campaign, to Kenneth Thorpe who leans more towards the right. Some studies focus on specific pieces of legislation, others focus more on the general concept and take some measure of variance for the exact implementation. In general, most studies find that while a single payer healthcare system would increase taxes, it also eliminates premiums and out of pocket expenses. It transfers the burden on higher incomes from the lower incomes, which by most accounts is a good thing. Someone who's struggling with a medical problem should not have to choose between food on the table or clothing for their kids, or paying for medication to keep them alive. Again, yes, it would raise taxes for every household, but with the elimination of premiums it will reduce in a big net gain for those in the most dire need, a low gain or loss (bit of a tossup depending on state) for medium income families and yes, a bump in taxes for those with plenty of money. Boo hoo to the last category. There is a difference between negotiation on equal footing between two countries and negotiation for personal gain. In the case of Trump, his "quo" was "announce a corruption investigation into a political opponent of mine or I'm illegally withholding congress approved funds". In the case of Biden, his "quo" was "The World Bank, the US and many other western countries insist that a corrupt prosecutor is removed from office or we will not offer funding". Again: Biden acted as the US government official, Trump acted as Trump. Difference.
  14. 1: Call me retarded once more, I dare you. I've warned you before. I'm trying to discuss this without resorting to namecalling, I do not take kindly to it. 2: I'm not in denial of anything. The reality is that Trump was impeached on two counts: obstruction of congress and abuse of power. There is ample evidence of the first, from his own mouth and certainly from his twitter thumbs. There is ample evidence of the second, though that evidence is more circumstantial. The testimony of witnesses can either destroy that charge or support it, so let's have those witnesses.
  15. You know even hearsay evidence is admissible? Funny thing is though, the initial hearsay is corroberated by the transcripts.
  16. This. Precisely this. Trump is setting a very dangerous precedent, aided and abetted by Mitch McConnell and the rest of the GOP. The nepotism, corruption and self-dealing in the Trump admin is so rampant and egregious that it should be stopped, he should be held accountable and he should be removed from office. Same for McConnell, as he violates his oath of office as well with his antics. But I'm sure the GOP will not mind while there's a Republican in office. Wait until a Democrat does anything remotely like Trump... they will lose their collective shit so hard that the Voyager will pick up the screaming. I'm also getting tired of the "the dems want to overturn the election results" bla bla bla that Fox and the others in Trump's Koolaid Crew are peddling... They do realise that if Trump is convicted and removed from office, that just means that Pence will assume the presidency. Now whether that's good is a whole other discussion, but it's still a Republican presidency.
  17. No. He's an old white man who claims to be rich, yet somehow can't afford to pay his bills.
  18. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/project-veritas/ Just saying..
  19. Right.. Obviously you don't know, since you're railing against the "illegal inquiry of the democrats". Okay, what I read matters greatly. I'll take that argument. Media bias is a thing. That's why there's sites like https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/. They objectively judge sources on left/right leaning, science or pseudoscience. So, when you disqualify my opinion because I'm European, it matters, but when I state that what the US does impacts the EU, you disqualify it? The EU is one of the biggest trade partners of the US. Get a fucking grip. Wake up call. China is taking over cheap labour. No amount of chest pounding Trump does will change that. Chinese workers accept much lower wages than we do, both in the US and in the EU where minimum wages are far higher. It's basic economics and you're guilty of it too. If you can buy product X for $19.99 in the US, or for $2.99 in China, you'll buy it from China. Trump's tariffs only mean it's more expensive for you to buy things manufactured with products from China (or any other country he hasn't slapped tariffs on). You do know tariffs are a tax on the consumer, not the producer right? Every president before Trump has been careful to keep long standing allies as allies. While not every president has been equally kind to trade partners and countries, they haven't just shunned all of them. Trump seems to only favour those countries that have dictators or strongmen leading them, like Russia, North Korea, Saudi-Arabia or China. The last only in private though, because the Trump family seems to get an aweful lot of trademarks pushed through.. Actually, the only thing that benefits China is exactly what Trump is doing. Making imports from western allies even more expensive with his silly tariffs. It makes for even higher cost disparities between European and Chinese products, leading to even more business going to China (and even more businesses in the US going out of business). Their abhorrent human rights policy has absolutely zero to do with the economics, that's just deflecting. Yes I suppose you would call it that, because I disagree strongly with your views. Your "MAGA!!!!!111oneone" ideas are just plain fucking stupid. Maybe move back to the bayou, live on a boat and stop pretending you can participate in intelligent discussion?
  20. I'll be migrating the website between Christmas and New Year's. A more exact date will follow.
  21. MueR


    Well, yes, but I thought I would leave out the insanely crazy for just the mildly "whatever the actual fuck are you talking about?".
  22. MueR


    The EU does not want a Brexit. Britain doesn't want a Brexit (unless you count the gullible idiots who fell for Boris' lies).
  23. Well, let me give you a quick course in civics and the workings of an impeachment proceeding. Yes, a European is giving you a course on civics. I've read up on it. The various committees in the House can investigate the president for whatever the hell they want. As you might remember, Republicans had plenty of investigations going on against Obama all the time. It's up to the Committee chair to start an investigation. Any evidence they gather, be it from documents or hearings, public or private, is to be sent to the House Judiciary Committee, as they are the only one that can bring impeachment votes to the floor. If the House Judiciary Committee finds that the evidence gathered is insufficient to consider articles of impeachment, that's the end of that. For reference, see the multiple Benghazi, Iran, US native and what not investigations the GOP launched against Obama. If they don't find sufficient evidence, Trump remains in office. However, if the HJC finds that the evidence is sufficient to support a full House vote, they send it to the floor. The full House will get to vote on whether or not to adopt one or more articles of impeachment. If that passes, Trump is officially impeached. Still in office, but impeached. The ball then gets passed to the Senate, as they are the courtroom for an impeachment trial, presided over by the Chief Justice. All evidence is brought before the Senate, witnesses get cross-examined, the whole deal you'll find on any trial. The Senate is the jury in this case, and they will vote on the outcome, guilty or not. A supermajority (2/3rd) must vote guilty if Trump is to be removed from office. If less than a supermajority votes to remove Trump from office, he's still impeached, but will remain in office until the end of his term (or second, should he win reelection). With the current Republican control of the Senate, that's unlikely unless some of them can actually grow a spine and objectively look at the evidence. This shouldn't be a party-line vote. This is a far more serious accusation than Bill Clintons, who only lied about getting a blowjob in the Oval. Based on the evidence (documents, quotes by Trump and his staff, testimony released so far), this is what the US Constitution defines as a high crime. This should be carefully weighed by each and every single Senator. This is not the Democrats impeaching Trump because he's a Republican, this is the House impeaching Trump because he comitted treason. It deserves their full attention. I can read. I read up on US politics pretty much daily. The fact that most Americans are only interested in their own country does not mean everyone else in the world is. I'm seriously interested in what happens in the US, because it has a direct impact on the EU. The current unstable buffoonery that Trump is calling "governing" is causing a very unstable world economy. His tariffs are seriously impacting industries both in the US and abroad, in a very negative way. His haphazard foreign policy makes the US a very unstable ally. That's dangerous and only benefits Russia and China. You should be happy that non US citizens are interested in your politics.
  24. There's no cloak and dagger. This is the process as per the rules that the GOP dictated in 2015. Similar to grand jury hearings, they're not open to the public. The public mind you, the GOP reps from certain committees can attend, ask questions and what not. They get as much time as any Democrat on the committee. They just lack any reasonable defense for Trump's obvious criminal actions and resort to publicity stunts such as "storming the hearing", which in itself is a criminal offense.
  25. Actually 12 (or 13, not sure) of them are actually on committees that would have allowed them to be there. Matt Gaetz certainly is. It's just a publicity stunt. One by which they violated security protocols and possibly are criminally liable. El Caudillo del Mar a Lago is becoming more unhinged by the day...
  • Create New...