He made another thread with the same title as mine + REEEEEE , it could've been deleted from that one if he copied a post from my thread and responded to it in his.
To be fair that is entirely plausible, I wasn't aware of his REEEE thread (and no one would based on the evidence he provided). Since I didn't delete the post I don't know which thread it was in and in reality everything after that is entirely moot. Even posts deleted from self moderated threads by the op don't say. "A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator." in the message. Are you accusing me of manufacturing the quotes now? I think he just overlooked the possibility that you were responding to my post in a thread I didn't post in. Are you accusing him of lying about deleting your post? Seems unlikely to me, but this isn't the first time he has explicitly told you that he didn't delete a post from your "FLYING HELLFISH - SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT AND CENSORSHIP" thread, and you seem to just not care. If you think he's lying, call him out on it and maybe we can get to the bottom of it. If you don't think he's lying, then remove the posts he says he didn't delete. Or do nothing if you don't care if your accusations against FH are accurate or not.
|
|
|
Oh, one more thing. Is it clear that linking to news articles is NOT a bad thing, and that criticizing them as not being scientific journals is not a valid criticism? It's simple enough to ask for scientific references. But there's absolutely nothing wrong with the linking to popular media references.
Linking a tabloid article with a sensationalized headline to defend your hypothesis on what the greatest risk to the planet is... kind of silly imo.
|
|
|
Funny, usually when people delete posts in a self moderated thread it doesn't say "A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator."
Funny how that still doesn't mean I did it you stupid fucking cunt. Feel free to poll all the other mods or theymos to find out who did it. Feel free to shove a cactus up your ass. But for someone who thrives on proof you have zero of it that proves I did it. I'm done responding to your ridiculousness. Even if you didn't do it, it still very clearly wasn't a self moderated thread. I don't know why you feel the need to make stuff up that is clearly untrue. Jesus your are fucking stupid. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5201316.msg53780581#msg53780581That is the post from your locked fucking thread. It clearly links to a self mod'd thread. I don't know why you feel the need to make stuff up that is clearly is proven by your own evidence. He made another thread with the same title as mine + REEEEEE , it could've been deleted from that one if he copied a post from my thread and responded to it in his. Of course that doesn't mean it was you who deleted it. TECSHARE, for someone who thinks speculating or assuming anything is wrong, maybe it's time to stop with all the speculation and assumptions about which moderator decided your post violated a forum rule or is out to get you.
|
|
|
I sort of agree with that, sincere to SELF. But this is rather meaningless. Hillary Clinton was "Sincere." NK's Rocket Man is "Sincere." Etc. This is a guy that claimed in his 2017 speech that "Trump was a con man." Then he and Trump reconciled. He has an angry, bitter demeanor that hints he thinks he's the one that should have been given the POTUS job. But nobody cares. Nobody. If you believe he was being genuine, then he was putting his Oath and his faith over his loyalty to the republican party. Romney's done. He's got a couple years left in the Senate, and Utah will not vote him back in. Utah is highly conservative, and these actions were a direct insult to many people there. In the Senate, Romney only chairs the Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism. That is so minor I wonder if they'll even bother to strip it from him. He'll have no important duties or responsibilities. None.
I'm not sure where you're getting all this. Voting to convict Trump didn't go against any conservative values, and assuming he doesn't resign or die, he'll be a US Senator until at least 2025 (which would also be the end of Trumps second term), which is a pretty important duty imo. Thanks for your stand up defense of the guy. Of course, you've misinterpreted what I said. I said he was true to SELF. Then to determine if he did good, you have to look into what SELF is. Also, for info on Romney, I'll rely on my Mormon friends. Meanwhile, Pelosi really looks bad today, sort of incoherent rambling. What do you think? Her long, heroic struggle is wearing her down? I wouldn't be surprised if she resigns after the mess she's created. And I hear Burisma's hiring. You said he was genuine to himself, sincere to himself, and true to self. I'm not arguing whether or not his vote was 'good' or 'bad', just saying that I believe the explanation he gave for why he voted guilty was sincere, unlike most of the attacks coming his way now.
|
|
|
.... Your sources are not researchers. Your sources are news articles. What are you even doing with your life? ....
What I chose to present to you may not be my sources. News articles are fine. But certainly, scientific sources must be available. My life is fine. How is yours going now that your Serious Discussion has came to an end? You're misquoting me. I didn't say that, I do my best to avoid making personal attacks even when I am personally attacked. Really? So you think a Carrington event would be some minor, unimportant thing? No. I didn't say that.
|
|
|
I would also like to thank FH for his non-biased moderation and the difficult job he must have to not take sides.
|
|
|
I sort of agree with that, sincere to SELF. But this is rather meaningless. Hillary Clinton was "Sincere." NK's Rocket Man is "Sincere." Etc. This is a guy that claimed in his 2017 speech that "Trump was a con man." Then he and Trump reconciled. He has an angry, bitter demeanor that hints he thinks he's the one that should have been given the POTUS job. But nobody cares. Nobody. If you believe he was being genuine, then he was putting his Oath and his faith over his loyalty to the republican party. Romney's done. He's got a couple years left in the Senate, and Utah will not vote him back in. Utah is highly conservative, and these actions were a direct insult to many people there. In the Senate, Romney only chairs the Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia and Counterterrorism. That is so minor I wonder if they'll even bother to strip it from him. He'll have no important duties or responsibilities. None.
I'm not sure where you're getting all this. Voting to convict Trump didn't go against any conservative values, and assuming he doesn't resign or die, he'll be a US Senator until at least 2025 (which would also be the end of Trumps second term), which is a pretty important duty imo.
|
|
|
Genuine to himself.
Exactly. A higher loyalty. I am not sure about this. Romney has floped on a fairly high number of issues over the years. I would also point out that Romney tried to get a job in the Trump administration, and accepted Trump's endorsement for his Senate campaign. Romney's vote to convict did not do anything except harm the country, and harm Trump. It probably also ended his political career, at least as a Republican. I would say the same thing about Romney's vote for additional witnesses. The only thing additional witnesses had the potential to do is harm Trump, and if Romney did not have enough information to make a decision, he should not have voted to convict, he should have abstained from voting. I believe that he was being sincere. Obviously we can't prove what's in his heart, but, if he is being sincere, then good for him and shame on the attackers. The Constitution is at the foundation of our Republic’s success, and we each strive not to lose sight of our promise to defend it. The Constitution established the vehicle of impeachment that has occupied both houses of our Congress these many days. We have labored to faithfully execute our responsibilities to it. We have arrived at different judgments, but I hope we respect each other’s good faith.
The allegations made in the articles of impeachment are very serious. As a senator-juror, I swore an oath before God to exercise impartial justice. I am profoundly religious. My faith is at the heart of who I am. I take an oath before God as enormously consequential. I knew from the outset that being tasked with judging the president, the leader of my own party, would be the most difficult decision I have ever faced. I was not wrong.
The House managers presented evidence supporting their case, and the White House counsel disputed that case. In addition, the president’s team presented three defenses, first that there could be no impeachment without a statutory crime, second that the Bidens’ conduct justified the president’s actions, and third, that the judgment of the president’s actions should be left to the voters. Let me first address those three defenses.
The historic meaning of the words “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the writings of the founders and my own reasoned judgment convince me that a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they’re not statutory crimes, they would demand removal from office. To maintain that the lack of a codified and comprehensive list of all the outrageous acts that a president might conceivably commit renders Congress powerless to remove such a president defies reason.
The president’s counsel also notes that Vice President Biden appeared to have a conflict of interest when he undertook an effort to remove the Ukrainian prosecutor general. If he knew of the exorbitant compensation his son was receiving from a company actually under investigation, the vice president should have recused himself. While ignoring a conflict of interest is not a crime, it is surely very wrong. With regards to Hunter Biden, taking excessive advantage of his father’s name is unsavory, but also not a crime. Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the president’s counsel that a crime had been committed, the president’s insistence that they be investigated by the Ukrainians is hard to explain other than as a political pursuit. There’s no question in my mind that were their names not Biden, the president would never have done what he did.
The defense argues that the Senate should leave the impeachment decision to the voters. While that logic is appealing to our democratic instincts, it is inconsistent with the Constitution’s requirement that the Senate, not the voters, try the president.
Hamilton explained that the founders’ decision to invest senators with this obligation rather than leave it to the voters was intended to minimize, to the extent possible, the partisan sentiments of the public at large. So the verdict is ours to render under our Constitution. The people will judge us for how well and faithfully we fulfill our duty. The grave question the Constitution tasked senators to answer is whether the president committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of a high crime and misdemeanor. Yes, he did.
The president asked a foreign government to investigate his political rival. The president withheld vital military funds from that government to press it to do so. The president delayed funds for an American ally at war with Russian invaders. The president’s purpose was personal and political. Accordingly, the president is guilty of an appalling abuse of public trust.
What he did was not perfect. No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security and our fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one’s oath of office that I can imagine.
In the last several weeks, I’ve received numerous calls and texts. Many demanded, in their words, that I “stand with the team.” I can assure you that that thought has been very much on my mind: You see, I support a great deal of what the president has done. I voted with him 80 percent of the time.
But my promise before God to apply impartial justice required that I put my personal feelings and political biases aside. Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me for the sake of a partisan end, it would, I fear, expose my character to history’s rebuke and the censure of my own conscience.
I’m aware that there are people in my party and in my state who will strenuously disapprove of my decision, and in some quarters I will be vehemently denounced. I’m sure to hear abuse from the president and his supporters. Does anyone seriously believe that I would consent to these consequences other than from an inescapable conviction that my oath before God demanded it of me?
I sought to hear testimony from John Bolton, not only because I believed he could add context to the charges, but also because I hoped that what he might say could raise reasonable doubt and thus remove from me the awful obligation to vote for impeachment.
Like each member of this deliberative body, I love our country. I believe that our Constitution was inspired by Providence. I’m convinced that freedom itself is dependent on the strength and vitality of our national character. As it is with each senator, my vote is an act of conviction. We’ve come to different conclusions fellow senators, but I trust we have all followed the dictates of our conscience.
I acknowledge that my verdict will not remove the president from office. The results of this Senate court will, in fact, be appealed to a higher court, the judgment of the American people. Voters will make the final decision, just as the president’s lawyers have implored. My vote will likely be in the minority in the Senate, but irrespective of these things, with my vote, I will tell my children and their children that I did my duty to the best of my ability believing that my country expected it of me.
I will only be one name among many, no more, no less, to future generations of Americans who look at the record of this trial. They will note merely that I was among the senators who determined that what the president did was wrong, grievously wrong. We are all footnotes at best in the annals of history, but in the most powerful nation on Earth, the nation conceived in liberty and justice, that distinction is enough for any citizen.
Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
|
|
|
I suggest you sign a message before TMAN gets angry. It looks like you're a scammer that's stalling for time to scam some more at this point.
|
|
|
Pretty entertaining video of him poorly editing some text to make it look like the script knows the next bust and pretending to have a clue about programming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQY5ULrDjdULooks like he even screwed up a the numbers a couple times lol. ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.gyazo.com%2Fe87a0b226ad41b7c588fe58ced6f5f45.png&t=665&c=Iw1E8NHFFxEYsA) ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.gyazo.com%2F677f9363e5d6b1e083e9d5b5aed81d73.png&t=665&c=AILPjdUBrypzTA)
|
|
|
Romney was MA Governer from 2003-2006. Cofer Black worked on his 2008 and 2012 Presidential campaigns (he won the nominee once, the other was just primaries). Cofer Joined Burisma in 2017, 5 years after Romneys most recent failed election and 11 years after he last held office. Romney won Senate Seat in 2019. I think the most likely scenario is Burisma was looking to expand internationally quickly in 2017 and they hired a bunch of people to help with the projects outside of Ukraine. (Biden, a lawyer managing an international equity firm coming from the board of multi billion dollar company, Cofer was at the top of the CIA for years with lots of over seas private sector work). https://www.huffpost.com/entry/former-cia-director-joins-burisma-and-it-is-good-news_b_58adf600e4b01f4ab51c75a4
|
|
|
The Bitcoin transaction fee is a miner fee? What is the difference between node and miner? A node verifies transactions on the blockchain. A miner solves (creates) blocks, which are then verified by nodes. You should ask any more questions like this here: Beginners & Help.
|
|
|
That doesn't seem to bother the conservatives anymore, just like the trillion-dollar budget deficits and other things they used to be vehemently opposed to.
Trump said he's collecting the tariffs from China, not Americans. So that's what's happening.
|
|
|
OK, if you are serious and it is over, lock this thread.
Otherwise, continue to threaten to end it. I don't care.
I don't make threads Vod, you make threats. Like this threat you made to me in the Nullius trust abuse thread to try to stop me from having the discussion about the abusive trust ratings you made in the past as well as the one made by Nullius. It is very clear you are using the threat of using frivolous negative trust ratings to attempt to extort me into silence. Are you really going to hold that list of people responsible for committing extortion? I don't think you should. There is no extortion, so that would backfire real quick and you'd end up with a few more negs and sitting in a mental institution.
|
|
|
~
Import tariffs - socialism or capitalism? Ummm. That makes my head hurt. Both? Americans are paying the tax, and the money is going to fund Socialist programs. But it's a mostly free market(sanctions) that promotes competition on both sides.
|
|
|
I don't care what he is.. I have a problem with him hindering the fight against left extremism, of which he is supposed to be an ally.. (Romney)
If he was really a Christian he wouldn't let his disagreement with Trump distract him from battling the LGBT agenda with the extreme perverted sexualization of everything they can imagine to relate, including sexualizing children with promotion and acceptance of "theybes", non-binary children, using hormone blockers on children, trans surgeries for children, child drag dancing, and generally exposing children to the topics of such filth in general, teaching children that being queer or especially TRANS is normal or acceptable and should be promoted.. Newsflas, Transexualism is not normal and should not be encouraged.. Look at the suicide rates.. You want that for your child? Forcing Christians to make gay wedding cakes.. Forcing Christians to pay for, via their tax dollars, free abortions as plan B for sluts.. Late term abortions up to the day of birth.. On and on..
If he was battling for his "Christian Principles" then Trump would just be a minor annoyance to him compared to his actual enemies of the faith.. (which I don't see him raising much of a fuss about)
He made it pretty clear that he doesn't believe Trump is fighting for any sort of agenda other than gaining more power and staying in office. and the conservative stances he's taken aren't because of his moral compass, they're because they are the most convenient at that moment. There's no reason to believe Trump wouldn't change them at any moment if he believed it would give him a better shot at staying in power, whether it be foreign policy, social, or economic issues. Example: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.gyazo.com%2F3735cb157c90154905363bebfa341a08.png&t=665&c=PCbz-TVSR8YiKQ) I dont think any of that motivated him to vote guilty though, I think he did it because he believed Trump did what he was accused of, he would do it again without with potentially much more at risk national security wise, and he took an oath to cast his vote without partisan motives.
|
|
|
Socialism without Capitalism, or Capitalism without Socialism are equally extreme.
The 'Socialist Democrats' just want to pull the country a little bit closer to Socialism on the Socialist ---- Capitalist spectrum. And the 'Capitalist Republicans' want to do the opposite. Neither side actually wants to eliminate all Socialism or Capitalism.
I would contend that a system very close to pure capitalism is MUCH less "extreme" than a system very close to pure socialism.. A capitalist system allows voluntary charity/socialism requiring little to no government intervention via authority.. A more purely socialist system would require great authority using the threat of violence to stop voluntary capitalistic actions.. I would like to eliminate the vast majority of socialism in place in America today, which is enforced by authority at the threat of violence.. The closer you get to pure capitalism, the more likely a single person or family acquires enough wealth/power to rule over the rest, or, at best a few giant companies that control everything with free reign. Think about what the organized crime families from a few decades ago would be able to get away with without all the regulators and other government agencies breathing down their neck.
|
|
|
A guy that started out running a flock of 200 Mormon "missionaries" in France is not exactly what most people who consider themselves Christian and conservative consider as Christian and conservative.
Mormons are Christian. It's common among many different types of Christianity (and religions in general) for the youth to go on a mission to help the less fortunate and spread whatever religion they are. Romney was 100% wrong on Trump in 2016 and 100% wrong on Trump today, except in one respect. Please see op and knock it off with the name calling. Disagree with an opinion, cool. That doesn't make it wrong.
|
|
|
"He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants, he calls for the use of torture. He calls for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters. He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit first amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss."
"But wait, you say, isn't he a huge business success that knows what he's talking about? No he isn't. His bankruptcies have crushed small businesses and the men and women who worked for them. He inherited his business, he didn't create it"
"[...]Donald Trump lacks the temperament to be president. After all, this is an individual who mocked a disabled reporter, who attributed a reporter's questions to her menstrual cycle, who bragged about his marital affairs, and who laces his public speeches with vulgarity."
Disagree on all points, lol. The left uses these immigrants to flood the polls and they are not always net-positive on our economy, democracy, or crime statistics.. Maybe some terrorist leaders should be "tortured" a bit.. Mr. Terrorist if you don't want your family bombed right along with you then don't be a terrorist or get them to safety rather than using them as a shield.. Violent antifa protesters smashing up cars and storefronts should be hosed off the street.. The "press" is fake news and should be called out as such.. Trump's business success is not inherited, lmao.. Also you don't win em all.. Trump's temperament has the power of America feared and respected across the world.. Rightfully so.. That disabled reporter should be mocked equally with other reporters just as he has.. A man in Trump's position could have all the women he wants.. Just a few that he has had shows great restraint.. Atleast he isn't that biden child bragging about strippers and blow.. Trump tells it like it is in his speeches.. Atleast he isn't constantly talking about those mentally ill with gender dysphoria as if their sexually depraved delusions are reality all day.. Acquitted.. Nice try overturning an election lefties.. We see what you really think of our republican democracy.. They'd wipe their ass with it when things don't go their way.. "By any means necessary" Totally fair to disagree with him, my point is that his opinions on Trump are mostly aligned with the stance Christian Conservatives have had for decades. He's more loyal to his personal beliefs than Trump, which he is what he said he would do when running for Senate.
|
|
|
|