HmL McCarthy and Donald Trump met today, showing that the Republican party can’t really depart from Trump yet as the voters won’t allow them to do so. Save America, Donald Trumps leadership PAC, had the following to say regarding the meeting: "President Trump has agreed to work with Leader McCarthy on helping with the Republican Party become a majority in the House," the group said. "They worked very well together in the last election and picked up at least 15 seats when most predicted it would be the opposite. They will do so again, and the work has already started." GOP really can’t move on from Trump (at least now), that’s been shown through the scandal relating to Cheney and her poll numbers dropping to 10-15% after she voted to impeach Trump. |
|
|
|
Considering there were not even any demonstrations, it is fair to say the 25,000 troop level was excessive.
No it's not. It's illogical to say that. The point is to reduce the chances of anyone attempting anything to as close to 0 as possible, not have just enough soldiers to win a shoot out. +1 to this. Not sure why it even matters the amount of troops that are in DC (on a relative level) — We literally just had thousands of people overwhelm the Capitol police and storm into the Capitol building. It’s not like Joe Biden is personally ordering these people to arrest his political enemies — it’s just for protection of the Capitol and those inside. It was actually hundreds of people that stormed the capital, not thousands. Twitchy is endorsing a police state. I believe the purpose of the military presence is to prevent protests in response to Biden's widely unpopular agenda. To put things into perspective, there were several hundred national guard troops sent to DC in June to help with security when the riots were actually ongoing, and many times larger than the riot on January 6. This can’t really be what you think. (I mean I guess it can be, but I really don’t understand it at all) - The things that Biden has done to this point (EO’s) have all had high approval ratings at an overall level (low support among Republicans, but mostly more then 50% for all Americans) - https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bidens-initial-batch-of-executive-actions-is-popular/There have been reports of potential threats at the inauguration and subsequent events. If you want to say that these aren’t true then that’s fine, but we did just have people storm into the US Capitol so it’s fair to say that we should have protection for the congresspeople and civilians that work in the Capitol. This isn’t a police state at all, like not even close. |
|
|
|
It looks like Proud Boys have been screwed not just by Trump. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/proud-boys-leader-went-undercover-help-fbi-after-2013-arrest-n1255878The leader of the Proud Boys, a far-right extremist group involved in the Capitol riot, went undercover to assist Miami police and cooperated with the FBI in multiple drug and illegal gambling investigations, a court transcript shows.
Henry "Enrique" Tarrio, 36, began working with the FBI after he was arrested in 2013 on federal fraud charges related to a scheme to sell stolen diabetic test strips well below market value, according to the transcript reviewed by NBC News. To be fair, this was before the organization was established but still - having a snitch as a leader kinda hurts their street cred I would think. LOL. Talk about being a ‘Proud Boy’ but not being able to be too proud of your own leader because he had to snitch to get himself out of trouble. But yeah, not something that is probably looked at by his people because it was done before this all happened and he probably just writes it off as some big conspiracy that the government set him up to do (just bs that I made up in my own head) Street cred probably doesn’t matter to a group that stormed into the WH because of baseless accusations of election fraud that had zero merit at all, heh. Is this timeline even real? |
|
|
|
|
Totally.
I think most people would answer the question in the same way. There are some questions as to how long this pandemic is going to go on for, so is it worth it to uproot your life (potentially temporarily or maybe permanently) to do this to have a few months of no pandemic life.
Though this sort of thing could be done on a temporary basis with college kids, old folks homes, and so on and so forth to keep life moving for some people.
You have some issues when it comes to — how are you going to get food into the isolated city as imports and exports could potentially bring in covid.
But without all of that, I’d totally want to do this to live in an isolated covid free city.
|
|
|
|
they could be fired.
the actual workmen could be fired. yes budgets have been handed out to the management and trying to recoup that is lost in the ether of off shore accounting. but biden could have just cancelled all contracts and offered nothing for the bottomline workmen.
and the funny thing is even without firing anyone. seems republican media will still stir the PR that they got fired. so in the end PR is meaningless as a concern.
its better to not actually fire them and when the dust settles people can in retrospect just see republicans as the liars they are.. basically making republicans fall on your own swords by fighting themselves over their own lies
Fair point, people are going to think that these people lost their jobs anyway so does it do anything? I think it does, given the fact that a contract was signed between an independent contractor and the US government to provide a service, meaning that everything should be done within that contract. But in any-case, can Republicans possible be referring to indirect jobs that are lost? As people working in these areas would then use their incomes in the surrounding towns which would bring new life into these places? Just a random devils advocate point that I thought would be interesting to bring up. Sigh, doesn’t matter anyway - no one is going to care enough to look into all of this. |
|
|
|
Now if the democrats start talking about how the republicans are blocking them on issues like healthcare, stimulus, fighting climate change... They're lying.
True. If all of the Democrats voted as a bloc, then they could get rid of the filibuster and do whatever they want. If anything fails to pass, then it'll ultimately be due to a bipartisan willingness to let it fail. Exactly what agreement McConnell and Schumer reach on the Senate rules for the next 2 years will be telling. They haven't reached a deal yet, but it sounds like Democrats are willing to give Republicans a lot of power, and McConnell is even pushing for guaranteeing that the filibuster is preserved. West Virginia Democrat Senator Joe Manchin has said he will not be the 50th vote for killing the filibuster, nor expanding the Supreme Court, however in the past, he has always voted with Democrats on major issues. If either were to come up for a vote, my guess is Manchin would be under extreme pressure from the left to vote with the Democrats. My guess is that Schumer wants to keep killing the filibuster as an option so he can claim Republican obstructionism as a reason to need to kill the filibuster, and put pressure on Manchin to vote in favor of killing it. Schumer is up for reelection in 2022, which includes a primary race. It is rumored that AOC may run for Senate. It is possible that putting Sanders on the powerful Budget Committee is an effort to try to get AOC to not try to unseat Schumer in the primary. Joe Manchin kinda needs this to be the case, given the fact that he is a Democratic senator in a place where there should be a Republican. Imagine being a coal loving Democrat? That’s what Joe Manchin is. He’s a guy who continues to win his senate seat while being in a place that Republicans have won for the longest time. They’re not going to have the votes to kill the filibuster - Manchin, Sinema, and co are going to stop that vote because they’re all people that convinced Republicans to vote for them because they were going to help real bipartisan change happen in Washington DC. If it happens and they get away with it, then so be it. But I expect that they’ll probably get told by their voters that they’re not going to let that happen (or at least they’ll punish them during their next election) |
|
|
|
biden did not destroy jobs with the stop the wall/pipeline EO.
it clearly says he will pause the contracts and retarget the contractors to other projects.
basically the contractors work on walls one day. and build something else another.. thus job security
I’m assuming you wouldn’t be able to just fire all of these people anyway, because of the fact that all of the contracts are signed and the people have already been paid / bought materials / established what they’re going to do. Probably wouldn’t want to fire these people anyway because that’d be some pretty bad PR in the middle of a pandemic, but Joe Biden probably has no choice. |
|
|
|
Nobody cares but the usual, permanently panty-bunched right-wingers, increasingly desperate to take attention off the utter collapse of everything they stupidly put their faith in. Funny how you are now proclaiming feminism to be a good thing. Seems like that's not the usual talking point from you incels on the far right. This is thinly veiled transphobia. All he did was reinstate Obamas mandate that Trump removed that gave transgender people protection under the civil rights act. Just like when they clutched their pearls screaming "Biden killed thousands of jobs!" when he stopped construction on the border wall and Oil pipe line - they aren't even honest about what they're bitching about. Lol, yeah these people don’t really understand what is happening here. Plus the bitching and moaning about EO’s is annoying because they were probably cheering on when Trump was using it to his advantage, and are now angry about Biden (and Obama using it way back then) Pipe line hasn’t even been being worked on due to litigation this entire time, everyone knew this was going to be the case if we used EO to make this happen. Make it happen by law if you want it to stick through multiple administrations. |
|
|
|
A copy of the Complaint can be found here. I don't think Dominion was smart for filing this lawsuit. Giuliani almost certainly does not have significant assets, so Dominion is not going to recover what they are alleging are damages even if they win the case, and the case will give an opening for Guiliani to look for and air out any potential dirty laundry of Dominion's employees, and scrutinize Dominion itself. I doubt the outcome of the case will change many minds regarding Dominion, including those that are decision-makers deciding if local governments will employ Dominion. It’s not even about being smart or not, it’s just a way of making a court say that he should shut-up for his claims being totally wrong and having no backing in the least. I assume they also want the courts to show that everything he has said is wrong as a way to ensure that people on the state and local level will continue to buy their machines — as places where Republicans hold power are going to be wary about using these systems if their voters think they enable fraud. |
|
|
|
Ron DeSantis also is probably going to run. Nikki Haley too apparently. Ted Cruz is the favorite so naturally he'll be the target and iirc, Podesta's emails back in 2016 hinted that Hillary Clinton did not want to face up against Cruz in the general. Didn't really work out too well lol
I'd vote for Cruz in a heartbeat -- constitutional conservative, havard law grad, clerked for Antonin Scalia, doesn't post retarded tweets about his IQ.....so on.
Expecting DeSantis to get a massive endorsement from Trump too, he’s one of the guys who knows that Trump put him on the map and is massively beholden to him. DeSantis will totally run for President, not sure on what his national profile looks like but he’s totally going to run. Cruz will totally run again too, Rubio as well. You can see that Cruz/Rubio are still heavily supporting Trump in the media.They’r relying on his endorsement too. Curious on who will be the anti Trump establishment GOP people will be. |
|
|
|
|
As we all know, Donald Trump is no longer the President of the United States and will slowly lose his grip over the party over the next few years. Not a guarantee, though I personally do not think that the Trumps will remain super powerful in the GOP. They will be a valuable endorsement, totally, but not the leaders of the party.
With that said, the Republican party is going to have new people rise up to the top. Going to use this thread for all of us to talk about who we think these people are going to be.
I’ll lay out mine - Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Mike Pence (he’s older but is totally a frontrunner in 2024)
|
|
|
|
seems the OP doesnt understand blockchains
purpose of blockchains is transparent verifiable data on multiple systems..
which is chained together
this is not privacy.
blockchains are about chaining blocks of data. nothing in blockchain actually defaults to privacy.
blocks can hold any data it pleases.
if you just want to bloat peoples hard drives with data they cannot view.. then spambot people with self replicating viruses.
...
cloud data (distributed over many systems) is not the same as blockchain data.
i think the OP wants decentralised cloud hosted social media that does not track identifiers because each cloud is a user not some corporation,, this is an entire different tech to blockchains
(its more so torrent/onion tech than blockchain tech)
Yeah franky but you don’t understand OKAY? If you just slap ‘decentralized blockchain’ onto anything it’s completely new and it works and it’s so amazing and everyone loves it and investor money is pouring in. /s if anyone needed it There’s no need to make this blockchain, decentralized would be cool but there’s no real way for something like that to gain traction as you can’t finance features, moderate, and so on if you’re on a decentralized social media platform. |
|
|
|
Allowing McConnell to kick the can on this* to the first week of February
*impeachment
This was actually very smart on the part of McConnell. In his inauguration, Biden was calling for unity, but his actions say something very different. The words and actions of other Democrats (that Biden has not denounced) is even more divisive. Biden's actions in his first days in office is comprised of many executive orders that many Americans are opposed to. The delay gives Republicans time to unify against the Biden agenda. Biden's agenda is so unpopular, I would not be surprised to see some moderate Democrats voting to acquit. I think if there was a trial immediately after the articles passed the House, Trump probably would have been removed from office. Oh yeah, totally a very smart move. If the House had moved to pass this even quicker, maybe like the day following the Capitol riots and then sent it over to the Senate immediately it would’ve forced there to be urgency. But kicking it off for awhile made it so that people ‘forgot’ about it and were able to move on to the next couple stories because we have the memories of goldfish. McConnell is the king of parliamentary stuff, guy is acting like he is the majority leader. |
|
|
|
So what you’re saying SuchMoon is that you don’t support the entrepreneurial support of a GREAT AMERICAN trying to make some money out of a LEGITIMATE CLAIM about election fraud? God you hate to see it.
Maybe he was going to donate his money to the Steve Bannon border wall fundraiser.....
TBH I'm not a big fan of defamation lawsuits, particularly by large corporations, but these types of cases are notoriously hard to win and Giuliani was deliberately making shit up so this seems to be well deserved. OTOH he doesn't have a billion dollars anyway so this is pretty much a PR play. Oh yeah, totally just a major PR play that they know isn’t going to end up paying them out anyway. Giuliani could probably just say that all of his claims were made on behalf of the campaign or that he puts on a show and dance as a performer (not sure on the legal claims of all of this, but still) I think that due to Dominion being in the media a lot, they may have a higher bar they must prove in defamation (Took one law class, awhile ago and this is something) |
|
|
|
Considering there were not even any demonstrations, it is fair to say the 25,000 troop level was excessive.
No it's not. It's illogical to say that. The point is to reduce the chances of anyone attempting anything to as close to 0 as possible, not have just enough soldiers to win a shoot out. +1 to this. Not sure why it even matters the amount of troops that are in DC (on a relative level) — We literally just had thousands of people overwhelm the Capitol police and storm into the Capitol building. It’s not like Joe Biden is personally ordering these people to arrest his political enemies — it’s just for protection of the Capitol and those inside. I don’t understand the issue here, are people mad that these troops aren’t just allowing Trump to continue being the President? (QAnon convinced some people this would be the case, lol) |
|
|
|
So what you’re saying SuchMoon is that you don’t support the entrepreneurial support of a GREAT AMERICAN trying to make some money out of a LEGITIMATE CLAIM about election fraud? God you hate to see it. Maybe he was going to donate his money to the Steve Bannon border wall fundraiser..... |
|
|
|
|
Sigh, this thread comes up every so often on here and I have the same response to on here.
All social media platforms start in the same place - at first you want everyone to be able to share their thoughts online without any sort of intervention.
But then you release and then bam you’ve got child porn, child pedos, really racist horrible shit, nazi stuff, and so on and so forth — so you have to have some level of moderation for the really bad stuff. Next comes the bullying, harassment, incitement of violence, and so on and so forth — do you moderate this or do you just leave it because everyone has a right?
This is the struggle of moderating decentralized social media platforms. If you leave some of this stuff on here, you’ll most likely losing hosting options and may end up being personally liable depending on the amount of decentralization.
Haven’t even gotten into the whole — how do we fund a massive undertaking like this where users demand new features but don’t like ads. But we’ll leave that for later on.
|
|
|
|
Why quote the real news when you can just quote random blog spam and youtube videos instead? It makes it much easier for you to prove your point. Come on Twitchy, be smarter. But in all seriousness this is very common. A lot of people (on both sides of the aisle) don’t understand that anecdotal evidence doesn’t mean anything when it can be easily shot down by tons of reputable news sources that can prove the polar opposite. |
|
|
|
LOL. What the hell is this law in Australia, look at this quote from the NYPost article: The proposal — which is being widely watched and could serve as a model for other countries whose local media have been hurt by the growing dominance of Google and Facebook over online advertising — would allow news companies to negotiate payments from the tech giants for the use of their content that appears in search results or news feeds. An arbitrator would decide the price if the parties are unable to reach a deal.
The proposal has broad political support down under and is backed by publishers such as News Corp., which owns The Post and publishes eight of Australia’s top 10 newspapers. (Bolded by me) Thinking about all of this for a second, I think we can see what side the NYPOST probably on, lol. Curious to see what this law looks like in real practice. If countries really want to regulate tech, they’re going to need to do it with a coalition of other countries to ensure that they cant be bullied by these huge companies. |
|
|
|
Ah, it’s nice to see that the link that you posted on the bottom is just a regular source instead of your own blog spam. But onto the topic here: Pretty sure that the Biden admin is going to be pretty crypto friendly, given the fact that his second largest donor is Sam Bankman Fried with a $5,000,000 donation to his campaign - https://www.coindesk.com/cryptocurrency-ceo-donated-second-largest-amount-to-joe-bidens-campaignNot expecting TOO MUCH CHANGE. Probably more IRS audits for crypto stuff, but that’s that IMO. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
