This is also NOT from the Onion

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
technovelist
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5034
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:20 pm

This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by technovelist » Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:06 am

User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Montague, MA
Contact:

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by vnatale » Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:23 am

technovelist wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:06 am
But it is extremely accurate!

https://twitter.com/nypost/status/11944 ... 68/photo/1
Maybe because he IS??!!!

I'm listening to this testimony and it is fairly devastating. And, within the first two sentences of Nunes's opening statement I could see that the Republicans strategy is to ignore facts and engage in distraction. Too much to expect them to put country ahead of party.

Vinny
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8777
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: next to emotional support peacock
Contact:

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by dualstow » Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:27 am

That's a curious use of "not the Onion." Usually it's employed when something really happens. O0
https://www.reddit.com/r/TactiCat
User avatar
technovelist
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5034
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by technovelist » Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:33 am

vnatale wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:23 am
technovelist wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:06 am
But it is extremely accurate!

https://twitter.com/nypost/status/11944 ... 68/photo/1
Maybe because he IS??!!!

I'm listening to this testimony and it is fairly devastating. And, within the first two sentences of Nunes's opening statement I could see that the Republicans strategy is to ignore facts and engage in distraction. Too much to expect them to put country ahead of party.

Vinny
It is devastating, all right... to the impeachment hoax.
You're going to be very disappointed when he is re-elected in a landslide due to all of this made-up idiocy.
User avatar
technovelist
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5034
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by technovelist » Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:35 am

dualstow wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:27 am
That's a curious use of "not the Onion." Usually it's employed when something really happens. O0
But that really did happen. It's today's NY Post cover.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8777
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: next to emotional support peacock
Contact:

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by dualstow » Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:07 am

Right, but it's just a joke, and a predictive one at that.
If someone is put in jail and then has a trial, that's Oniony territory.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TactiCat
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by flyingpylon » Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:01 pm

vnatale wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 10:23 am

I'm listening to this testimony and it is fairly devastating. And, within the first two sentences of Nunes's opening statement I could see that the Republicans strategy is to ignore facts and engage in distraction. Too much to expect them to put country ahead of party.

Vinny
What specifically do you find to be devastating? What facts are being ignored?
User avatar
technovelist
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5034
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by technovelist » Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:33 pm

dualstow wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 11:07 am
Right, but it's just a joke, and a predictive one at that.
If someone is put in jail and then has a trial, that's Oniony territory.
Well, in this case there's no "going to jail" component, so that's not very likely to happen.
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1516
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by Cortopassi » Wed Nov 13, 2019 3:53 pm

Just to confirm to everyone that I do not have TDS, or am in remission, I have listened to multiple hours today.

And my conclusion is the democrats are screwed. If they wanted a clear argument that he deserves to be impeached, it is not happening in the least.

While I have great respect for the people testifying, my overall sense is this kind of talk and "quid pro quo" likely goes on all the time and they just decided to call Trump on it because they don't like him.

I 100% believe he withheld aid to try to get what he wanted. Can the democrats clearly make that case? I highly doubt it.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8777
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: next to emotional support peacock
Contact:

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by dualstow » Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:48 pm

I agree. I also wonder if they’d want a President Pence anyway. They’re basically nervous that if Trump is not impeached (whatever the word is for real impeachment, post indictment), he’ll be re-elected, and yet they can’t do anything about it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TactiCat
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1837
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by Kriegsspiel » Wed Nov 13, 2019 4:51 pm

Cortopassi wrote:
Wed Nov 13, 2019 3:53 pm
While I have great respect for the people testifying, my overall sense is this kind of talk and "quid pro quo" likely goes on all the time and they just decided to call Trump on it because they don't like him.

I 100% believe he withheld aid to try to get what he wanted. Can the democrats clearly make that case? I highly doubt it.
Quid pro quo is kind what diplomacy is all about, right? It's pretty much always used in the sense that it's nefarious (ie, two illegal things are done), but it doesn't have to. Pretty much all international relations and diplomacy are conducted as quid pro quos. Look at a list of treaties and you see a big list of "you give us this land, and we'll stop attacking you" and "you let me be king of Spain, and I'll stop trying to be king of France" or whatever.

In addition, is it a Bad Thing to withhold aid from a country? Do we just have to give them stuff, no questions asked? I think it depends on the circumstances. If you're negotiating (quid pro quo-ing) with a country, and you threaten to withhold aid unless they stop investigating your son's company for illegal activities, that's a Bad Thing. But if you threaten to withhold it if they don't help you investigate corruption among your own politicians, that's a Good Thing. Though last I heard, Trump didn't tell the Ukrainians he would withhold aid if they didn't help, but I may be behind the times.

When I try to sort out what actually happened and whether it was kosher or not, I gather that Trump asked Ukraine to help determine whether we have a corrupt politician (Biden) on our hands. This is precisely what we have a treaty with Ukraine to do. Biden doesn't get immunity from investigation just because he's campaigning for president. I get why some people are queezy about the whole thing, since tyrannical 3rd world governments suppress (or attempt to suppress) political opposition with made-up charges against their opponents*, but this one seems legit from the available information.

* which does seem to be what the Left in America has been doing to Trump for a while now, with various made up charges like Russiagate, sexual assaults, etc. One of the rules that seems slavishly followed is Saul Alinsky's for accusing your opponents of what you're doing to them.
To die, to sleep
To sleep, perchance to dream; ay, there's the rub
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Montague, MA
Contact:

Re: This is also NOT from the Onion

Post by vnatale » Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:15 pm

SImple matter is that we have a president who based the granting of aid to another country simply based upon what the other country would do SOLELY for HIS interest. And, absolutely NOTHING to do with the country's interest.

If anyone cannot see that I cannot add anything to the above. In this specific case we interpreting it entirely differently. Which is not an earth shattering conclusion. That seems to be the normality in life. Two people interpreting the same things in opposite ways.

Vinny
Post Reply