***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[dwalk31]

Given a lot of the mass shootings committed by whites, the guns were purchased legally.....

But the murders were done illegally. Clearly the vegas terrorist didn't care about the law.

Edit: I am also not sure if I should be offended by the insinuation that white people purchase guns legally while other races do not.

 

[chao7]

The trumbots are hilarious.

Are you a lawyer defending someone who advocates quick, summary executions?

Also a lawyer who doesn't see any way the President commenting on an ongoing judicial process would possibly influence the jurors going forward.

Certainly nothing wrong with that.

 

[iamdef]

What is the idea? The reason most people think the gun control stuff is dumb after an attack is because there's no way to say that it would have prevented it. Murder is already illegal, but a murderer would adhere to gun laws?

Would a terrorist follow immigration laws?

 

[ksteezy]

But the murders were done illegally. Clearly the vegas terrorist didn't care about the law.

Edit: I am also not sure if I should be offended by the insinuation that white people purchase guns legally while other races do not.

When has murder ever been legal tho?...

 

[dwalk31]

Also a lawyer who doesn't see any way the President commenting on an ongoing judicial process would possibly influence the jurors going forward.

Certainly nothing wrong with that.

Do you think, honestly, Trump's tweets are going to taint a jury pool any more than the 24/7 news coverage of the incident? I realize that the tainted jury pool is a line CNN has going, but please take it to its logical conclusion.

 

[ksteezy]

Would a terrorist follow immigration laws?

But but but....das different

 

[iamdef]

Do you think, honestly, Trump's tweets are going to taint a jury pool any more than the 24/7 news coverage of the incident? I realize that the tainted jury pool is a line CNN has going, but please take it to its logical conclusion.

"One more person can't hurt"

 

[Belgium]

I did both. I assume you are familiar with the term clickbait. That headline is clickbait.

General word of advice: Nobody should at ever look at a headline and then swiftly skim through or even ignore the whole article. Simply looking at headlines is never a good idea for anyone to engage in, good headlines or not.

Did he or did he not speak these exact words? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Speaking during a Cabinet meeting Wednesday, Trump mourned the lives lost in the attack Tuesday in New York.
He said the country needs to come up with "punishment that's far quicker and far greater than the punishment these animals are getting right now."
"They'll go through court for years. At the end, they'll be — who knows what happens. We need quick justice and we need strong justice, much quicker and much stronger than we have right now," he said.
"Because what we have right now is a joke and it's a laughing stock and no wonder so much of this stuff takes place."

Is that or is it not Trump referring to the US justice system (what we have right now = referring to the US justice system) as a joke and a laughing stock?
Again a simple yes/no will suffice.

Did the article contain what was in the headline? Yes or no?
Did the article also provide additional context by adding Sarah Huckabee Sanders' comments? As well as clearly stating through both video and text the situation in which Trump made those comments? Yes or no?

A president's words (should) matter. Sarah Huckabee Sanders' statement tried to clarify Trump's comments came later at the WH press briefing. Is it productive for a US president to refer to the US judicial system as a joke and laughingstock?
Sanders stated this:
"That's not what he said," she said.

"He said the process has people calling us a joke and calling us a laughing stock."

Could you point out where Trump said "the process has people calling us a joke and calling us a laughing stock."?
No, because that's not what he said. He stated "what we have right now is a joke and it's a laughing stock."
Trump is the sitting US president. Words (should) matter. He could have simply gave his comments a bit more thought or refinement and avoid mischaracterizations if that was not what he meant.
Instead, it was Sanders who later had to come clarify the president's comments.

 

[dwalk31]

Would a terrorist follow immigration laws?

But but but....das different

Exactly. Both are just politicized talking points. Issue is, y'all wont acknowledge the gun stuff is straight rhetoric.

 

[dwalk31]

Did he or did he not speak these exact words? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Yes. Now a simple yes or no for you. Do you understand the meaning of context?

 

[chao7]

Do you think, honestly, Trump's tweets are going to taint a jury pool any more than the 24/7 news coverage of the incident? I realize that the tainted jury pool is a line CNN has going, but please take it to its logical conclusion.

I don't have cable, so you'll have to fill me in on what network news has been saying.

Whether I think something he said will affect the process in some measurable way is irrelevant.

It's inappropriate for a president to call the justice system in his own country a joke and scream about how he should be put to death on Twitter before he's even had a trial. This isn't rocket science man.

 

[dwalk31]

I don't have cable, so you'll have to fill me in on what network news has been saying.

Whether I think something he said will affect the process in some measurable way is irrelevant.

It's inappropriate for a president to call the justice system in his own country a joke and scream about how he should be put to death on Twitter before he's even had a trial. This isn't rocket science man.

So you concede it won't have a meaningful affect? Come on man... Anyway, how's life without cable? I've considered getting rid of it, but haven't taken the plunge.

 

[iamdef]

Exactly. Both are just politicized talking points. Issue is, y'all wont acknowledge the gun stuff is straight rhetoric.

The gun stuff isn't rhetoric. When Vegas happened the right made sure we took some time to mourn the tragedy. NYC happens and same day there's requests and demands for law changes.

Where's the consistency?

 

[Belgium]

Yes. Now a simple yes or no for you. Do you understand the meaning of context?

I believe so yes, though I'm sure I've probably used it incorrectly on a number of occasions.
The circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood.
Synonyms: circumstances · conditions · factors · state of affairs · situation · background · scene · setting · frame of reference
The article provided the context in which Trump made those comments. It did so by showing the video that displayed the event and it described the setting of the event through text.
The addition of Sarah Huckabee Sanders's comments also provide additional context as she also states and tries to clarify the circumstances the formed the setting of the event and the statement that Tump made, in order to get a better understanding of the whole situation.
I don't think the use of the term context is wrong there but I could be wrong of course. I speak 4 languages, it'd be a miracle if I don't make mistakes every so often.

 

[ninjahood]

I don't have cable, so you'll have to fill me in on what network news has been saying.

Whether I think something he said will affect the process in some measurable way is irrelevant.

It's inappropriate for a president to call the justice system in his own country a joke and scream about how he should be put to death on Twitter before he's even had a trial. This isn't rocket science man.

Sayfullo Saipov, 29, the man behind the wheel of a rented truck that cut a path of destruction along a lower Manhattan bike path.

tweets is da last thing this clown has to worry about.

 

[Belgium]

So you concede it won't have a meaningful affect? Come on man... Anyway, how's life without cable? I've considered getting rid of it, but haven't taken the plunge.

Out of curiosity, why would you and chao7 get rid of cable? I just don't really see the point of it. I wouldn't watch cable news in the US but surely there are other benefits to having cable?

 

[EddieDoyers]

The terrorist deserves to get fried
However, there still needs to be a legal process to be respected.

 

[dwalk31]

Out of curiosity, why would you and chao7 get rid of cable? I just don't really see the point of it. I wouldn't watch cable news in the US but surely there are other benefits to having cable?

I mean I don't plan on getting rid of it because I watch far too much television. The friends I have that get rid of it feel that they can get the same content for less (playstation, Netflix, hulu, etc). I've done the math and it comes out to about the same for me. May save 50 bucks a month... so not worth getting rid of it to get a bunch of subscriptions imo.

 

[dwalk31]

I believe so yes, though I'm sure I've probably used it incorrectly on a number of occasions.
The circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood.
Synonyms: circumstances · conditions · factors · state of affairs · situation · background · scene · setting · frame of reference
The article provided the context in which Trump made those comments. It did so by showing the video that displayed the event and it described the setting of the event through text.
The addition of Sarah Huckabee Sanders's comments also provide additional context as she also states and tries to clarify the circumstances the formed the setting of the event and the statement that Tump made, in order to get a better understanding of the whole situation.
I don't think the use of the term context is wrong there but I could be wrong of course. I speak 4 languages, it'd be a miracle if I don't make mistakes every so often.

We are missing each other. My entire point was that you had to read the article to find the substance. The headline, alone, was clickbait. It would make someone assume he made a statement without the additional context of the terrorist attack. That is why I said gotta love the headline to substance ratio.

 

[Belgium]

Also, here is the C-Span video of the House Republicans unveiling the tax plan:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?436728-1/house-republicans-unveil-tax-reform-plan

 

[chao7]

Out of curiosity, why would you and chao7 get rid of cable? I just don't really see the point of it. I wouldn't watch cable news in the US but surely there are other benefits to having cable?

Personally, the main reason is I just wouldn't be taking advantage of it about 95% of the time. I don't watch a lot of TV.

Recently moved to the suburbs north of Atlanta and my roommate has a FireStick. With Netflix or Hulu and the Kodi app (look it up, I don't want to get in trouble here) I can basically watch any show I'm interested in on-demand without commercials.

That was another thing that bugged me about the old cable-package system. Why am I paying money to sit through a ton of commercials where people are attempting to sell me more ****? Makes no sense.

Also it helps me not mindlessly sit in front of a television for hours watching stuff I'm only halfway interested in. More time to read, paint, whatever.

 

[Based Jesus]

Out of curiosity, why would you and chao7 get rid of cable? I just don't really see the point of it. I wouldn't watch cable news in the US but surely there are other benefits to having cable?

It's expensive and there are "cheaper" options. My cousin in Canada doesnt have cable either.
Guy I knew spends all day torrenting. Like he leaves home and his computer keeps going
Netflix + Hulu + illegal streams keep me more than satisfied. I barely watch regular tv nowadays.
There's a whole thread on here about cutting the cord.

 

[Belgium]

We are missing each other. My entire point was that you had to read the article to find the substance. The headline, alone, was clickbait. It would make someone assume he made a statement without the additional context of the terrorist attack. That is why I said gotta love the headline to substance ratio.

You always have to read an article to find the substance though. It is never a good idea for anyone to assume anything simply off a headline. Ever. Doesn't matter what the headline is.
People could be skimming through the best and most accurate headlines and they'd still be terribly uninformed if they only read those headlines.

 

[deuce king]

Don't vote black people..... instead buy my movies, Hidden Colors 1-4.

@maximus meridius

 

[Belgium]

It's expensive and there are "cheaper" options. My cousin in Canada doesnt have cable either.
Guy I knew spends all day torrenting. Like he leaves home and his computer keeps going
Netflix + Hulu + illegal streams keep me more than satisfied. I barely watch regular tv nowadays.
There's a whole thread on here about cutting the cord.

This is a strange concept to me. Then again our cable is rather cheap and doesn't have anywhere remotely close to the content y'all have.
I'd have to check the exact details in the bills but I know our 200mb/s download and 30mb/s upload internet with fibreoptic cable amounts to around €75 per month. I know our cable is significantly less.
Our only tv is downstairs so personally I don't watch much tv. It's mostly my mom.
I have my laptop and a large monitor upstairs that I can stream whatever I want on.