***Official Political Discussion Thread***

Methodical Management said:
If you think it's irresponsible to point the finger at Russia "without proof", why do you consider it appropriate to scapegoat Jewish people generally, due solely to a racist, hard right's administration's support of another racist, hard right administration?

I don't think im fully understanding your point but if we want to label Trump as a bigot and a racist than lets look at the people who he also does business with is all im saying. No human is perfect and to judge another group based off your beliefs is hypocritical. "Thou shall not judge" just as you are doing me.

The impulse to vet information carefully before rushing to share something that conforms to your worldview is a good one, but there's a world of difference between "you can't talk about the Roy Moore allegations because they haven't been proven in a court of law yet" and "you have no proof that French Stewart is a cannibal."

But thing is there are countries that eat humans today but us westerners will deem it a sin. "thou shall not judge"

There's ample evidence suggesting Russian meddling in the 2016 US elections. As such, it's a legitimate subject of discussion. "Don't let the Russia investigation distract you from the fact that the Democrats are running a child slavery ring out of an abandoned Chuck-e-Cheese in Woodbridge" is not a legitimate subject of discussion. You have the right to your own opinions, certainly, but you don't have the right to abuse a private platform to serve as a megaphone for those opinions. Ask blco02, titanium tea, and all the other banned racists.

there is ample evidence to draw up any scenario you deem fit that you believe if there isn't concrete proof of what happened. Since we don't trust russia its easy to say they did more meddling than they should its easier to be safe than sorry so apply sanctions is the scapegoat. But trust i understand what you are saying and no one is using this thread as a megaphone just trying to challenge y'all views and we will see how this probe turns out.

Conspiracy theories appeal to those who struggle to make sense of an unjust and unfair world that seems beyond reason or control. The same basic impulse that led ancient people to believe that lightning is hurled to Earth by cloud-dwelling giants or that their own indiscretions were influenced by sorcery leads people, today, to claim that the attenuation of their masculine authority is the product of some massive conspiracy. "Your recent unemployment represents a confluence of historical and sociological trends" is harder to grasp than "immigrants stole your job." The former explanation is accurate and responsible, but complicated and mystifying. The latter explanation is viscerally satisfying, as it gives you someone or something tangible to blame. Guess which type of explanation spreads faster on social media.

So some struggle to make sense of unjust and you have it all figured out i guess you can tell me what is life after death? We all are human and struggle to make sense of "LIFE" and to believe what you believe is righteous and correct is hypocritical to say someone else is struggling to figure it out when no one knows what "LIFE" is.

Let's not allow modern technology to take us all back to the dark ages.

I would advise you to learn from the mistakes of this DC council member: https://www.vox.com/identities/2018...-anti-semitism-conspiracy-theory-trayon-white
Propagating these beliefs is not harmless. Hate crimes have been on the rise in the United States, and the widespread online scapegoating/demonization of minority groups is largely to blame. Hate groups blame the collapse of society on the "gay agenda." They blame people of color for crime and drug use, or for taking "their" jobs. Everyone should understand where these "beliefs" come from and how supporting or furthering these narratives can hurt innocent people - as well as our society/community as a whole.

It's irresponsible for us to allow NikeTalk to be misused amplify outright falsehoods and hate speech.

My fault if my conspiracies felt like hate speech but i don't believe anyones opinion is worth more than anyone else on this forum we are all human all have flaws no one is perfect and for anyone to act like they have it all figured out when no one knows if religion is real or what life is after death i take with a grain of salt. See you on the flip side homey.
Click to expand...
 
elpablo21 said:

1MfMtWv.gif
Click to expand...


giphy.gif

Based Jesus said:
latest
Click to expand...
Read my mind.:lol:
 
Trump announcing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel wasn't some insurmountable task that previous presidents weren't able to tackle. Any one of them could have done the same thing. It's just that every single person who came before him was exponentially more thoughtful and had a greater understanding of the potential consequences of that move. Trump "made it look easy" because he's an impulsive jackass.
 
Methodical Management said:
It sounds like you're saying "no one has it all figured out, so therefore the opinion that drinking bleach cures cancer is just as valid as the opinion that drinking bleach is harmful."

Surely you can understand why that's dangerous.
Click to expand...

Meth lets just agree to disagree. I can do this all day.

We have some things figured out but not all and all im saying is Trump aint the person to have figured out the 2500 years of unjust in the middle east. No man is perfect.
 
This appears to be the Channel 4 report about Cambridge Analytica. Not sure if that's the full thing that was aired, I believe this is a segment.
 
Last edited:
Hillary must have screamed into everyone of the pillows in her house by now.

I know she is far from perfect, but like damb, ole girl for screwed over on so many levels.
 
John Wick said:
My fault but i didn't know this was offensive.

I don't take offense of someone calling me black but some black people do.
Click to expand...
that's not it.

referring to "the Jews" being behind something is hateful conspiracy nut language that implies there is some vast evil Jewish plot. it is what binds Nazis, skinheads, and islamist terrorists.

it's not the equivalent of calling you black. it's the (very loose) equivalent of saying the blacks should be enslaved because they're inferior.

maybe you didn't mean it that way and are using the Jews as shorthand for the state of Israel or something, but language matters in this case, as it does for some white Southerner throwing around the n word.
 
After the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled the Republicans' congressional map as unconstitutional partisan gerrymandering in their favor, the Republicans challenged the implementation of the new court-drawn congressional map.
They took it all the way to the US Supreme Court, however SCOTUS has rejected their appeal. Thus the new map will be kept.
https://www.axios.com/federal-court...d8-4c83-9afd-9a1c03265cb6.html?source=sidebar
SCOTUS moves to keep new Pennsylvania congressional map
 
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ony-he-opposed-russia-outreach-idUSKBN1GU0NC?

Exclusive: Sources contradict Sessions' testimony he opposed Russia outreach
Karen Freifeld, Sarah N. Lynch, Mark Hosenball
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ testimony that he opposed a proposal for President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign team to meet with Russians has been contradicted by three people who told Reuters they have spoken about the matter to investigators with Special Counsel Robert Mueller or congressional committees.

Sessions testified before Congress in November 2017 that he “pushed back” against the proposal made by former campaign adviser George Papadopoulos at a March 31, 2016 campaign meeting. Then a senator from Alabama, Sessions chaired the meeting as head of the Trump campaign’s foreign policy team.

“Yes, I pushed back,” Sessions told the House Judiciary Committee on Nov. 14, when asked whether he shut down Papadopoulos’ proposed outreach to Russia.

SPONSORED

Sessions has since also been interviewed by Mueller.

Three people who attended the March campaign meeting told Reuters they gave their version of events to FBI agents or congressional investigators probing Russian interference in the 2016 election. Although the accounts they provided to Reuters differed in certain respects, all three, who declined to be identified, said Sessions had expressed no objections to Papadopoulos’ idea.

One person said Sessions was courteous to Papadopoulos and said something to the effect of “okay, interesting.”

The other two recalled a similar response.

“It was almost like, ‘Well, thank you and let’s move on to the next person,’” one said.

However, another meeting attendee, J.D. Gordon, who was the Trump campaign’s director of national security, told media outlets including Reuters in November that Sessions strongly opposed Papadopoulos’ proposal and said no one should speak of it again. In response to a request for comment, Gordon said on Saturday that he stood by his statement.

Sessions, through Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores, declined to comment beyond his prior testimony. The special counsel’s office also declined to comment. Spokeswomen for the Democrats and Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee did not comment.

Reuters was unable to determine whether Mueller is probing discrepancies in accounts of the March 2016 meeting.

The three accounts, which have not been reported, raise new questions about Sessions’ testimony regarding contacts with Russia during the campaign.

Sessions previously failed to disclose to Congress meetings he had with former Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, and testified in October that he was not aware of any campaign representatives communicating with Russians.


U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions testifies before a House Judiciary Committee hearing on oversight of the Justice Department on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., November 14, 2017. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas
Some Democrats have seized on discrepancies in Sessions’ testimony to suggest the attorney general may have committed perjury. A criminal charge would require showing Sessions intended to deceive. Sessions told the House Judiciary Committee that he had always told the truth and testified to the best of his recollection.

Legal experts expressed mixed views about the significance of the contradictions cited by the three sources.

Sessions could argue he misremembered events or perceived his response in a different way, making any contradictions unintentional, some experts said.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, said Sessions’ words might be too vague to form the basis of a perjury case because there could be different interpretations of what he meant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

shaboozy
What's your NT routine?
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
ogbobbyjohnson773
ogbobbyjohnson773
chezzer10
***MLB FEET, EQUIPMENT, AND UNIFORMS 2024***NEW THREAD
2 3
Replies
72
Views
6K
buddhashark
buddhashark
datznasty
Official Niketalk Custom Basketball Shorts Thread
Replies
5
Views
1K
MakeNTGreatAgain
MakeNTGreatAgain

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom