ADVERTISEMENT

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

so I ask for a rundown of the lies LIKE the ones of the alleged liar that you insist have been made, and instead all you can give us is the alleged liar. I'm going to go ahead and assume (actually I already did) that you know there aren't other lies but just needed to make some shit up. Do better.
You want lies other than the ones on which Comer/Jordan we're basing their bs? Those aren't enough?
How many lies are needed before you realize the impeachment attempts which are predicated on those lies, are fruitless and going nowhere? I suspect zero, and yrs from now you'll be crying about Hunter's laptop.
 
You want lies other than the ones on which Comer/Jordan we're basing their bs? Those aren't enough?
How many lies are needed before you realize the impeachment attempts which are predicated on those lies, are fruitless and going nowhere? I suspect zero, and yrs from now you'll be crying about Hunter's laptop.
the lies you keep insinuating but failing to produce would be more than enough for me.
 
How many lies are needed before you realize the impeachment attempts which are predicated on those lies, are fruitless and going nowhere?
You mean lies like RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA?

How quickly we forget. Incidentally, I saw this same thing repeated just the other day as the Russian interference in our election claims have already started.
 
You mean lies like RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA?
No more like the lies from maga regarding crime and immigrants.

"review of available 2024 crime data from the cities targeted by Texas’ “Operation Lone Star,” which buses or flies migrants from the border to major cities in the interior — shows overall crime levels dropping in those cities that have received the most migrants."

"Another misconception often cited by critics is that crime is more prevalent in “sanctuary cities.” But a Department of Justice report found that “there was no evidence that the percentage of unauthorized or authorized immigrant population at the city level impacted shifts in the homicide rates and no evidence that immigration is connected to robbery at the city level.”

"In December 2020, researchers studying Texas crime statistics found that “contrary to public perception, we observe considerably lower felony arrest rates among undocumented immigrants compared to legal immigrants and native-born U.S. citizens and find no evidence that undocumented criminality has increased in recent years.”

 
No more like the lies from maga regarding crime and immigrants.

"review of available 2024 crime data from the cities targeted by Texas’ “Operation Lone Star,” which buses or flies migrants from the border to major cities in the interior — shows overall crime levels dropping in those cities that have received the most migrants."

"Another misconception often cited by critics is that crime is more prevalent in “sanctuary cities.” But a Department of Justice report found that “there was no evidence that the percentage of unauthorized or authorized immigrant population at the city level impacted shifts in the homicide rates and no evidence that immigration is connected to robbery at the city level.”

"In December 2020, researchers studying Texas crime statistics found that “contrary to public perception, we observe considerably lower felony arrest rates among undocumented immigrants compared to legal immigrants and native-born U.S. citizens and find no evidence that undocumented criminality has increased in recent years.”


Don’t be stupid. We have already debunked this. You know why crime is “down”. Because it doesn’t get reported anymore. Please don’t ever try to convince anyone of anything using the corrupt DOJ.


EPxSaIeXsAE4vuC.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
No more like the lies from maga regarding crime and immigrants.

"review of available 2024 crime data from the cities targeted by Texas’ “Operation Lone Star,” which buses or flies migrants from the border to major cities in the interior — shows overall crime levels dropping in those cities that have received the most migrants."

"Another misconception often cited by critics is that crime is more prevalent in “sanctuary cities.” But a Department of Justice report found that “there was no evidence that the percentage of unauthorized or authorized immigrant population at the city level impacted shifts in the homicide rates and no evidence that immigration is connected to robbery at the city level.”

"In December 2020, researchers studying Texas crime statistics found that “contrary to public perception, we observe considerably lower felony arrest rates among undocumented immigrants compared to legal immigrants and native-born U.S. citizens and find no evidence that undocumented criminality has increased in recent years.”

I surrender. You win.

I mean, there used to be tons and tons of Laken Riley's before we got that hard on crime president and his crack team in office. All the gang crime is way, way down. The carjackings in DC where the politicians are have dropped so low, it's like we don't even have cars anymore.

You can cite statistic after statistic all day long, but you've got to also acknowledge that there are other factors behind the so-called stats. This stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum. Cooking the books to reflect numbers that help your agenda doesn't make it true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
I guess that, just like crime in general and crime by immigrants is down, I also have to accept that inflation is no longer an issue. They keep telling me that is down as well.

It's the new math.
Inflation slowed down, but that doesn't mean deflation happened. Though in a few things deflation has happened, like natural gas - cheapest it's been in a looong time. But real wages are still lower than they were pre-pandemic (though they're positive in 2023, so improving).
 
I surrender. You win.

I mean, there used to be tons and tons of Laken Riley's before we got that hard on crime president and his crack team in office. All the gang crime is way, way down. The carjackings in DC where the politicians are have dropped so low, it's like we don't even have cars anymore.

You can cite statistic after statistic all day long, but you've got to also acknowledge that there are other factors behind the so-called stats. This stuff doesn't happen in a vacuum. Cooking the books to reflect numbers that help your agenda doesn't make it true.
Sounds like you are choosing anecdotes and media sound-bites over stats.
 
It's a bit like visiting the border to finally accept some responsibility or at least try to do something about the situation other than just to get funding for other countries border issues and to create more of an issue and plopping this in the middle of your speech:

"I love some of my Neanderthal friends who still think there's no climate change." Because the "climate crisis" is connected to our border and the ensuing problems.
 
@Hark_The_Sound_2010 did the work last week and poasted exactly why crime stats aren't reliable anymore. You can choose to ignore if you want. I don't care.
You aren't applying logic, no shocker.

@Hark_The_Sound_2010 specified that the FBI's 2021-2022 data was unreliable. And he said that crimes are being unreported (like people not filing a report when Macy's is broken into).

But neither of the above would apply to the info I posted, cuz it is comparing cities, not totals. "overall crime levels dropping in those cities that have received the most migrants."

Nor do they apply to "no evidence that the percentage of unauthorized or authorized immigrant population at the city level impacted shifts in the homicide rates and no evidence that immigration is connected to robbery at the city level" unless somehow only the immigrant-specific crimes were unreported (which is not imaginable).

And of course it doesn't apply to the third snippet since that was data over prior recent yr before 2020:
"In December 2020, researchers studying Texas crime statistics found that “contrary to public perception, we observe considerably lower felony arrest rates among undocumented immigrants compared to legal immigrants and native-born U.S. citizens and find no evidence that undocumented criminality has increased in recent years.”

Finally, he said "property crimes and violence against young people have both increased significantly recently" -- but that doesn't disprove any of the three above either. If the crimes percentages weren't tied to immigrants pre-2020, there is no reason to think the crime percentages for that same demographic would change... there are more of them, but they're the same type of people just looking to mow lawns and have taco trucks.
 
As a vet, watching that makes me nauseous.
me too. Just very queesy. What the F is going on with us that 1) we have forsaken the male attitude toward defense, and that 2) a high-ranking officer makes its job about it and not our defense.

And even if others see it as I see it, nothing will be done because of the lunatic sensitized atmosphere we have allowed to envelop us.

Can't wait for the usuals to chime in with 'white male blather blather' idiocy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
You aren't applying logic, no shocker.

@Hark_The_Sound_2010 specified that the FBI's 2021-2022 data was unreliable. And he said that crimes are being unreported (like people not filing a report when Macy's is broken into).

But neither of the above would apply to the info I posted, cuz it is comparing cities, not totals. "overall crime levels dropping in those cities that have received the most migrants."

Nor do they apply to "no evidence that the percentage of unauthorized or authorized immigrant population at the city level impacted shifts in the homicide rates and no evidence that immigration is connected to robbery at the city level" unless somehow only the immigrant-specific crimes were unreported (which is not imaginable).

And of course it doesn't apply to the third snippet since that was data over prior recent yr before 2020:
"In December 2020, researchers studying Texas crime statistics found that “contrary to public perception, we observe considerably lower felony arrest rates among undocumented immigrants compared to legal immigrants and native-born U.S. citizens and find no evidence that undocumented criminality has increased in recent years.”

Finally, he said "property crimes and violence against young people have both increased significantly recently" -- but that doesn't disprove any of the three above either. If the crimes percentages weren't tied to immigrants pre-2020, there is no reason to think the crime percentages for that same demographic would change... there are more of them, but they're the same type of people just looking to mow lawns and have taco trucks.

TL;DR

But here's my guess, you're trying to explain away the proof @Hark_The_Sound_2010 provided last week showing crime stats have been unreliable. I'm also guessing your dissertation above includes stats from other sources that you want to pawn off as reliable as if the FBI stats we discussed last week were the only set of stats that were unreliable and somehow, the ones you're providing today can be trusted. And all the while, you and the other sheep will continue to ignore your eyes and ears. Shit that is happening all around us that never happened all around us before. It's truly amazing the lengths that liberals will go to to excuse the destruction of our country/society. And why? So you can score social points with your warped virtue signaling friends. It's sad. And weird.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
Here you go @blazers. They are narrowing it to give presidents some immunity, which is necessary in some instances, instead of the broader appeals court ruling. My suggestion for you would be to never comment on anything involving the court again. You continuously make yourself look stupid when you do.

 
Remember when certain poasters here did a victory lap when Colorado overstepped their authority and I wanted to bet it was going to be overturned? I do.


Unanimously? Even the DEI appointment got it right.
 
For anyone thinking that there is no counter to the whole marketing job of something called Bidenomics, there is a new website.




Enjoy. Or, at least don't get too depressed.
 
Hey, Nikki won one. In D.C.. Lol. Way to go Nikki.
DC is so weird. Its existence is weird. It’s like having a pet dog that gets the same treatment as a kid.
DC has 537,000 of voter eligible population, there are apparently 23K R's actually registered.

The breakdown is 75.7% are D's; 17.9% are unaffiliated; 5.9% are R's, and; 0.4% are Libertarian.

While I guess it's news that she "won", of the whopping total 2000 plus votes cast by R's in the primary, she got almost 1300 votes.

If a tree votes in the woods and no one is there to tally it . . . . . .
 
  • Haha
Reactions: gunslingerdick
Here you go @blazers. They are narrowing it to give presidents some immunity, which is necessary in some instances, instead of the broader appeals court ruling. My suggestion for you would be to never comment on anything involving the court again. You continuously make yourself look stupid when you do.

You are FOS, that is one guy's take based on their extremely brief memo AND you are assuming the outcome, AND it is odd for you to claim it is necessary given it has NEVER been necessary in the past and likely won't be in the future. They could hear anything they wanted to, and this wasn't needed or important given the manner and wording of the District's.
 
Remember when certain poasters here did a victory lap when Colorado overstepped their authority and I wanted to bet it was going to be overturned? I do.


Unanimously? Even the DEI appointment got it right.
Hey @tarheel0910 , guess you got to put one down on the negative list for Blaze. I mean, this was obviously those super conservatives since it was unanimous ruling, correct?
 
You are FOS, that is one guy's take based on their extremely brief memo AND you are assuming the outcome, AND it is odd for you to claim it is necessary given it has NEVER been necessary in the past and likely won't be in the future. They could hear anything they wanted to, and this wasn't needed or important given the manner and wording of the District's.
Apparently you stopped reading my posts before the last two sentences. You're just mad because I continue to call you out on your bullshit. Either take it like a man or just stop posting.
 
To me it’s just plain wrong for a state (aka political party in the state) to decide who is or isn’t on the ballot even if just a primary Ballot. As far as the legal-ese stuff goes this has exposed a huge sink hole in the constitution about a candidate participating in an insurrection. There’s way too much subjectivity in the vague amendment. SCOTUS said this opens the door to chaos and it makes sense they would think that. As far as letting congress decide…lol…well just drop the charade and admit the amendment is useless. Congress can’t agree that water is wet and if they tried rest assured one party would disageee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarheel0910
So sincere question: IF trump
Loses (and I don’t think he will btw) but IF he does do y’all think he steps away from being an influencer and de facto head of the repub party? Does he try to retain his status but repubs reject him? Does he run again?
 
So sincere question: IF trump
Loses (and I don’t think he will btw) but IF he does do y’all think he steps away from being an influencer and de facto head of the repub party? Does he try to retain his status but repubs reject him? Does he run again?
I could see him running again and no doubt these politicians would line up behind him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: heelmanwilm
Apparently you stopped reading my posts before the last two sentences. You're just mad because I continue to call you out on your bullshit. Either take it like a man or just stop posting.
The only bullshit is your insistence or hubris or whatever that them hearing the immunity is such an obvious outcome. Your take is weird.
 
The only bullshit is your insistence or hubris or whatever that them hearing the immunity is such an obvious outcome. Your take is weird.
Your take was based on a random judge's opinion. Mine was based on a court watcher's expert opinion based on the supreme court's actual words. Your take is beyond horrible.
 
So sincere question: IF trump
Loses (and I don’t think he will btw) but IF he does do y’all think he steps away from being an influencer and de facto head of the repub party? Does he try to retain his status but repubs reject him? Does he run again?

Great question. I don't know what I think here. I would say that I doubt he runs again in 28. I mean, he'll just be too old. I'd also say I don't think he voluntarily steps away from his influential position within politics. But I don't know what it would like for him. Of course he'll still beat the drum against corruption in politics and the swampy nature of it all (and I think that's a good thing). But how much influence can a 2 time loser really have? At some point, I think people will just reside themselves to the fact that "it is what it is". But, there is also the possibility that another Trump loss motivates some kind of revolution. And if the result of that is a total reset on national politics, then wouldn't we all agree that's a good thing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: heelmanwilm
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT