Societal collapse

[Bob Butler]

The left won't be happy until Trump and the American tax base are all dead and their wealth confiscated as reparations for 'slavery'.

Too bad for the leftists that the electricity and water will cut out permanently while this is going on.

The Democrats are pushing bidenomics. Steer money and manufacturing toward helping to create jobs. The Republicans are obsessed with 2020, with rehashing the insurrection. They are trying to continue white supremacy by forcing old religious doctrine and prejudice. They are censoring schools, exaggerating the homicide problem, an furthering climate change disasters.

Republicans are not really ones to talk about a failing economy when they do not even present an economic vision. I'm in a nice safe blue state, and am not worried about the collapse of the economy or my political party.

[Anon guest]

The left won't be happy until Trump and the American tax base are all dead and their wealth confiscated as reparations for 'slavery'.

Too bad for the leftists that the electricity and water will cut out permanently while this is going on.

The Democrats are pushing bidenomics. Steer money and manufacturing toward helping to create jobs. The Republicans are obsessed with 2020, with rehashing the insurrection. They are trying to continue white supremacy by forcing old religious doctrine and prejudice. They are censoring schools, exaggerating the homicide problem, an furthering climate change disasters.

Republicans are not really ones to talk about a failing economy when they do not even present an economic vision. I'm in a nice safe blue state, and am not worried about the collapse of the economy or my political party.

Before Trump ran for office, I had never voted Republican. I voted for Trump twice. I still support him. I see what is happening to the country. I am still financially sound, so I have options that most don't. I am a white, middle-aged, male, a combat veteran, and I am afraid that America will crash out completely. I am against the trans agenda.The leftist are Maoist hellbent on total destruction. I'm fighting against.

And I'm a gay man. This is where I am at now.

[Bob Butler]

Before Trump ran for office, I had never voted Republican. I voted for Trump twice. I still support him. I see what is happening to the country. I am still financially sound, so I have options that most don't. I am a white, middle-aged, male, a combat veteran, and I am afraid that America will crash out completely. I am against the trans agenda.The leftist are Maoist hellbent on total destruction. I'm fighting against.

And I'm a gay man. This is where I am at now.

I have voted for both parties, aiming for the best candidate not the best party, though as I see it this is usually Democratic. However, my uncle was elected local Republican sheriff, so it is not exclusive. I am white, retired, but in my younger days worked on aspects of all three elements of the nuclear triad plus various projects for the three letter spy agencies. Among my field trips I visited for work places like Vandenburg, Moffett Airfield. Valley Forge, the Washington DC area, Colorado Springs, Great Falls Montana, Fort Hauchuca in New Mexico (Tombstone), and Atlanta. I have no particular bias against any minority, gender or sexual preference. I may not be comfortable with some, bit am not set against them.

I am not Maoist or hellbent on total destruction. None of the Democrats I know are. The gentle comment is that you are badly deluded. I see a new birth of freedom as being the normal result of a crisis, plus the collapse of the old way of looking at things. Part of the old way is a hatred of gay men. I'm surprised to find you embracing that.

[Tom Mazanec]

No, you are just bent on the total destruction of thousands of preborn babies a week.

[Bob Butler]

No, you are just bent on the total destruction of thousands of preborn babies a week.

Or I am against religious fanatics attempting to use the government to enforce their doctrines on people who do not share them. Freedom involves learning to live with people who make different moral choices than you. White supremacists attempt to force European religious doctrines and prejudices on other cultures. I am not sure which is worse.

[jdcpapa]

I guess there had to be a red response.

Dershowitz is a "blue" democrat.

So far, though, the Daily Collar is a conservative propaganda publication, not a peer reviewed journal. If the arguments raised were serious, they would have gone with an established law review. Obviously, none would touch the articles presented.

Tribe, Dershowitz and Turley are rendering legal opinions in the media. There is a distinction to a paper review process. Please provide a cite, if one exists, on Tribe's peer review.

Dershowitz’s false telling of history, imagining an Amendment didn’t and couldn’t work, is obviously false. It did function.

Please be more specific. What exactly did Dershowitz say about history that was false? I understood him to say that the intent of the 14th amendment was to the issue of a civil war as an insurrection. The January 6 riot does not rise to the level of a civil war or an insurrection as to date no such charges have been filed. The subject Congressional referral to the DOJ was ignored.

Turley argued not that it didn’t or couldn’t work, but that it was dangerous. He tried to invoke red violence. Not a worry.

He rendered an legal opinion. He states, as a matter of fact, that there have been no charges levied for incitement or insurrection related to January 6. Further, he states that many people believe it was merely a riot. Here is an article reporting on the FBI's conclusion that there was no insurrection: https://news.yahoo.com/fbi-finds-no-evi ... 36457.html. The FBI has found no evidence that Trump was directly involved in organizing Capitol-riot violence, it also found little evidence of an organized plot to overturn the election results, and "ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said one former official.

Since the DoJ started convicting and imprisoning insurrectionists

Hmmmm, please provide evidence.

even the most intense MAGA people have ceased violence, excepting only the spree killers, most of whom are suicidal.

Can you refer me to an article or at least a penciled note?

Trump called for protests walking the edge of calling for renewed violence at his first few arrests. No such violence occurred. The pro and anti Trump people were both outnumbered by the press. Trump ceased even trying.

Do tell.

The ammendment authors assumed insurrectionists are more dangerous if allowed near the military or the government. I would argue this is the case.

Apparently, so does Dershowitz.

[spottybrowncow]

the Daily Collar is a conservative propaganda publication, not a peer reviewed journal.

Sadly, "peer-reviewed" doesn't mean much anymore. "Peers" of various ideological persuasions will sometimes approve or reject submitted works based upon their support (or lack of support) of their preferred narrative.

Here is a hilarious read demonstrating how far "peer review" has fallen. What is funniest, if you read far enough on the topic, is the indignation of the far-left "professors" (uggh...) who were caught red-handed approving complete bullshit because it fit their narrative. I would recommend it as "must reading" for anyone not inclined to accept bullshit as reality.

BTW, this article is just about "academic" grievance studies; "academic" legal opinions are, if anything, potentially even less believable, since law is completely made-up, anyway.

God help us all.

https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/aca ... holarship/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair

[Bob Butler]

I watch a sampling of MSNBC programming, but do not take notes. When Luttig and Tribe appeared they quoted a more formal article, but they made a more populist presentation. Try https://www.msnbc.com/ali-velshi/watch/ ... 1177797850 if you really want to chase down the formal paper.

Derchhwitz claimed the disqualification clause can’t work. It did work at a time the amendment authors were alive.

Some of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers were found guilty of seditious conspiracy. This indicates participation in an insurrection. A New Mexico judge removed an officer as he was at the Capitol on January 6, and found the event to be an insurrection. Admittedly, the DoJ has been slow in going after the White House bunch, but that is changing. While Jack Smith is building a case for speed and thus is sticking with other charges that can be more easily made, the Georgia RICO case will cover the lack.

The bits about who showed up at the indictments and the lack of violence were covered by several MSNBC programs. While the talking heads were pointing out the small size and lack of violence, the cameras were panning the area of the courthouses to confirm the reporting. I guess you get news from other sources who did not mention it? MSNBC was also big on reporting Trump’s calls for edged confrontations for the first two indictments, and the lack in subsequent cases. I personally thought the numerous security people at all four events were overkill. If security was insufficient on January 6, no more.

I guess this is part of the difference between Earth One and Earth Two. You can get news censored to emphasize the opinion of the news source. In the recent Fox v Dominion lawsuit, Murdock suggested they tell their audience what they want to hear. It is not about red and blue, it is about green. Build your audience share to charge more for ads. Thus, during the discovery phase Dominion found memos by Fox hosts which showed blatantly contemptuous opinions of their guests which did not show up on air. While the MSM is somewhat more honest in their reporting, I suspect many outlets of showing a firm bias supporting the blue vantage points, for much the same reason as Fox.

[Cool Breeze]

You're lost. Why don't you bring up a topic that actually someone might get something from, or ask a question that might enhance people's awareness, rather than dull it.

spotty again pointed out how you just report buzzwords, which is all I've been saying - "peer reviewed". You don't even know what that means.

You're part of the matrix. Just admit it and go back to your pod.

[Bob Butler]

I've noted that CNN and MSNBC are covering quite a few cases where various people are looking into whether the disqualification clause should be invoked or Trump's name put on the ballot. Doesn't look like it will go away short of the Supreme Court. It makes me wonder a bit. Trump put several justices on the court and may think they own him one. On the other hand, the Federalist Society is behind a lot of the disqualification clause recent research. Trump didn't actually evaluate the judges he appointed, but let the Federalist Society do it for him. At any rate, with the meaning of the 14 Amendment so clear and the SCOTUS reputation being so strongly questioned, I would bet on a disqualification. We'll see.