[Gorefest]

I am really sorry to break it to you, Macros, but I fear your uncle is actually an idiot.

[Macros]

yeah, he's always been quite heavy into the masons and all that.

but again, its a paradox, he's a smart man, just not when it comes to politics it seems.

[End of Disc One]

Macros, on 16 August 2018 - 04:14 PM, said:

He actually brought up Fox as being reasonably well balanced compared to CNN, at that point I nearly did a spit take with my coffee.

To be fair CNN is one hell of a low bar...but Fox still does not manage to top them.

[worry]

Macros, on 16 August 2018 - 12:45 PM, said:

Holy fuck.

My uncle from the states has just landed home for a few weeks. first time hes been home in years.

He's a trump supporter.

like full on believes all the conspiracy bullshit hilary is evil the pizza shop peadophile ring is real trump supporter.

trump is very clever and is driving out the old guard and they're running scared. FML


what really gets me is he's a VERY intelligent man, really switched on, well read, and knows his world history very well. But is just full on batshit templars crazy.

[Macros]

i have no idea what any of that means worry.


I follow US politics only lightly as its just a fucking shit storm of corruption, and what ever I read in here from you guys.

I must brush up over the next week or two so if I get cornered at grannys birthday I have plenty of water to hose down his burning insanity with

[Tsundoku]

Macros, on 16 August 2018 - 05:41 PM, said:

yeah, he's always been quite heavy into the masons and all that.

but again, its a paradox, he's a smart man, just not when it comes to politics it seems.

Intelligence =/= Wisdom.

I mean, it's even 2 different stats in D&D!

This post has been edited by Tsundoku: 17 August 2018 - 07:55 AM

[Tiste Simeon]

Macros. Here's a list of GOP sex crimes. See if that's more important to your Uncle than the unfounded pizza thing...

https://www.reddit.c...comment/e4b902d

[Macros]

jesus christ that makes for depressing reading

[Tiste Simeon]

Yeah but they never mention that!

[Morgoth]

conspiracies are like religion. The more you present arguments against them, the more fervent the believer becomes. There's no real point trying to argue. It'll only make the visit more stressfull. Better to just avoid the topic, or make it clear that the topic is not at all welcome. At least that's my experience.

This post has been edited by Morgoth: 18 August 2018 - 09:44 AM

[EmperorMagus]

I know we're all fond of comparing Trump and his ilk to the government folks in 1984, but Giuliani's new tirade on TV has taken it one step further.

"No! Truth isn't truth!"

"War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, and truth isn't truth."

Doesn't have the same ring to it, but other than that it fits just fine.

[Cause]

EmperorMagus, on 20 August 2018 - 08:47 AM, said:

I know we're all fond of comparing Trump and his ilk to the government folks in 1984, but Giuliani's new tirade on TV has taken it one step further.

"No! Truth isn't truth!"

"War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, and truth isn't truth."

Doesn't have the same ring to it, but other than that it fits just fine.

A stupid sound bite to be sure and one which he will be punished for. However he expands on his point. Trump and comey differ over what was said. Comey does have notes but does that necessarily mean they are accurate? Its not that truth is not truth its that sometimes the objective truth is unknowable. Saying that Trump could go down for perjury though because his account differs to Comeys on the record seems a bit of a stretch to me.

My won interpretation is this does not make good optics for trumps. Why is he so scared to give his version on the record? However Id say this kind of defensive action is par for the course for lawyers.

Also just a drop in the ocean of the chaos that is his presidency.

[Obdigore]

Cause, on 20 August 2018 - 09:46 AM, said:

EmperorMagus, on 20 August 2018 - 08:47 AM, said:

I know we're all fond of comparing Trump and his ilk to the government folks in 1984, but Giuliani's new tirade on TV has taken it one step further.

"No! Truth isn't truth!"

"War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, and truth isn't truth."

Doesn't have the same ring to it, but other than that it fits just fine.

A stupid sound bite to be sure and one which he will be punished for. However he expands on his point. Trump and comey differ over what was said. Comey does have notes but does that necessarily mean they are accurate? Its not that truth is not truth its that sometimes the objective truth is unknowable. Saying that Trump could go down for perjury though because his account differs to Comeys on the record seems a bit of a stretch to me.

My won interpretation is this does not make good optics for trumps. Why is he so scared to give his version on the record? However Id say this kind of defensive action is par for the course for lawyers.

Also just a drop in the ocean of the chaos that is his presidency.

No, Trump would go down for perjury if he lies under oath about things he said/did that were recorded with video evidence.

If Trump was ever put under oath, he would lie within 5 minutes, because he literally can't keep straight all the shit he said based on what he thinks his current audience wants to hear.

[QuickTidal]

EmperorMagus, on 20 August 2018 - 08:47 AM, said:

I know we're all fond of comparing Trump and his ilk to the government folks in 1984, but Giuliani's new tirade on TV has taken it one step further.

"No! Truth isn't truth!"

"War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, and truth isn't truth."

Doesn't have the same ring to it, but other than that it fits just fine.

Which reminds me of the opposite in Canada with our most no-bullshit, take no prisoners, punch assholes in the face, Prime Minister:

[EmperorMagus]

Cause, on 20 August 2018 - 09:46 AM, said:

A stupid sound bite to be sure and one which he will be punished for. However he expands on his point. Trump and comey differ over what was said. Comey does have notes but does that necessarily mean they are accurate? Its not that truth is not truth its that sometimes the objective truth is unknowable. Saying that Trump could go down for perjury though because his account differs to Comeys on the record seems a bit of a stretch to me.

My won interpretation is this does not make good optics for trumps. Why is he so scared to give his version on the record? However Id say this kind of defensive action is par for the course for lawyers.

Also just a drop in the ocean of the chaos that is his presidency.

Yeah, I know. I listened to the rest of what he said too. Nonetheless, 'truth isn't truth' is an eminently stupid thing to say on national TV. And it's worse in our current era of people blatantly ignoring fact and reality in favor of their make-believe. If someone had said "truth isn't truth" 10 years ago and presented the same explanation as Giuliani, I would have been a lot less angry than I am right now. Because today Trump's main defense against all the allegations against him is that "regardless of the facts and reality, everybody is lying."

"Truth isn't truth" has a different meaning in this context.

[worry]

Something tells me "I don't want to put my client in front of a prosecutor because he will inevitably commit perjury" is a winning strategy, but what do I know?

[Cause]

So what do we think is happening in the manaforte trial? Day 3 with no verdict. Seems to me that the jury is struggling with something over their head. I would imagine that for 12 average americans the nuances of money laundering and shelf companies must be hard to follow. Especially when these things are sometimes grey but not illegal.

I read an article that the judge said he would no longer answer questions relating to banking laws and shelf companies and they must rely on their collective knowledge and recollection. I understand that he may not want to influence them but I also cant understand why the jury cant have help.

Edit- I understand anonymous juries are very rare. Still I wonder if I would be happy to be a known juror on such a trial when the partisanship is so heated.

This post has been edited by Cause: 21 August 2018 - 08:18 AM

[worry]

I don't know the ins and outs of this stuff, but I'm nervous about some of the questions the jury has been asking (like to re-explain "reasonable doubt"). The judge has also been pretty bratty throughout the trial, but I can't say if refusing to answer those points of law is part of that or just normal judge stuff. And I mean, in general it's good for judges to be tough on prosecutors? But that's in conflict with what I want to happen!

Would love to get a more lawyerly take on it all though.

[Cause]

Luv2B_Sassy, on 21 August 2018 - 09:03 AM, said:

I don't know the ins and outs of this stuff, but I'm nervous about some of the questions the jury has been asking (like to re-explain "reasonable doubt"). The judge has also been pretty bratty throughout the trial, but I can't say if refusing to answer those points of law is part of that or just normal judge stuff. And I mean, in general it's good for judges to be tough on prosecutors? But that's in conflict with what I want to happen!

Would love to get a more lawyerly take on it all though.

Bratty How?

Also apparently ths jury is anonymous. The judge says he has been getting death threats.

[Aptorian]

The judge has been gettibg att3ntion because he's been undermining the prosecutors because he kept interrupting them, telling them not to phrase arguments a certain way, disagreeing with their tactics, etc. It reached a point where the judge actually had to apologize for his own conduct.

The judge just sounds like a terrible judge in general.