quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I don’t disagree that there is a loss of common agreement.

On the left the whole trans women are women thing being an obvious one. That they are people is true, but their “truth” isn’t the same as factual reality.

In medicine, I’ve been around long enough to see once established orthodoxy to be changed and then come back again… I’m very reluctant to call anything “established science” and I well remember the crap I got here by pointing out masking was not established science for prevention of viral spread. They trotted Fauci and his claims on the news… and now he’s admitted there was no actual science supporting their claims.

A big part of being a professional is knowing where your certainty lies. Best practices isn’t the same as being right.

I find it rather unlikely that a relatively new field like climatology has anywhere near the experience and study that medicine/biological science does, yet you are expecting folks to bow to their rather broad and overwhelming claims with a pretty solid record of being wrong in detail for decades.

I’m not disclaiming that weather patterns are not changing, but rather not buying the certainty it is CO2 emissions directly causing it.

Personally, I think the crap we are putting in the oceans and the (IMO) unsustainable amount of harvest we are taking from it has more to do with climatic effects than planes, trains, automobiles, and cow farts.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...5ba87d3b30a4dc&ei=91

Trump appears desperate to keep Jack Smith’s findings under wraps
Story by Steve Benen • 4h • 3 min read

When Donald Trump won a second term nearly 10 weeks ago, it marked the beginning of the end of special counsel Jack Smith’s criminal cases against the president-elect. Almost immediately after Election Day, the prosecutor and his team grudgingly wrapped up their work — not because they wanted to, or because they lacked compelling evidence, but because of Justice Department guidelines related to prosecuting a sitting president.

Smith’s resignation was inevitable, and as my MSNBC colleague Clarissa-Jan Lim noted, it was tucked into a brief filed Saturday.

Trump, who’s spent much of his pre-inaugural transition period railing hysterically against the special counsel, posted an item to his social media platform that read in part, “Deranged Jack Smith was fired today by the DOJ. He is a disgrace to himself, his family, and his Country.”

In reality, of course, there’s an important difference between resigning and being fired, but the Republican kept going, publishing a follow-up item falsely asserting that the prosecutor and his colleagues “were sent packing.” Hours later, the president-elect endorsed and amplified an online message that said Smith, among other prosecutors, should be “disbarred” and “indicted.”

Why bother with a blizzard of attacks against a special counsel as he ends his cases and exits the Justice Department? I won’t pretend to be able to read Trump’s mind, but it appears the Republican remains concerned about the fact that Smith’s final report on his investigations and their findings might yet reach the public.

As last week got underway, the president-elect launched an effort to block the release of Smith’s findings, and as this week got underway, Trump publicly questioned why the prosecutor should even be “allowed” to follow law enforcement guidelines. This was his online statement in its entirety:

The claim-to-lie ratio in Trump’s missive was effectively 1:1. Smith isn’t “deranged”; his cases were not a “witch hunt”; the cases were not brought for “political purposes”; he wasn’t “dismissed” by the Justice Department; the special counsel’s work wasn’t “illegitimate”; there was no “persecution”; the prosecutor’s court filings were not a “joke”; and the president-elect wasn’t elected in a “landslide.”

But of particular interest was the Republican’s insistence that Americans should not see Smith’s final findings.

It’s important to emphasize that, as NBC News recently explained, the Justice Department’s special counsel regulations require Smith to file a report to the attorney general “explaining his charging decisions before he steps down.” As part of that same process, the incoming president’s legal defense team has already been able to review a draft copy of the special counsel’s report.

Evidently, Team Trump didn’t like what it saw.

So what happens now? Writing for MSNBC late last week, Carol C. Lam, a former U.S. attorney, explained that Smith’s findings have been “caught in limbo“ in recent weeks, adding, “What we’re left with is the dizzying spectacle, a damning report and a convicted felon just two weeks away from becoming president of the United States, after which time he will likely try to discredit and bury both the investigation and the report itself.”

Complicating matters, Steve Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University, further explained that it’s still possible that the U.S. Supreme Court might very well be “dragged into” the question regarding Smith’s report.

With seven days remaining before Inauguration Day, it’s an open question as to when or whether the special counsel’s findings will reach the public. Watch this space.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Federal Court orders the report could be released.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
We paid for the damn report. We ought to see it.

quote:

Special Counsel David Weiss blasted President Biden in his highly-anticipated report on his years-long investigation into Hunter Biden, saying the commander-in-chief's characterizations of the probe into his son were "wrong" and "unfairly" maligned Justice Department officials, while admitting that the presidential pardon made it "inappropriate" for him to discuss whether any additional charges against the first son were warranted.

quote:

heck, even jobama recognizes that lawfare exists

quote:

Special Counsel David Weiss blasted President Biden in his highly-anticipated report

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Special Counsel David Weiss blasted President Biden in his highly-anticipated report

I think I read that Trump has his personal attorneys all setup to run DOJ. He will treat the DOJ like his personal law firm.

What do you think about that Lane?

quote:

Maybe this will be an end to all the lawfare and we will have some normal governance for a while. One can only hope.

quote:

IMO, it's your reality, based in fiction.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
uhm, ME,
in small words, please explain to me how you aren't RANTING about Biden saying hunter's legal woes were actually lawfare, by the BIDEN doj? can you 'splain that me?

quote:

I can only chuckle when I read this written by the one person here that has zero base in reality

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
uhm, ME,
in small words, please explain to me how you aren't RANTING about Biden saying hunter's legal woes were actually lawfare, by the BIDEN doj? can you 'splain that me?

The Biden admin authorized the special prosecutor to investigate and didn't interfere or make a 1000 lies during the process.

It's a disgusting paradox, but I can live with it. If you had the power, would you pardon your son?

If you go on and distract this thread, I'll just ignore you. I answered out of courtesy - this time.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

I can only chuckle when I read this written by the one person here that has zero base in reality

Reality in the context here is the ability to sort out lies from --- not lies

For example, the claim or fiction narrative, lie, of Rightists per Trump is that Trump is a victim of politically motivated lawfare. That's a gross lie, and also harmful to the nation.

Believing that lie is multiplying the harm.

Here's another reality: The scope and significance of this analysis, the Trump era, cannot be overstated. It will take years to play out, and if history is a clue or prologue, this will not go well.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

I can only chuckle when I read this written by the one person here that has zero base in reality

Reality in the context here is the ability to sort out lies from --- not lies

For example, the claim or fiction narrative, lie, of Rightists per Trump is that Trump is a victim of politically motivated lawfare. That's a gross lie, and also harmful to the nation.

Believing that lie is multiplying the harm.

Here's another reality: The scope and significance of this analysis, the Trump era, cannot be overstated. It will take years to play out, and if history is a clue or prologue, this will not go well.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
The thing that astounds me and concerns me too is that objective truth on this is readily available.

To believe Trump's lies about lawfare is to believe that the whole system is corrupt and all those jurors, judges, attorneys, witnesses, testimony, prosecutors, etc., bar associations deciding on other attorneys that they violated the ethics rules, that they were all in cahoots, is beyond reason.

I don't need to be smart to decipher this. All that's needed is to look at the associated facts.

It is astonishing that anyone could believe Trump's lies despite evidence to the contrary.
.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
The thing that astounds me and concerns me too is that objective truth on this is readily available.

To believe Trump's lies about lawfare is to believe that the whole system is corrupt and all those jurors, judges, attorneys, witnesses, testimony, prosecutors, etc., bar associations deciding on other attorneys that they violated the ethics rules, that they were all in cahoots, is beyond reason.

I don't need to be smart to decipher this. All that's needed is to look at the associated facts.

It is astonishing that anyone could believe Trump's lies despite evidence to the contrary.
.

And yet you are crickets on jobamas doing the same for hunter...

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I do not like how this is being reported. I have seen headlines, “ Jack Smith’s Report says Trump Would Have Been Convicted.”

That is not what the report says. The report says there was sufficient, admissible evidence that a jury could convict. That is Jack Smith’s ethical obligation. It is against professional rules to seek a prosecution one does not believe their is sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.

This is a nutshell, is why I would have not publicly released the report. It was probably subject to an Open Records Request.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
The thing that astounds me and concerns me too is that objective truth on this is readily available.

Please start reading it.

To believe Trump's lies about lawfare is to believe that the whole system is corrupt

There IS corruption for sure. But more than corruption…the legal system has become a political tool. A tool powered by idealism.

and all those jurors, judges, attorneys, witnesses, testimony, prosecutors, etc., bar associations deciding on other attorneys that they violated the ethics rules, that they were all in cahoots, is beyond reason.

The “all” is where you go off track. For sure not all…not even a majority…actually a small minority. But, there is enough to strategically craft lawfare. Make NO mistake, each of these cases was carefully crafted to have the “correct” prosecutors and venues (read judges and jurists). The NY hush-money case was not brought due to harm citizenry but again “crafted” at a goal…to weaken a political opponent. Justice played NO part.

I don't need to be smart to decipher this.

Obviously, It would help.

All that's needed is to look at the associated facts.

Please start! Quit reading the propaganda drivel you thrive on for your confirmation bisa.

It is astonishing that anyone could believe Trump's lies despite evidence to the contrary.

Please try to find that reality you speak of.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
The thing that astounds me and concerns me too is that objective truth on this is readily available.

Please start reading it.

To believe Trump's lies about lawfare is to believe that the whole system is corrupt

There IS corruption for sure. But more than corruption…the legal system has become a political tool. A tool powered by idealism.

and all those jurors, judges, attorneys, witnesses, testimony, prosecutors, etc., bar associations deciding on other attorneys that they violated the ethics rules, that they were all in cahoots, is beyond reason.

The “all” is where you go off track. For sure not all…not even a majority…actually a small minority. But, there is enough to strategically craft lawfare. Make NO mistake, each of these cases was carefully crafted to have the “correct” prosecutors and venues (read judges and jurists). The NY hush-money case was not brought due to harm citizenry but again “crafted” at a goal…to weaken a political opponent. Justice played NO part.

I don't need to be smart to decipher this.

Obviously, It would help.

All that's needed is to look at the associated facts.

Please start! Quit reading the propaganda drivel you thrive on for your confirmation bisa.

It is astonishing that anyone could believe Trump's lies despite evidence to the contrary.

Please try to find that reality you speak of.

quote:

Please start reading it.

quote:

Please start reading

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Start reading what? Smith's report? Have you read it?

You say, "powered by idealism". I never thought of the rule of law and associated due process as "idealism". Maybe the Founders thought so. But really it is ideal compared to other systems. I would much prefer the legal system be a function of "idealism" than fascism.

That is the ‘F***ing’ problem ME…in much of these instances Lady Justice took off her blindfold!

Anytime you bring the term fascism ME…I am going to disregard you as a space cadet. Get real if you want to have meaningful conversation with people who live in reality. I live or die by the reality of science and facts.



Well, I'm glad to read that now you say SOME corruption. You were making blanket claims before. Do you deny that Trump has used the legal system as a political tool, and it will get worse?

I'm sure the nuances of these cases were carefully considered. Not “considered” — CRAFTED! After all, they were dealing with Teflon Don. As it turns out, he earned the name, again.

There is no evidence that the so-called hush-money case in NY was crafted to "weaken a political opponent".

Are you F***ING NUTS!? One-hundred% for sure there is and plenty!

All prosecutions and all defense "craft" their parts to win. The political aspect of it couldn't be avoided.

After all, it was election interference, "crafted" by some slick operators to hide it inside attorney fees.

>>> <<<

Me being smart? I do the best I can to not be stupid.

The MSM portion that I consider the Truth media has lived up to my expectations.

Laughable

Fox has too, in a flip side disappointing way. If that's confirmation bias, I'm ok with it. But you are using the term "confirmation bias" wrong, IMO. I think you are projecting for one thing.

Wrong…you are epitome of person who feeds off of “confirmation bias.” Sorry to inform.

My "bias" favors Truth based in facts and evidence; truth built upon truth.

Laughing again.

It's telling that you consider all the stuff you say as truth yet has no basis other than lies built upon lies.

Still rolling on the floor.

I wonder where it all started with you, but I'll never know. What I can know is at least 90% of the shit you believe recently can be traced back to some Trump lie{s}. You have internalized his spew. I wonder why you are the perfect vessel.

>>> ME <<<

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
The thing that astounds me and concerns me too is that objective truth on this is readily available.

Please start reading it.

To believe Trump's lies about lawfare is to believe that the whole system is corrupt

There IS corruption for sure. But more than corruption…the legal system has become a political tool. A tool powered by idealism.

and all those jurors, judges, attorneys, witnesses, testimony, prosecutors, etc., bar associations deciding on other attorneys that they violated the ethics rules, that they were all in cahoots, is beyond reason.

The “all” is where you go off track. For sure not all…not even a majority…actually a small minority. But, there is enough to strategically craft lawfare. Make NO mistake, each of these cases was carefully crafted to have the “correct” prosecutors and venues (read judges and jurists). The NY hush-money case was not brought due to harm citizenry but again “crafted” at a goal…to weaken a political opponent. Justice played NO part.

I don't need to be smart to decipher this.

Obviously, It would help.

All that's needed is to look at the associated facts.

Please start! Quit reading the propaganda drivel you thrive on for your confirmation bisa.

It is astonishing that anyone could believe Trump's lies despite evidence to the contrary.

Please try to find that reality you speak of.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
Lane
He doesn't want a conversation, he is starved for any attention.. put him on ignore

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
I live or die by the reality of science and facts.

quote:

Originally posted by JudgeG:
As a judge, I’ve signed a few thousand warrants, all supported by a sworn affidavit(s) that the affiant believed to be true and supported by the “facts” therein alleged. I’ve also (as head of a Public Defender’s office with multiple attorneys and investigators under my charge) defended several thousand felony indictments. I also practiced criminal defense law for 20 years, death penalty murder to traffic violations.

It is amazing the number of those indictments and warrants went to shit when deductive reasoning was implied rather than the inductive reasoning used by most law enforcement officers and prosecutors. In other words…. Here’s the culprit so let’s find the facts that prove it, instead of, here’s the crime and let’s find facts that lead us to who the culprit is.

Nowhere is their a greater example of the old saying: when you assume, you’re likely to make an “ass” out of “u” and “me”.

quote:

If you are so well founded in facts and science, then why is it that you believe in Trump's lies?