Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gcomeau and 2 guests

The Trump Administration's War With Reality

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by gcomeau   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:45 pm

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2215
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:

Certain based on WHAT?

It has been pointed out to you that over half a dozen investigations, run by her political opponents who like nothing better than to call her a liar... all found she didn't lie.


It has been pointed out to you that the statements to which you are referring were not lies.



You have provided ZERO backing for lies being told about Benghazi.



From where does your certitude spring? An act of religious faith?


All those investigations prove is that she is not legally lying. That does not mean that her actions conveyed the truth as she knew it. She shared with her daughter what she believed to be most likely true.


FFS, there are STANDARDS for official statements issued by government officials about attacks that killed Americans. And "hey America, let me just spout off about my personal suspicions immediately after it happened before the intelligence is in with the findings" doesn't freaking cut it.


That is not LYING. That is the basic responsibilities of the position.


When the intel said it, then it was publicly communicated. It's. That. Damn. Simple.


You have yet to provide any actual lies.
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by PeterZ   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:47 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6231
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
gcomeau wrote:https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/827867311054974976

"What is our country coming to when a judge can halt a Homeland Security travel ban and anyone, even with bad intentions, can come into U.S.?"


What do you believe now?




Yes, he DID criticize the ability of the judge to make the ruling. He didn't say he couldn't believe a judge DID do it. He said he couldn't believe a judge COULD do it. And in another tweet made within minutes of that tweet also called him a "so-called" judge.


Question whether a judge could intrude on a Constitutional authority given to the Legislative branch and delegated to the executive through statute and rule the words don't mean what they say they do but the words mean something completely different? Yeah, I question whether SCOTUS has the ability to ignore the words of a statute and assert something the words do NOT support in anyway.

I read his remarks as questioning what ability any judge has to ignore the words of both the Constitution and the applicable statute. That he complies with that asinine ruling tells me he is not challenging the courts actual ruling and authority to make rulings.
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by PeterZ   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:49 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6231
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
FFS, there are STANDARDS for official statements issued by government officials about attacks that killed Americans. And "hey America, let me just spout off about my personal suspicions immediately after it happened before the intelligence is in with the findings" doesn't freaking cut it.


That is not LYING. That is the basic responsibilities of the position.


When the intel said it, then it was publicly communicated. It's. That. Damn. Simple.


You have yet to provide any actual lies.


We will not convince the other on this. Believe as you will.
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by gcomeau   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:52 pm

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2215
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:Yes, he DID criticize the ability of the judge to make the ruling. He didn't say he couldn't believe a judge DID do it. He said he couldn't believe a judge COULD do it. And in another tweet made within minutes of that tweet also called him a "so-called" judge.


Question whether a judge could intrude on a Constitutional authority given to the Legislative branch and delegated to the executive through statute and rule the words don't mean what they say they do but the words mean something completely different? Yeah, I question whether SCOTUS has the ability to ignore the words of a statute and assert something the words do NOT support in anyway.

I read his remarks as questioning what ability any judge has to ignore the words of both the Constitution and the applicable statute. That he complies with that asinine ruling tells me he is not challenging the courts actual ruling and authority to make rulings.


You do realize Trump didn't say any of that? That's you, not Trump. You're making arguments then assigning them back to him after the fact and saying "see, what he said made sense". But he never said it.


(Just setting aside for the moment your claim that *multiple* courts now have just not understood the Constitution like you apparently do)
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by PeterZ   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:24 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6231
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
You do realize Trump didn't say any of that? That's you, not Trump. You're making arguments then assigning them back to him after the fact and saying "see, what he said made sense". But he never said it.


(Just setting aside for the moment your claim that *multiple* courts now have just not understood the Constitution like you apparently do)

I gave you my take on what he said. Yours is different, but that's not a surprise.

I don't believe that the Constitution denies Congress the ability to control immigration and only limit who can be made a citizen. That is just ludicrous. I doubt most of the federal courts believe that either.

If this was true, then anyone can enter the US for any reason and the US government cannot do a damn thing about. The entire visa process would be pointless because that is a limit on immigration. So, if the US Legislature has the authority to limit immigration as granted by the Constitution, then Congress can delegate that function as it did in the Refugee Act of 1980 that amended the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965 which allowed the President to limit for a period of 12 months the number of refugees allowed into the country.

The travel ban for permanent residents with re-entry permits should have been addressed and as I understand it was addressed but not directly in the language of the EO. That part was indeed over-reach or sloppy. The refugee ban, was not.
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by Howard T. Map-addict   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:34 pm

Howard T. Map-addict
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1392
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:47 am
Location: Philadelphia, PA

For all that Trump tweeted,
I must NOTE that our Border Guards have complied with
that Judge's Ruling.
Even though my Note accords with what Peter said.

I further NOTE that many Trump tweets of complaint and
anger end with such words as "so sad," which are
opinions, not promises of an action.
In other words, he speaks loudly,
but doesn't always wave a stick.

Teddy R. might not be pleased with him.

HTM

gcomeau wrote:
PeterZ wrote:
Unchanged. This is criticism of judicial over reach. He did not challenge the judges ability to make a bad ruling by NOT complying with the bad ruling. He is in compliance.


Yes, he DID criticize the ability of the judge to make the ruling. He didn't say he couldn't believe a judge DID do it. He said he couldn't believe a judge COULD do it. And in another tweet made within minutes of that tweet also called him a "so-called" judge.
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by gcomeau   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:03 pm

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2215
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:
FFS, there are STANDARDS for official statements issued by government officials about attacks that killed Americans. And "hey America, let me just spout off about my personal suspicions immediately after it happened before the intelligence is in with the findings" doesn't freaking cut it.


That is not LYING. That is the basic responsibilities of the position.


When the intel said it, then it was publicly communicated. It's. That. Damn. Simple.


You have yet to provide any actual lies.


We will not convince the other on this. Believe as you will.


Yeah, well when only one of us is interested in even using the available data to formulate their conclusions convincing does tend to become problematic.
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by gcomeau   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:10 pm

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2215
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:I gave you my take on what he said. Yours is different, but that's not a surprise.


No, you gave me an argument which you formulated yourself for criticizing a judicial opinion but which bears no relationship to anything Trump said. Then attributed it to Trump.

I don't believe that the Constitution denies Congress the ability to control immigration and only limit who can be made a citizen. That is just ludicrous.


Yes, it is extremely ludicrous. So ludicrous one might even suspect it is nothing but a strawman that has nothing to do with the reasoning behind the Court's actual judgement...
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by PeterZ   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:23 pm

PeterZ
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 6231
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:11 pm
Location: Colorado

gcomeau wrote:
PeterZ wrote:
We will not convince the other on this. Believe as you will.


Yeah, well when only one of us is interested in even using the available data to formulate their conclusions convincing does tend to become problematic.


We both use the available data but do not assign the same weight to the facts as we see it. We have different world views and that truly leads us to different conclusions when presented with the same facts.

And yes, convincing each other will be a chore. Just as those from our respective sides will face a chore in trying to convince those on the other side. My conversation with you does not intend to convince you of anything. I merely want to share my pov with you. That may lead to nothing or it may lead to a shared value to build upon. We'll see.
Top
Re: The Trump Administration's War With Reality
Post by gcomeau   » Tue Feb 21, 2017 5:55 pm

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2215
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 4:24 pm

PeterZ wrote:
gcomeau wrote:Yeah, well when only one of us is interested in even using the available data to formulate their conclusions convincing does tend to become problematic.


We both use the available data but do not assign the same weight to the facts as we see it.


Oh do we really?


Ok then.


I'm using the findings of over half a dozen congressional investigations (that said there was no lying or coverup), the content of the intelligence assessments being provided at the time which said what Clinton and the State Department were then passing on (which mean... no lies), and the actual content of the things Clinton and state said on the subject which matched those assessments (therefore, not lies).

Hence, no lying.

You are using....


"Well, she suspected something different". (which doesn't make communication of the content of the initial intelligence assessments a lie. It makes it doing her job while she waits for the intel to update and finalize and then communicate that too...)



Aaaaaaand.... what? When do you present the data we are both apparently looking at that contains the... you know.... "she lied" part? Rather than just proclaiming you are certain she did?


And I noticed you never addressed motivation. WHY would she have lied? It's ridiculous. There's no purpose to it.
Top

Return to Politics