(06-11-2022 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
So, essentially the same judicial system as Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran?
Yeah, I put a lot of faith in that system. It is just so American.
(This post was last modified: 06-11-2022 09:05 PM by OptimisticOwl.)
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
What about that sounds wrong to you?
That wasn't the point that I was making.
Quote:At least with Good Owl, his items are put up to the acid test of actually having a contrary issue being presented to them. Which many times you do.
Right. And he almost never engages with a contrary point. And when he does engage, it isn't in good faith. Bad example TBH.
Quote:In the case of the '1/6 Committee', there is none of that ability to counter embedded within the framework of that body, is there? No challenge to anything presented is even allowed. And this is what you are defending? Seriously?
Defending? Dude, if you are going to jump in at least keep up.
My point was not a spirited defense of this committee. Refer to my earlier comments on that topic.
My point was that OO was happy to deliver a condescending lecture on the virtues of keeping an open mind regarding GoodOwl's posts however he seems to not be following his own unsolicited advice when the shoe is on the other foot.
(06-11-2022 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
So, essentially the same judicial system as Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran?
Yeah, I put a lot of faith in that system. It is just so American.
Honest question... can't remember the specifics... in previous Senate hearings when the majority party is investigating the opponents.... does the accused typically get to mount a defense/enlist a defense attorney?
(06-11-2022 05:04 PM)GoodOwl Wrote: Look it up. Executive Order 13990 signed by Former Vice prezdon't Biden* on 1/20/2021 put us in this mess. It revoked 8 prior EOs six of which addressed infrastructure, pipelines and energy independence through drilling on federal land and offshore.
The public name of EO 13990 is "Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science To Tackle the Climate Crisis" ... ain't that a hoot?
Who else ot there would welcome some mean tweets right now AND A RETURN TO $1.89 GAS! #LGBFJB #DemokkkratsHateYOU!
bumpity
Souce document in link: Former Vice prezdon't Biden*, admittedly, a verrrry biased and totally unreliable source! Mazel Tov; Word to ya' mutha!
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
What about that sounds wrong to you?
That wasn't the point that I was making.
Quote:At least with Good Owl, his items are put up to the acid test of actually having a contrary issue being presented to them. Which many times you do.
Right. And he almost never engages with a contrary point. And when he does engage, it isn't in good faith. Bad example TBH.
Quote:In the case of the '1/6 Committee', there is none of that ability to counter embedded within the framework of that body, is there? No challenge to anything presented is even allowed. And this is what you are defending? Seriously?
Defending? Dude, if you are going to jump in at least keep up.
My point was not a spirited defense of this committee. Refer to my earlier comments on that topic.
My point was that OO was happy to deliver a condescending lecture on the virtues of keeping an open mind regarding GoodOwl's posts however he seems to not be following his own unsolicited advice when the shoe is on the other foot.
I guess you didn’t read my explanation. You certainly didn’t answer my question.
(This post was last modified: 06-11-2022 11:59 PM by OptimisticOwl.)
Quote: Consumer sentiment sank to its worst level on record in early June as the rising cost of food, gas, and other essentials weighed on American consumers.
The University of Michigan’s closely watched Surveys of Consumers consumer sentiment index slumped to 50.2 in the preliminary June survey, marking the lowest level recorded by the survey, which dates back to the mid-’70s.
Friday’s reading marked a drop from May’s already-depressed level of 58.4, and missed estimates for a print of 58.1, according to Bloomberg data. Throughout 2019, the last year before the COVID-19 pandemic sent the economy into recession, the sentiment index had averaged around 96.0.
“Consumer sentiment declined by 14% from May, continuing a downward trend over the last year and reaching its lowest recorded value, comparable to the trough reached in the middle of the 1980 recession,” Joanne Hsu, director of the University of Michigan’s Surveys of Consumers, said in a statement.
Consumers’ assessments of their own personal financial situations deteriorated sharply and contributed heavily to the overall drop in the index, Hsu noted. Nearly half (46%) of consumers attributed these worsening views to inflation, up from 38% who did so in May.
Reminder: Throughout 2019 the average number was around 96.0
--but, um, y'know...'mean' tweets, so much "better" now!
Thanks Demokkkrats!
Quote: Watch how Harris has to keep holding on to her seat as Charles tells her what the awful truth is. – Charles Payne on 40-Year Inflation High: Biden Admin, Federal Reserve ‘Created a Monster’ pic.twitter.com/LAHwvzeLaA
— Alexandra Datig | Front Page Index ?? (@alexdatig) June 10, 2022
Hey...c'mon, "everyone" "knows" Charles Payne and Harris Faulkner are WHITE SUPREMICISTS!!!!
Reminder: Throughout 2019 the average number was around 96.0
--but, um, y'know...'mean' tweets, so much "better" now!
Thanks Demokkkrats!
(This post was last modified: 06-12-2022 12:02 AM by GoodOwl.)
(06-11-2022 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
So, essentially the same judicial system as Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran?
Yeah, I put a lot of faith in that system. It is just so American.
Honest question... can't remember the specifics... in previous Senate hearings when the majority party is investigating the opponents.... does the accused typically get to mount a defense/enlist a defense attorney?
When the issue is contentious, the opposing side gets to 'cross' the majority witnesses, question the evidence presented, and even show evidence to buttress their opposition.
And, interestingly enough, there is a fundamental question at the root of the 1-6 Committee if it has been formed in a manner consistent with the rules, and whether it even has the power of Congress to operate.
But again, progressive shitbirds really never care that much about underlying rules.
(06-11-2022 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
So, essentially the same judicial system as Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran?
Yeah, I put a lot of faith in that system. It is just so American.
Honest question... can't remember the specifics... in previous Senate hearings when the majority party is investigating the opponents.... does the accused typically get to mount a defense/enlist a defense attorney?
When the issue is contentious, the opposing side gets to 'cross' the majority witnesses, question the evidence presented, and even show evidence to buttress their opposition.
And, interestingly enough, there is a fundamental question at the root of the 1-6 Committee if it has been formed in a manner consistent with the rules, and whether it even has the power of Congress to operate.
But again, progressive shitbirds really never care that much about underlying rules.
The end justifies the means seems to be a Democratic principle.
2000 Mules, the Hunter saga, and much of the stuff posted by GO would tend to support this thought, as would the entire Russia hoax from the git-go. No wonder people want it all to be ignored.
(This post was last modified: 06-12-2022 08:08 AM by OptimisticOwl.)
(06-11-2022 06:10 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: 93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
What about that sounds wrong to you?
That wasn't the point that I was making.
Quote:At least with Good Owl, his items are put up to the acid test of actually having a contrary issue being presented to them. Which many times you do.
Right. And he almost never engages with a contrary point. And when he does engage, it isn't in good faith. Bad example TBH.
Quote:In the case of the '1/6 Committee', there is none of that ability to counter embedded within the framework of that body, is there? No challenge to anything presented is even allowed. And this is what you are defending? Seriously?
Defending? Dude, if you are going to jump in at least keep up.
My point was not a spirited defense of this committee. Refer to my earlier comments on that topic.
My point was that OO was happy to deliver a condescending lecture on the virtues of keeping an open mind regarding GoodOwl's posts however he seems to not be following his own unsolicited advice when the shoe is on the other foot.
I guess you didn’t read my explanation. You certainly didn’t answer my question.
(06-11-2022 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
So, essentially the same judicial system as Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran?
Yeah, I put a lot of faith in that system. It is just so American.
Honest question... can't remember the specifics... in previous Senate hearings when the majority party is investigating the opponents.... does the accused typically get to mount a defense/enlist a defense attorney?
Did the Watergate committee have a “defense” on the committee? What about the 9/11 committee?
I know that there was an attempt to make the committee more bipartisan, to reduce the overwhelming skew of the current committee, but the resolution in the Senate failed due to a lack of Republican support. Kinda genius if you think about it. Don’t support a measure so that when it’s put in place, it will be inherently skewed along political lines, then complain that it is skewed along political lines…
(06-11-2022 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
So, essentially the same judicial system as Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran?
Yeah, I put a lot of faith in that system. It is just so American.
Honest question... can't remember the specifics... in previous Senate hearings when the majority party is investigating the opponents.... does the accused typically get to mount a defense/enlist a defense attorney?
Did the Watergate committee have a “defense” on the committee? What about the 9/11 committee?
I know that there was an attempt to make the committee more bipartisan, to reduce the overwhelming skew of the current committee, but the resolution in the Senate failed due to a lack of Republican support. Kinda genius if you think about it. Don’t support a measure so that when it’s put in place, it will be inherently skewed along political lines, then complain that it is skewed along political lines…
(06-11-2022 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
So, essentially the same judicial system as Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran?
Yeah, I put a lot of faith in that system. It is just so American.
Honest question... can't remember the specifics... in previous Senate hearings when the majority party is investigating the opponents.... does the accused typically get to mount a defense/enlist a defense attorney?
Did the Watergate committee have a “defense” on the committee? What about the 9/11 committee?
I know that there was an attempt to make the committee more bipartisan, to reduce the overwhelming skew of the current committee, but the resolution in the Senate failed due to a lack of Republican support. Kinda genius if you think about it. Don’t support a measure so that when it’s put in place, it will be inherently skewed along political lines, then complain that it is skewed along political lines…
Seriously???
So when Pelosi rejected the Republican nominees for the committee and put in the tame RINOs, that was a Machiavellian move by the GOP?
(06-11-2022 08:24 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
So, essentially the same judicial system as Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran?
Yeah, I put a lot of faith in that system. It is just so American.
Honest question... can't remember the specifics... in previous Senate hearings when the majority party is investigating the opponents.... does the accused typically get to mount a defense/enlist a defense attorney?
Did the Watergate committee have a “defense” on the committee? What about the 9/11 committee?
I know that there was an attempt to make the committee more bipartisan, to reduce the overwhelming skew of the current committee, but the resolution in the Senate failed due to a lack of Republican support. Kinda genius if you think about it. Don’t support a measure so that when it’s put in place, it will be inherently skewed along political lines, then complain that it is skewed along political lines…
The filibustering of the bill lead directly to the House select committee being established. I think Pelosi could have added more Reps to the committee, though (just not sure whether procedural hurdles, if any, existed).
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
Key word there is organization. I am very familiar with the Democratic organization and it’s methods. Are you saying you were familiar with the organizations GO quoted? My impression was was that you ignored them because GO quoted them.
It seems to me that a case is being made that the 1-6 committe is a fair and unbiased investigation, and any unfairness is entirely due to Republicans.
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
Key word there is organization. I am very familiar with the Democratic organization and it’s methods. Are you saying you were familiar with the organizations GO quoted? My impression was was that you ignored them because GO quoted them.
Bump
I have answered that question in the past (probably more than once). I have checked out his links before and they tend to be laughable garbage. I'm not going to investigate every single one to see if he sometimes includes some non-garbage ones in the mix.
The last one that I checked out was his quoting a study from the medical literature. When I checked out the study it was from a "Anybody can do their own meta-analysis! website". Amazing.
Again... when I have looked at his stuff and responded I typically get silence or a completely bad faith response.
So I have decided that ignoring his garbage is the best route. You condescendingly lectured me on that decision but you seem to have a closed mind when it comes to this committee. I also look at this committee's findings with a jaundiced eye however I have not delivered any recent condescending lectures about the perils of a closed mind. Make sense?
(06-12-2022 09:36 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: It seems to me that a case is being made that the 1-6 committe is a fair and unbiased investigation, and any unfairness is entirely due to Republicans.
Does that about cover it?
If not, what am I missing?
LOLOLOLOLOL. Who is making that case? I'd love to see you point to some specifics on that one. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
bumpity ![[Image: vF5IgKnit6Ys.png]](https://media.patriots.win/post/vF5IgKnit6Ys.png)
![[Image: MjhLsIJwBIXd.jpeg]](https://media.patriots.win/post/MjhLsIJwBIXd.jpeg)
