Hunter Biden Plea Deal

Yes they're crazy. And yes AOC is also crazy. So why doesn't she have her own thread as well.

There is a significant difference, though. You consider Alexandria's ideas to be poorly thought out, untenable, perhaps naïve. I mostly disagree with that on a fundamental level, although accomplishing her goals in the current environment would be steeply challenging.

The major difference, the reason Alexandria does not have a WTELFIWH thread, is because her ideas are basically decent. Unlike TheatreHandjobLady or WharrgarblGreene, she does not strive to marginalize large groups of people. "Jewish Space Laser"? Those two women are constantly attacking people, constantly seeking ways to create division. In fact, it seems like they are just blorting the stupidest or most inciteful shit they can to get attention, which is not something Alexandria does. I imagine you can come up with an example, but it goddam well better be in full context.

From what I can tell, Alexandria is interested in helping those who need it most, not tearing people down in an effort to score points. For that, I perceive her as decent. It takes effort to lift people up, dragging people down just requires inertia.
 
Wait, what in the Fox News kind of BS is this?


He will not be a convicted felon until the judge enters the jury decision into the record. He will most likely do that at sentencing on July 11th. So while all the news sites like to say he is a "convicted felon", he will not technically be until the court's decision is entered into the record. Ergo, he is still allowed to legally possess a gun.

And as of 5 minutes ago when I made that post, such order had not been entered.

 
He will not be a convicted felon until the judge enters the jury decision into the record. He will most likely do that at sentencing on July 11th. So while all the news sites like to say he is a "convicted felon", he will not technically be until the court's decision is entered into the record. Ergo, he is still allowed to legally possess a gun.

And as of 5 minutes ago when I made that post, such order had not been entered.

Dude you have to be fucking kidding me, is this what you guys are running with?
 
Also, KJO
Dude you have to be fucking kidding me, is this what you guys are running with?

No it is a legitimate answer to why he is legally still allowed to possess a gun. Nothing more.

If I am wrong, please explain how and why.



Also, KJP has refused to say whether or not Biden will commute Hunter's sentence. So they say they aren't going to pardon him, but not that they won't commute the sentence.
 
Last time I heard anything from AOC she was weighing in on the insultfest at some committee meeting. Before that I couldn’t tell you. Its been ages.

I have a conservative friend who still goes on about cat litter boxes at schools that was debunked years ago. I think we’re not far off from conservative media talking about escaped slaves as a current event.
 
If I am wrong, please explain how and why.
Problem is that you're wrong 99.999% of the time on here, nobody's going to spend any amount of time chasing down links or disproving your constant bullshit statements that are all spewed to defend Donald Trump. WTF is wrong with you?
 
1) When people are lied to about something too many times, they tune out. And that is what has happened. Why do we still have polar ice caps, why is Manhattan not under 12' of water, why do we still have rain forests? I can keep going with all the predictions from climate scientists that haven't even had a whiff of coming true. Lie to people enough and they tune out. Sorry.
Do you have citations for this? Who are the climate scientists who predicted that any one of these three things would happen by now? And what was the reaction from other climate scientists?

In general, projections based on the models have warned that specific actions must be taken by 2030 through 2050 in order to limit warming and so avoid the catastrophic changes you mention (and others). Most of the models forecast these various forms of ‘collapse’ in the 2050-2200 timeframe.

Hence, I’m surprised to hear you have information that this should already have happened. If true, it would render pointless the warnings given by the IPCC to date.
 
If the cult thought they were winning in November, they wouldn't be doing stupid **** like holding Merrick Garland in contempt. What a joke!
 
Last time I heard anything from AOC she was weighing in on the insultfest at some committee meeting. Before that I couldn’t tell you. Its been ages.

I have a conservative friend who still goes on about cat litter boxes at schools that was debunked years ago. I think we’re not far off from conservative media talking about escaped slaves as a current event.

The fact that the litter box story even got any traction is because things have gotten so nutty that it was easy to believe.


Problem is that you're wrong 99.999% of the time on here, nobody's going to spend any amount of time chasing down links or disproving your constant bullshit statements that are all spewed to defend Donald Trump. WTF is wrong with you?

Well you have a legal expert on staff. Ask him.

But in the meantime, this is from the American Bar Association:


The decision of the jury doesn t take effect until the judge enters a judgment on the decision - that is, an order that it be filed in public records.

Bolding is their's, not mine.
 
The fact that the litter box story even got any traction is because things have gotten so nutty that it was easy to believe.
Yes and guess what party has been pushing the nuttiness? and remember who the ringleader of the nutjobs is.
 
He's absolutely a convicted felon. You mean to tell me he's John Q Non-Felon until he goes in for sentencing? Nope, he's a felon now, I'd also be interested in seeing how many felons the state of New York allows to have weapons AFTER they've been convicted of felonies and BEFORE they've been sentenced.

Trumpers will piss on the electric fence and grit their teeth if it means proving Trump right about something.
 
Do you have citations for this? Who are the climate scientists who predicted that any one of these three things would happen by now? And what was the reaction from other climate scientists?

The problem is you have two sources of information. First, you have predictions from Climate Scientists. Then you have predictions from politicians holding themselves out to be experts. Think Al Gore.

I will address the second first. Al Gore has famously made some whopper predictions. So while he may not be an true scientist, he certainly holds himself out as an expert. So as long as the climate change side is willing to repeat what he says, then people are going to believe it. And he has been wrong. So people think they have been lied to. While I don't think anyone would consider AOC an expert, people for some reason listen to her. I think we have a few more years until the world ends.

So when these things don't happen, people tune out. That is just human nature.



As for the actual climate experts, well they have laid out some whoppers too:

In 1975, Paul Ehrlich predicted that “since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so [by 2005], it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.”

As late as 1980, Carl Sagan was still presenting global cooling as one of two possible doomsday scenarios we could choose from.

Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, “By the year 2000 if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say,`I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”

Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years [by 1985 or 2000] unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”

In 2007, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - part of the UN) issued a report stating the Himalayan glaciers would be gone by 2035. We didn't even have to wait this long as the UN retracted the report in 2010 citing that it wasn't based on peer-reviewed data. Then why in the cornbread hell did they publish it?

On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press squeezed decimation into a tight, 11-year window, with an ominous article, “Rising Seas Could Obliterate Nations,” containing a jaw-dropping opener: “A senior UN environmental official (Noel Brown) says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”

To be fair, many of these predictions are meant as a call to arms so to speak to get people motivated. Google failed climate predictions and you will have a lot to read.
 
Back
Top