Oof I bet he is mad he came back gay
Oof I bet he is mad he came back gay
Epstein didn't kill himself.
Impeachment’s boring.Originally Posted by Krokodile
Climate change and fascism, together https://www.berggruen.org/the-worldp...ironmentalism/
oh **** that url is amazing
ironmentalism is a killer band name
Epstein didn't kill himself.
That article touches on something I hate
Overpopulation is a problem, but only because the westnorth requires large amounts of poor people to sustain it's lifestyle and paradoxically is obsessed with bringing (or talking about bringing) them into the fold, destroying their own turboemitter lifestyle and temporarily turning a given amount of people into turboemitters like themselves making regular population into overpopulation. These people who wanted to bring these people into the turboemitter religion then insist that acknowledging this grotesque export is in fact ecofascism.
What the ****?
Epstein didn't kill himself.
ironymentalism?
Epstein didn't kill himself.
I should point out this usually comes up because someone says the population will level out so we can't be in overshoot, but I ask if the method for levelling out the population involves everyone emitting like dirty americans or even western europeans for that matter and theres always screeching after that.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
https://twitter.com/sterlingcrispin/...ghtmode%3Dtrue
It's likely that neural network type AI is the first obvious manifestations of the fascist elder gods poking through
Epstein didn't kill himself.
Son of Krokodile XVI
Oh, that's too bad.
So now that the Senate has a Republican majority, this impeachment can't actually lead to anything substantial? Maybe unless something comes up in the impeachment proceedings that absolutely warrants removal from office? Am I missing something?
Epstein didn't kill himself.
My god.
i know can you believe this is being hid from us
Epstein didn't kill himself.
It all makes sense now. Alice Shade, Friend14. Everything.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
But America is only becoming weaker economically, militarily, and culturally.My answer: much like today but even more so. So that means wealth inequality will widen to widths never before imagined, fatter tech profits and bigger earnings, higher stock prices, America being even bigger and more dominant economically, militarily, and culturally, increasingly competitive college admissions, more political angst and anger online, increased dissatisfaction at the system and political leaders yet a sort of unwillingness or inertia to want to much to change it either, etc.
You sound like a conservative.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16
youre obviously not grey enlightned lmao
Epstein didn't kill himself.
Holy hell this site is dumb.
And the very first sentence of that page reads like a joke:The Bay Area has become the center of the universe. Everyone wants to live in the Bay Area. Everyone wants to give Bay Area firms more money. 20-30 somethings are becoming instantly wealthy, even more more so than their 90′s predecessors. Back then a typical internet IPO was no bigger than a billion dollars and usually around $60-100 million; now companies go public for no less than a couple billion and early funding begins at $60 million. Will this end badly? Nope. This time is really different. There won’t be a crash like 1929, 1973, 1987, 2000 or 2008. We’re in a hyper-meritocracy where smart, ambitious people in the Silicon Valley and around the world are reaping mind boggling amounts of money with relatively little effort and time. Someone can code a bird app and be a multi-millionaire in a few weeks. Or someone can code a photo app and be a billionaire in a few years. The American dream is alive and well.
http://greyenlightenment.com/sample-page/The Grey Enlightenment represents republicans and libertarians that don’t think the world is doomed and like things the way they are (but with some improvements like lower taxes and no more Obama).
sheesh
I honestly can't tell if that site is a parody or a reddit post that was copy-pasted onto a web server with some fancy CSS.
It really is pretty impressive.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
Poe’s law alive and well
Gonna just try and do a thorough primer on impeachment here (obviously you, Kroko, understand a lot of this already but I want to work from the bottom up here so it's as broadly instructive as possible):
The United States has two legislative houses, the Senate and the House of Representatives.
The House of Representatives consists of one representative per district, with districts having roughly equal population across the country (and as a natural consequence, more populous states having more districts).
The Senate consists of two representatives per state, and it shouldn't exist.
In a traditional criminal proceeding, the prosecutor determines what charges should be brought against a defendant, and the court determines whether the defendant is guilty of those charges. An impeachment is not a criminal proceeding, but I think it's a little bit useful to think of the House of Representatives as the prosecutor in an impeachment, and the Senate as the Court.
(Republicans, by the way, have tried to complain that the President's due process rights are not being respected. This is silly for a lot of reasons, but the main reason it's silly is that even in a criminal prosecution, no potential defendant is entitled to participate in the prosecutor's investigation into whether they should be charged.)
Sorry for the sidebar. So if the House is like a prosecutor, an impeachment is like a prosecutor charging (usually "indicting") a defendant, right? Almost completely yes. Generally, a prosecutor can indict a person within her jurisdiction for breaking the laws of that jurisdiction. The House of Representatives, if we view it as a kind of prosecutor for impeachment purposes, has a very limited jurisdiction as to the people it may impeach, but so broad an ambit of offenses it may impeach those people for that it would make an Alabama prosecutor blush.
How broad? The text of the Constitution says an official may be impeached for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Treason, of course, is explicitly defined in Article III, Section 3. (This unusual constitutional clarity does not stop various dumbasses from claiming that Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden or Reality Winner have committed treason, but oh well.) Bribery, well, we know what that is, and we've all agreed to call it "campaign finance" instead. But then there's "high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
Most legal/constitutional scholars agree that that last phrase is to be interpreted broadly, that an impeachable offense is, to quote then-Vice President Gerald Ford, "whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history." In fact, as far as I know, no Republican member of Congress is even insisting that Trump must be charged with a specific crime. (There may be some institutional memory at work here; Republicans were never able to pin perjury on Clinton either.)
All of this is to say, impeachment is political. It's not a trial in an impartial court. A public official could sneeze at the wrong time and be impeached and removed if the opposing party thought they could get away with it. A public official could also direct charitable funds to his reelection campaign, steer foreign dignitaries to properties he owned, use federal funds to pay for his frequent vacations, and withhold congressionally allocated aid to pressure a foreign government to assist his reelection campaign, so long as he was assured of his party's support in the Senate.
So anyway, Kroko, you asked whether anything's going to come of impeaching Trump, in light of Republicans' control of the Senate, the court where impeachment is tried. The answer is no, unless Republican senators think they might lose their seats by not opposing Trump. So the answer is no.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
I don't want to hide the ball here; Trump's done all of these forms of corruption.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
Interesting. I mean, I essentially agree with this since the 17th amendment destroyed the purpose of the senate, to represent the states, but I desire the repeal of the 17th amendment. One day I may study what corruption led to the 17th amendment. I've always found it amazing that the 16th and 17th amendments could be ratified without pitchforks being raised.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16
“I don’t understand what problem these amendments solved, but I don’t like them and therefore nobody at the time must have liked them either”
Getting to vote directly on your senator isn’t exactly the sort of thing people riot over, historically. As for the progressive income tax, consider that it was good for most people, especially the sort of people who had ready access to pitchforks.
Wookie06 didn’t even spend the minute it takes to look up the history on Wikipedia. He doesn’t even need a stupid reason to have strong feelings about stuff, so I’m sure he’s not interested in your educated one.
It took me literally 30 seconds to learn that the 17th amendment was popularly demanded because of *seat buying*. Wookie06 cares so little about the future of his country that he wouldn’t spend 30 seconds looking up something before deciding that it’s bad.
Wookie06 votes.
Last edited by Jon`C; 11-12-2019 at 12:43 AM.
Is the 15th the one that is supposed to let felons vote?
Epstein didn't kill himself.
I don't read as fast as you.
What about a stupid educated reason?
Now, Stephen Miller, there's a problem for which pitchforks are the appropriate remedy.
If you think the waiters are rude, you should see the manager.
I saw some headlines and I was confused that Steve Miller had come out as a white supremacist.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
I see. How fast would you need to read, exactly, before you're willing to become an informed and responsible citizen?
holy **** Stephen Miller is Jewish? lmao
Epstein didn't kill himself.
I am already informed and responsible. I was referring to doing actual research on the corruption that enabled passage of an amendment. Not a 30 second Wikipedia search that I can't really believe you think constitutes research.
Citation needed
Most Jews are white (or at least they are now).
Unrelated, I just had a funny thought. "Colored people" would probably be considered a racist expression but "people of color" isn't. I can't imagine seriously using either stupid term.
If only you spent half as much time thinking about policy as you spend thinking about what to call the ethnics.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote