All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[babyblob]

Trump was talking on one of his personal telephones throughout the afternoon of the attack on the Capitol, so those conversations don't show up in the official White House phone records. It's hard to believe that this wasn't done deliberately.

I know it was. There is no doubt. But again the proof has to be there.

[babyblob]

By proof I mean a recording of him ordering it, or a written order. Not just one or two guys saying hey he told us to. because that would not be near the smoking gun people think it is. They wouldnt arrest him on that alone and it for sure would not convict him.

We know who ordered it and why. But proving it is another matter.

I am talking about the records being removed or destroyed or whatever. Not the fact that he was on the phone.

[Kirby101]

Witnesses testifying that he ordered it is evidence. He has violated the Presidential Records Act repeatedly. And he is responsible for what all his subordinates do.
John Dean's testimony was enough to get Nixon, before the tapes came out. The missing logs are a crime themselves, using a nonsecured phone is a crime. Not producing the phone he used is a crime. He is a criminal, it just takes a prosecutor with the guts to indict him.

Harold Hill put a lot of mobsters behind bars with just his testimony.

[Iron Maiden]

Witnesses testifying that he ordered it is evidence. He has violated the Presidential Records Act repeatedly. And he is responsible for what all his subordinates do.
John Dean's testimony was enough to get Nixon, before the tapes came out. The missing logs are a crime themselves, using a nonsecured phone is a crime. Not producing the phone he used is a crime. He is a criminal, it just takes a prosecutor with the guts to indict him.

Harold Hill put a lot of mobsters behind bars with just his testimony.

What I can't understand is Trump has committed a lot of crimes over the years before he was President but he always seems to wiggle out of doing time. The biggest hit he took was the $20 million for his fraudulent Trump University.

[babyblob]

Witnesses testifying that he ordered it is evidence. He has violated the Presidential Records Act repeatedly. And he is responsible for what all his subordinates do.
John Dean's testimony was enough to get Nixon, before the tapes came out. The missing logs are a crime themselves, using a nonsecured phone is a crime. Not producing the phone he used is a crime. He is a criminal, it just takes a prosecutor with the guts to indict him.

Harold Hill put a lot of mobsters behind bars with just his testimony.

Im just saying how many "Smoking guns" have there been with Trump. And now we have these missing records and everyone is one the "This is it. This is the end of Trump." bandwagon. I have heard this song about 100 times in the last 5 or six years.

is this a big deal? Yes. Will Trump do a second of time for it? No. Will it hurt his standing with his cult? nope it will help it.

When it comes to Trump and the smoking gun I will buy into it when he is behind bars.

if I had a Nickle for every time a Dem has said "This is the smoking Gun it is the end of Trump." I would be so rich AOC would be trying to take 80% of my money in taxes.

[seismic-2]

Evading phone records is shady conduct, but mishandling classified documents is undeniably a federal offense. This certainly happened at the end of Trump's presidency, since highly classified documents turned up in boxes of papers at his Florida residence. But it appears that this will be just another thing that he gets away with. (Had it happened to one of us, after an intense FBI investigation we almost certainly would be hauled into court.)

[babyblob]

It needs to be investigated, it needs to be looked into and someone needs to be help responsible. But what in the history of the last 7 or so years makes anyone think and strongly believe that person will be Trump?

[Mister Mets]

Since we've talked a lot about trans issues lately for obvious reasons, I thought I'd link this book, since it has some key insights into trans youth and the intersection with autism.
https://www.amazon.com/Supporting-Tr.../dp/1785928031
Attachment 119675

The underlined stuff is especially relevant.

Gosh, it's almost like the *real* 'trend' is cis-heteronormative conformity. <3

Here's more:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32770077/


https://www.autismspeaks.org/science...ic-individuals



Gasp! Inadequate trans health care? But I thought we were just throwing HRT at people who asked and that's why we need to ban it?! We better do something before there's irreversible damage to our trans kids. <3

It's an interesting argument that autistic people have a low tolerance for bullshit, and are more likely to recognize that they are trans. The links just point out the higher rates of autism among trans and gender-diverse people, and consider implications in terms of care, but not the reasons this may be.

I have no idea what the answer to this is, but it would be interesting to look at how the autistic population differs from the standard American population when it comes to objective measures involving peer pressure related tactics, or medical conditions involving self-regulation. Are they more or less likely to be victims of financial scams? Are they more consistent when it comes to any schedules for prescription drugs? What type of medical services are autistic LGBTQ adults asking for and not receiving?

Okay so answer everyone there this...

Why can't the Republicans show PROOF that CRT and all this other boogeyman crap they are making laws against?

I am TIRED of hearing about this stuff like CRT being done in public schools and NOBODY can show any proof.

Proof being a lesson plan, the name of the teacher, the dean or assistant principal that approves the lesson plan.

Along with PROOF that teaching sex to K-5 is in the curriculum of any STATE-because that is public information and at least looking through Texas-sex doesn't get mention until 7th grade.

Along with PROOF parents rights are being denied ANYWHERE. If they READ the student code of conduct they would know they already have rights to look at instructional material and library books.

And then show PROOF that all these books they want banned in school because some KAREN wants to be den mother to everyone else that they have CRT in them. Because as OWNER of a few of those books like Jerry Craft's New Kid-I don't see it.

I TIRE of some set of folks see a black person or LGBTQA+ person and they got a problem and start making stuff up.


So where are the receipts???

My comments were about organizations making claims about individuals, so the CRT fight is mainly a different issue.

The argument itself is more about a trend than picking on an obscure educator or one really flawed board.

If you want to see obscure progressive teachers making some dumb announcements, the "Libs on Tik Tok" twitter has plenty of that. If some people go too far, that's not necessarily an indictment of the system.

Last month, several members of the San Francisco Board of Education lost recall elections, after deciding to spend energy during school closures renaming schools because Abraham Lincoln and Dianne Feinstein were beyond the pale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/16/u...rd-recall.html

When it comes to curriculums, a major argument is that teachers will go beyond the curriculum to talk about things some parents will object to.

This is a situation where some people want to push two sides, but it gets messy because people on either side of the political aisle aren't in a hivemind. Their attitudes are going to be on a spectrum. Some parents will be overly sensitive in terms of their suggested restrictions on high schools.

Some fights also get conflated. Most of the arguments about how to handle gender and sexuality are distinct from any discussion on the influence of Critical Race Theory, which is more about a different sensitive issue.

It isn't on them at all, that's absurd. The first lesson in any class on public relations is to be succinct and just state your action and get out and you're just plain wrong if you believe otherwise because otherwise you're just getting yourself stuck in the weeds.

There's no defending this issue, there's no one wrongly accused here just an author known for being a hothead on line who said some trans-phobic things and then defended other people who said even worse things in her defense and so as a consequence it was decided that she wasn't someone they wanted to exemplify.

There's no cancel culture narrative here, just consequences for behaving badly.

It's time to admit that you got duped by a one sided article and didn't do the research to see if it was true. It happens to everyone at one time or another so no harm,no foul once you admit it and move on.

I believe if an organization decides to make a statement about a person, the onus is on them to back up their claims.

Being succinct may be Public Relations 101, but that first class almost certainly doesn't touch on the question of how an organization should comment about a human being. I suspect the general suggestion would be to avoid those fights unless absolutely necessary.

I don't think I've been duped by one article, but I'm willing to change my mind, if someone can show me the comments by the writer that indicate such "a troubling hostility toward transgender critics and trans-allies" that a nomination for best memoir in a particular category should be rescinded.

[Jack Dracula]

Witnesses testifying that he ordered it is evidence. He has violated the Presidential Records Act repeatedly. And he is responsible for what all his subordinates do.
John Dean's testimony was enough to get Nixon, before the tapes came out. The missing logs are a crime themselves, using a nonsecured phone is a crime. Not producing the phone he used is a crime. He is a criminal, it just takes a prosecutor with the guts to indict him.

Harold Hill put a lot of mobsters behind bars with just his testimony.

I’m hopeful the DOJ will pursue charges regarding destruction of federal records, at least to the point where he can’t run for President. That’s all I really want. Just to be certain that criminal can’t get near the White House ever again.

[thwhtGuardian]

It's an interesting argument that autistic people have a low tolerance for bullshit, and are more likely to recognize that they are trans. The links just point out the higher rates of autism among trans and gender-diverse people, and consider implications in terms of care, but not the reasons this may be.

I have no idea what the answer to this is, but it would be interesting to look at how the autistic population differs from the standard American population when it comes to objective measures involving peer pressure related tactics, or medical conditions involving self-regulation. Are they more or less likely to be victims of financial scams? Are they more consistent when it comes to any schedules for prescription drugs? What type of medical services are autistic LGBTQ adults asking for and not receiving?

My comments were about organizations making claims about individuals, so the CRT fight is mainly a different issue.

The argument itself is more about a trend than picking on an obscure educator or one really flawed board.

If you want to see obscure progressive teachers making some dumb announcements, the "Libs on Tik Tok" twitter has plenty of that. If some people go too far, that's not necessarily an indictment of the system.

Last month, several members of the San Francisco Board of Education lost recall elections, after deciding to spend energy during school closures renaming schools because Abraham Lincoln and Dianne Feinstein were beyond the pale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/16/u...rd-recall.html

When it comes to curriculums, a major argument is that teachers will go beyond the curriculum to talk about things some parents will object to.

This is a situation where some people want to push two sides, but it gets messy because people on either side of the political aisle aren't in a hivemind. Their attitudes are going to be on a spectrum. Some parents will be overly sensitive in terms of their suggested restrictions on high schools.

Some fights also get conflated. Most of the arguments about how to handle gender and sexuality are distinct from any discussion on the influence of Critical Race Theory, which is more about a different sensitive issue.

I believe if an organization decides to make a statement about a person, the onus is on them to back up their claims.

Being succinct may be Public Relations 101, but that first class almost certainly doesn't touch on the question of how an organization should comment about a human being. I suspect the general suggestion would be to avoid those fights unless absolutely necessary.

I don't think I've been duped by one article, but I'm willing to change my mind, if someone can show me the comments by the writer that indicate such "a troubling hostility toward transgender critics and trans-allies" that a nomination for best memoir in a particular category should be rescinded.

There's zero reason to comment about the person herself as that just creates argument. A press release is a simple statement, not a commentary; it's meant to be short and declaratory in tone. You go in, make your statement and get out and that's exactly what they did. They observed actions that didn't meet their ideals so they declined to consider that author's work for an award. There is no reason to say more than that...and it's not on them to do so, and nor are they alone in keeping it short and sweet. You'll notice the Academy of Motion Pictures didn't go into details of what happened at the Oscars, thy simply said, " The Academy condemns the actions of Mr. Smith at last night's show.We have officially started a formal review around the incident and will explore further action and consequences in accordance with our Bylaws, Standards of Conduct and California law."

There's no context, no details, no he said-she said, just a concise statement of what their actions will be...and it was the same with the Lamda's statement.

That you want more for some reason, or think that their should be more doesn't mean that they should have included more or that they erred in not doing so as your wants fly in the face of the standard operating procedure of every publicist out there. I can post literally hundreds of more similarly worded releases if you really want...but I think you know how they are usually formatted, and you're just trying to deflect from the fact that the article you linked to didn't provide quotes of her comments.

And you were duped, that's not a subjective opinion it's just a flat fact.

That you didn't go looking for the comments yourself when they strangely weren't included in the article but believed the article's message any way is the evidence that you bought the narrative.

You just have to admit you were wrong here, you thought because it was in the Times it must have been trust worthy and didn't stop to think that it strangely didn't even try to even pretend to be objective and only reported one side of the issue.

It happens, we see something that agrees with our bias and just go with it...but this is a case where doing so just slapped you in the face. Own that, promise to do better in evaluating your news sources in the future and move on.

[Catlady in training]

So, to sum up:

- Russian forces are withdrawing from Kyiv to the East.
- A number of Russian officials reportedly left Moscow.
- Peskov recently said that they will not use nukes unless their own country is threatened, which translates from Russian as: We will likely use them.

I don't know, I am getting very, very afraid that they plan to send a nuke to Ukraine. I really hope I'm wrong.

[babyblob]

So, to sum up:

- Russian forces are withdrawing from Kyiv to the East.
- A number of Russian officials reportedly left Moscow.
- Peskov recently said that they will not use nukes unless their own country is threatened, which translates from Russian as: We will likely use them.

I don't know, I am getting very, very afraid that they plan to send a nuke to Ukraine. I really hope I'm wrong.

At first glance it just looks like Russia is cutting thier losses and trying to save face by going after the areas they were Interested In saving in the first place. At least saving in their minds. But a Nuke at Kyiv wouldnt shock me.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I’m hopeful the DOJ will pursue charges regarding destruction of federal records, at least to the point where he can’t run for President. That’s all I really want. Just to be certain that criminal can’t get near the White House ever again.

That would be enough for me. Doesn’t matter if Trump never sets foot in a courtroom, as long as he’s denied a second shot at the presidency.

[skyvolt2000]

My comments were about organizations making claims about individuals, so the CRT fight is mainly a different issue.

The argument itself is more about a trend than picking on an obscure educator or one really flawed board.

If you want to see obscure progressive teachers making some dumb announcements, the "Libs on Tik Tok" twitter has plenty of that. If some people go too far, that's not necessarily an indictment of the system.

When it comes to curriculums, a major argument is that teachers will go beyond the curriculum to talk about things some parents will object to.

This is a situation where some people want to push two sides, but it gets messy because people on either side of the political aisle aren't in a hivemind. Their attitudes are going to be on a spectrum. Some parents will be overly sensitive in terms of their suggested restrictions on high schools.

Some fights also get conflated. Most of the arguments about how to handle gender and sexuality are distinct from any discussion on the influence of Critical Race Theory, which is more about a different sensitive issue.

Did not answer the question.

I do NOT want Libs on TiK Tok or Twitter.

I want PROOF this nonsense has happened in a class room not what some stupid Karen THINKS happens.

[Tendrin]

Besides conservatives trying to hide their agenda behind 'parent objections' is garbage anyway.