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

[SUPERECWFAN1]

https://www.who.int/docs/default-sou...sitrep-188.pdf



As we continue to engage in our own coverup of the extent of our government's failure, I just want to point out that it didn't have to be this bad. Again.

John Hopkins will likely do the real figures while Trump's administration tries to fudge them.

[Tendrin]

Denying human rights. Ok, so, you say conservatives don't deserve to have a platform to speak. .

I'm glad you agree that modern conservatism is synonymous with denying people's human rights.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Well ... Barron is not going back to school for in-person learning. Trump said the FLOTUS and him agreed it was not safe.

BUT EVERYONE ELSE NEEDS TO GO BACK!

Nice one ...

Well, of course. What's even more hypocritical is all the municipalities with officials and politicians demanding that kids return to school were having meetings about that via Zoom or Microsoft Teams instead live and in person. I mean, what do those blowhards have to fear?

====================

Trump Admin Official Defends Coronavirus Testing Despite Widespread Lab Delays

Admiral Brett Giroir, who’s leading Trump’s testing protocols, tried to paint a rosy picture of nationwide testing efforts, which are severely lacking in hard-hit cities.

**********

‘Put A F**king Mask On’: Comic’s Blunt Coronavirus Plea Makes It Really Simple

Jonathan Pie lists a few things that are far worse than wearing a mask.

**********

Trump Says He’ll Skip Yankees Pitch Because Of His ‘Strong Focus On The China Virus’

Change of heart follows a weekend of golf and after two Yankees players knelt during the national anthem at a stadium in Washington. And because he feared embarrassing himself on national TV.

********************

In non-coronavirus news:

Workers Will Just ‘Sit Home’ On Unemployment Aid, Steve Mnuchin Complains

The Treasury secretary with offshore tax havens is certain U.S. taxpayers will be upset when they get extra aid to weather COVID-19.

**********

Michelle Obama Launches Voter Registration Push

This election “could not be more important for the future of our country,” the former first lady says.

**********

Minnesota Couple Wears Nazi Face Masks To Walmart After State Mask Mandate

A woman seen wearing the mask insisted that she is “not a Nazi” and that she was making a political statement. Uh-huh. Yeah, right.

[Tami]

One question still dogs Trump: Why not try harder to solve the coronavirus crisis?

But both allies and opponents agree he has failed at the one task that could help him achieve all of his goals — confronting the pandemic with a clear strategy and consistent leadership.

Trump’s shortcomings have perplexed even some of his most loyal allies, who increasingly have wondered why the president has not at least pantomimed a sense of command over the crisis or conveyed compassion for the millions of Americans impacted by it.

Some aides and outside advisers have, in fact, tried to stress to Trump and others in his orbit that before he could move on to reopening the economy and getting the country back to work — and life — he needed to grapple with the reality of the virus.

But until recently, the president was largely unreceptive to that message, they said, not fully grasping the magnitude of the pandemic — and overly preoccupied with his own sense of grievance, beginning many conversations casting himself as the blameless victim of the crisis.

In the past couple of weeks, senior advisers began presenting Trump with maps and data showing spikes in coronavirus cases among “our people” in Republican states, a senior administration official said. They also shared projections predicting that virus surges could soon hit politically important states in the Midwest — including Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin, the official said.

This new approach seemed to resonate, as he hewed closely to pre-scripted remarks in a trio of coronavirus briefings last week.

One of Trump’s biggest obstacles is his refusal to take responsibility and admit error.

In mid-March, as many of the nation’s businesses were shuttering early in the pandemic, Trump proclaimed in the Rose Garden, “I don’t take responsibility at all.” Those six words have neatly summed up Trump’s approach not only to the pandemic but also to many of the other crises he has faced during his presidency.

“His operating style is to double- and triple-down on positions and to never, ever admit he’s wrong about anything,” said Anthony Scaramucci, a longtime Trump associate who briefly served as White House communications director and is now a critic of the president’s. “His 50-year track record is to bulldog through whatever he’s doing, whether it’s Atlantic City, which was a failure, or the Plaza Hotel, which was a failure, or Eastern Airlines, which was a failure. He can never just say, ‘I got it wrong and let’s try over again.’ ”

Another self-imposed hurdle for Trump has been his reliance on a positive feedback loop. Rather than sit for briefings by infectious-disease director Anthony S. Fauci and other medical experts, the president consumes much of his information about the virus from Fox News Channel and other conservative media sources, where his on-air boosters put a positive spin on developments.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

One question still dogs Trump: Why not try harder to solve the coronavirus crisis?

The Mooch got it right: Trump's steadfast refusal to admit being wrong about the seriousness of the virus directly led to the situation being as horrific as currently is today. Four months in, and the only reason Trump begun taking things seriously at all was because it's negatively affecting voters in key red states like Florida and Texas which he needs for his reelection bid. Nevertheless, if you were to press Trump, he'll still refuse to take responsibility for this clusterfuck.

[CTTT]

To the poster above, if you took the time to read the rest of my post instead of cherry picking, my point wasthat one bad egg is not representative of everyone.

[Tami]

An interesting theory/idea brought up on news based on what Nixon did in the '60s/'70s. People using guns fro violence are ones who wouldn't have the money to buy guns. Someone is putting thises guns in the hands of those most likely to use them just so that crime increases and it gives Trump an excuse to send it his Storm Troopers.

In other words, this rise in violent crime might, possibly, be a plan by the Trumpites to justify Trumps actions and try to make him 'look good' as a 'law and order' president for the election.

[Kirby101]

To the poster above, if you took the time to read the rest of my post instead of cherry picking, my point wasthat one bad egg is not representative of everyone.

Which. elected Republicans don't support Trump's family separation and caged children? Which don't support more and more tax cuts for the rich? Which are not trying to end abortion, through legislature or packing the Courts? Which have stood up to the blatant, corrupt, criminal, unconstitutional an treasonous acts by Trump?

More like trying to find a good egg.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Trump's national security adviser has coronavirus

President Donald Trump's National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien has tested positive for the coronavirus — making him the highest-ranking official to test positive so far.

That's according to two people familiar with the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss it by name.

The White House confirmed that O'Brien has mild symptoms and “has been self-isolating and working from a secure location off site,” adding that: “There is no risk of exposure to the President or the Vice President" and that the "work of the National Security Council continues uninterrupted.”

[WestPhillyPunisher]

An interesting theory/idea brought up on news based on what Nixon did in the '60s/'70s. People using guns fro violence are ones who wouldn't have the money to buy guns. Someone is putting thises guns in the hands of those most likely to use them just so that crime increases and it gives Trump an excuse to send it his Storm Troopers.

In other words, this rise in violent crime might, possibly, be a plan by the Trumpites to justify Trumps actions and try to make him 'look good' as a 'law and order' president for the election.

Or anarchists with no political affiliation, or love for Trump whose lone goal, to paraphrase Michael Caine from The Dark Knight, is to watch the world burn.

[Tami]

Or anarchists with no political affiliation, or love for Trump whose lone goal, to paraphrase Michael Caine from The Dark Knight, is to watch the world burn.

Jihadist plots used to be U.S. and Europe's biggest terrorist threat. Now it's the far right.

LONDON — The threat of terrorism — particularly from the far right — should be a major concern for governments on both sides of the Atlantic as coronavirus restrictions continue to ease, according to multiple experts and former law enforcement officials who have experience monitoring violent extremist activity.

High unemployment levels due to the pandemic, poor economic prospects and the spread of disinformation through the internet and social media could accelerate radicalization, they said.

And after a major drive by law enforcement agencies to disrupt the organizing potential of violent Islamist movements in the United States and in Europe, where hundreds of people have returned from the battlefields in Iraq and Syria, recent analysis suggests far-right groups now pose the most significant threat to public safety.

"We see an increasing percentage of plots and attacks in the United States shifting over the past couple of years from jihadist motivations, increasingly, to far-right activity," said Seth Jones, who directs the Transnational Threats Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington, D.C., think tank.

Jones defined right-wing extremists as "sub-national or non-state entities" with goals that could include ethnic or racial supremacy. They can also be marked by anger against specific policies like abortion rights and government authority, as well as hatred toward women, or they may be members of the "involuntary celibate," or "incel," movement.

A report he co-authored recorded 14 terrorist incidents, including attacks and disrupted plots, from Jan. 1 to May 8. Thirteen of them were classified as right-wing, and the other was recorded as being religiously motivated in the context of jihadism.

[Mister Mets]

What happened to listening to both points of view? I think it's a little unfair to say what represents a Republican these days are gun waiving religious rich men who care about saving themselves more money. They're not all like that and I'm sure there are some that use funds they get for tax cuts to help more get a job. Is there no such thing as a Christian Democrat? There are Democrats who lean more conservative on fiscal issues and lean liberal on social issues and vice versa for Republicans. I will say though that people like Joe Lieberman who say they're an Independent with a capital I and yet they caucus with Democrats,....yeah he's still a closet Democrat. Although it is difficult, I do think it's possible for someone to be be completely center. That's the kind of politician that we need, someone who can reach across the aisle to both sides. It's a pipe dream, but why not? Politics is an ugly business. It's always been that way. But it is very interesting. Look at what happened between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Yet, later in life, they were able to reconnect. Jefferson and Hamilton detested each other. Politiking has been going on for a long time

Thomas Jefferson partisans said that President John Adams had a "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman." A Connecticut newspaper on Adams' side said that Jefferson won the 1800 presidential election “murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest will openly be taught and practiced.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung.../#198754a73d84

Denying human rights. Ok, so, you say conservatives don't deserve to have a platform to speak. Doesn't that go against the claim about the human right of expressing an opinion? So, simply because one is a Republican, they don't deserve to have the chance to express themselves? The purpose of listening to both sides of a certain issue isn't to force one's opinion down the other's throat. It's about listening and possibly gaining a certain insight. One Republican or Democrats view is not representative of all Democrats or Republicans. That's...narrow minded don't you think? So, in your view, only one side gets an opinion? I was listening to an interview with a reporter today on SiriusXM. She was a liberal reporter who was talking about George W. Bush. While she was no supporter of Bush, she spent some time with him on the campaign of 2000 and gained an appreciation of him for how he treated her and her mother and that he had a certain mastery of dealing with the press. There was a couple clips where they had playful banter between them and he kidded her about wearing the color purple, as that was her favorite color. Does she deserved to get flamed for that and called a traitor to liberalism? No, of course not. While I did not vote for Obama during 2016, I can respect the fact that he's a pretty good speaker and I respected the office that he held.

There's a lot to unpack here, and several different arguments.

There are some liberal forums/ media sources where conservatives should not have a platform. Mother Jones has no obligation to provide space for a conservative columnist. Likewise the El Chapo Traphouse and Pod Save America podcasts are really only going to present left-wing points of view. The most important point would be that whatever the policy is it should be open and unambiguous. The platform should not say they have one policy, and practice another. It should be clear to readers what views are considered beyond the pale (to the best of their ability; sometimes there's a slide from the category that all reasonable people are expected to believe to the category of things we allow open debate on to the category of views that are anathema.)

The New York Times is going to be different, because they do not present themselves that way. State universities get funding from the government, so that leads to some limitations.

The human rights argument has sometimes been a self-serving way to shut down discussion by the left, suggesting that there is room for much discussion, but that there is an exception for anything to do with protected classes because it is essential and non-debatable to affirm the dignity of every person. However, this ignores that there will be disagreement about what counts as someone's human rights (does one person signing a letter affirming free speech serve to deny a coworker her right to feel safe at her place of work?) and that sometimes there are conflicts. Feminists are calling for more prosecutions of men accused of sexual assault, which would result in more prosecutions of men of color. There is also the question of whether a particular policy will meet its goal. As one example, a ban on employers asking prospective employees whether they have been in prison led to less job offers for minority job-seekers without college degrees, because employers couldn't verify whether they had criminal records or not.

[Tami]

National Guard commander says police suddenly moved on Lafayette Square protesters, used ‘excessive force’ before Trump visit

An Army National Guard commander who witnessed protesters forcibly removed from Lafayette Square last month is contradicting claims by the attorney general and the Trump administration that they did not speed up the clearing to make way for the president’s photo opportunity minutes later.

A new statement by Adam DeMarco, an Iraq veteran who now serves as a major in the D.C. National Guard, also casts doubt on the claims by acting Park Police Chief Gregory Monahan that violence by protesters spurred Park Police to clear the area at that time with unusually aggressive tactics. DeMarco said that “demonstrators were behaving peacefully” and that tear gas was deployed in an “excessive use of force.”

DeMarco backs up law enforcement officials who told The Washington Post they believed the clearing operation would happen after the 7 p.m. curfew that night — but it was dramatically accelerated after Attorney General William P. Barr and others appeared in the park around 6 p.m. Monahan has said the operation was conducted so that a fence might be erected around the park. DeMarco said the fencing materials did not arrive until 9 p.m. — hours after Barr told the Park Police to expand the perimeter -- and the fence wasn’t built until later that night.

Written Statement of Adam DeMarco, Hearing Before the Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives July 28, 2020

[WestPhillyPunisher]

National Guard commander says police suddenly moved on Lafayette Square protesters, used ‘excessive force’ before Trump visit



Written Statement of Adam DeMarco, Hearing Before the Committee on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives July 28, 2020

Over/under on when DeMarco gets the chop from Trump and/or Barr: Wednesday afternoon.

[Mister Mets]

Well, there you go. Tom Cotton declares that slavery was a necessary evil. Not much more to say other than f**K Tom.

The idea that slavery was a defining feature of the formation of the country is one often seen on the left, and a major aspect of the 1619 project that Cotton is so critical of.

Cotton says that he was describing the views of the founders.

Describing the *views of the Founders* and how they put the evil institution on a path to extinction, a point frequently made by Lincoln, is not endorsing or justifying slavery.

No surprise that the 1619 Project can't get facts right.

An interesting theory/idea brought up on news based on what Nixon did in the '60s/'70s. People using guns fro violence are ones who wouldn't have the money to buy guns. Someone is putting thises guns in the hands of those most likely to use them just so that crime increases and it gives Trump an excuse to send it his Storm Troopers.

In other words, this rise in violent crime might, possibly, be a plan by the Trumpites to justify Trumps actions and try to make him 'look good' as a 'law and order' president for the election.

I don't think this has any basis in fact.

This would require the Trump administration to engage in a massive conspiracy, and keep it quiet. Any reporter who uncovers it would be famous and respected. Any blue state/ big city prosecutor who can prove it would be a major contender for higher office. Any criminal invited to get involved would be able to negotiate immunity.

It would also need some kind of demonstrable link to an increase in violence, and the election of Trump, since the Trump administration would not have been in the position to flood the streets of Chicago with firearms until after his inauguration.