|
Boris Galerkin posted:As Yeah, this is a really good post. The thing about Greta Thunberg is that too many people are interpreting her activism as a cute kid who cares about the environment and not as a kid who is literally begging us to let her generation have a future. She's being mocked by the right because they're all spiteful, empty bags of hate, but it's also because they implicitly recognize that she's part of a very angry youth that is going to hold them accountable.
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 14:43
|
|
and feel good as that is, the point she’s making with her activism is that we need to do something now, because if we don’t it doesn’t matter that the “kids are alright.” It’s not enough to post on social media about how awesome she is or how you can sleep better at night knowing the next generation could be better people than us. Those are just words. We need action, and we needed it yesterday, but today is all we have so we need to do something today instead of punting it into the future.
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
Mahoning posted:Part of what has made Trump so strong and untouchable has been the GOP's absolute unflinching loyalty to him. Save Justin Amash, there hasn't been a single Republican who has made a peep about Trump or Trump's actions beyond a meely mouthed "I'm concerned" statement every so often. So GOP senators and congressmen will need to make a choice. Hold the party line (this will be SUPER easy for some, but others could be a death sentence for the political careers if their district or state is even close to purple) or speak up and oppose Trump and incur the wrath of the party and the President. My guess is, many will just retire or not run for re-election (many have already done that, likely foreseeing this catch 22). I've made posts to this effect before, but I think the federal government is basically facing two stress tests at this point. First, it's the willingness of Democrats to impeach. Impeachment won't do anything if Republicans in the Senate won't flip, but impeachment in the face of actual, blatant crimes shouldn't be a political issue. You vote to impeach even if you think nothing is going to happen, because that's your job, and because it gives you wider latitude for pursuing an investigation. Second, it's whether Republicans will actually remove Trump from office in the event that there's strong evidence that he did something wrong. This one is way more important than people in this thread give it credit for and it's a big part of why impeachment is so important. Nixon is the only other time this has ever really been tested, and there was enough evidence that Republicans would have removed him if he hadn't resigned. If there's similar evidence for Trump and Senate Republicans still won't budge, then our institutions really are toast.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 15:32
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:By your own numbers, if we managed to knock Agriculture down to effectively 0...we're still at 90% of emissions. If we all start walking everywhere instead of using personal vehicles, we're at like...70%. Which is a big difference, but also does not solve the problem. The long term trick is making it so that modern society's needs come from sources that don't spew carbon. Yeah. Just to put this into perspective, Greta Thunberg is 16 years old right now. Our best shot at preventing potentially catastrophic warming is for us to stop all CO2 emissions globally before she even turns 25. If we do that, then we'll still have warmed the planet up and we'll still be facing serious issues. That means no natural gas, no coal, no oil, no airplanes, no container ships, nothing... by 2028ish. We'll never pull that off, but even slightly more realistic plans for aggressive action will mean a world that's going to be drastically different by 2030. This is a problem that can't be solved by consumer action.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 15:38
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:With the current state of politics, the US will never invest in carbon sequestering technology either, thanks to the Middle American death cults that exalt guns, greed and profit. We unfortunately need to start public works today, but I can’t see anything happening at all with the way the Republicans need to block any public good unless they personally profit from it. My only vain hope is that we bring back earmarks and pork-barrel poo poo to bribe Oklahoma and Texas to let us install wind and solar energy, and to bribe a few politicians to look the other way as we create research grants for carbon sequestering tech. It's too much to get into in this thread, but CCS is a pipe dream and unlikely to ever be even remotely economical at scale. Doesn't mean we won't have to make heavy use of it at some point, but it's going to be something that we'll do long after we've stopped emitting entirely. The reality of our situation is that we waited too goddamn long and we're now locked into either crash decarbonization or complete disaster.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
ummel posted:This is gonna sound trivial for the eco I can't stop laughing at the idea that saying widespread political action is needed means that "nothing matters." Just because you can't solve a problem by buying a thing or spending money doesn't mean that you have no agency.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 18:19
|
|
crowd in here today, but this happened to me. All I did was put a recycling bin just for used water bottles in my office and a couple people use it and I empty it weekly. One person said that the bin made her realize how many bottles per week she used (she brings in a 6 pack of Aquafina per day) so she switched to a Brita filter bottle. So that's 120 plastic bottles a month saved.
|
She's stuck at this point. A majority of the caucus is in favor of impeachment, so there's no way this isn't going forward.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:This has been true since last year. It really is the fact that Trump is going after the presumed candidate that has made her move. This doesn't even make sense. Republicans are going to drag Biden through the mud during this investigation and there's almost no chance that Trump is actually removed from office. I'm absolutely sure that Pelosi would rather this Ukraine poo poo just go away, but there's too much noise being made right now.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 18:59
|
|
|
Yeah, it's pretty clear at this point that Republicans are going to turn this into Biden's email scandal. It's meaningless nonsense, but they aren't going to shut up about it for the next several months. It's going to be difficult for Democrats to make sure that the focus actually stays on Trump during an impeachment. Paradoxish fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Sep 24, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Which will be hilarious when Biden doesn't get the nomination and Warren or Sanders slaps him. Oh yeah, I'm not particularly worried about it in part because I'm convinced that if Biden gets the nom he'd lose in the general either way. It is loving annoying that Republicans keep doing this and will likely be able to keep getting away with it, though. They're just picking the wrong target in this case.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
There's effectively no chance of Trump being removed and I'm not even sure how much this is going to matter, but today is still a good day.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 19:52
|
|
|
Democrats discover that doing things can have benefits.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:don't let this slip by in the hullabaloo Everyone should read this, because it's exactly as bad as it sounds. quote:Prosecutors said that disclosing whether Abdul Kareem is on the “kill list” could permit him to evade capture or further U.S. action, and also could risk revealing or compromising intelligence sources and methods. So the judge essentially agreed that the government was not obligated to provide information because that information could allow this guy to avoid being killed by the government.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I’ve noticed that as well. Sasse was the only comment I saw and it was not helpful to Trump. I think the big issue right now is that the reactions are too candid. Republicans are keeping their mouths shut or using vague language like "troubling" because they aren't sure which way the wind is blowing yet. I don't think it's wise to read anything into Republican reactions (unless they're literally saying "yes, impeach") until they've had a few days to digest and develop a coherent strategy. This is all moving at the speed of light for a political scandal.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 02:13
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:If the whistle blower report was in any way middling they would have been already leaking reports on how it makes Trump look good and how the Dems screwed up. But instead we’ve seen nothing. It's going to be insanely damning, but I think it's a mistake to assume that Republicans will vote to remove Trump based on its content. It's bad enough that they don't have a cohesive response, but they're going to decide to support removal on the basis of whether they think they can get away with it, not whether Trump actually did something wildly illegal. This is why I'm saying that their off-the-cuff responses don't really matter. What's important is what they say over the next few days.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 02:17
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I think you can read a lot into the fact that Devin Nunes read the thing and isn’t feeling like running to a camera and saying it’s nothing. To me, that says a lot: of it cows even nut bars like him into waiting for a line it’s bad. Oh yeah. If we're just talking about reading tea leaves to guess the content of the report then I agree that it must be awful. I just don't believe that Senate Republicans would ever vote to remove Trump if they felt like it would actually threaten their job security. It's gotta be bad in a way that will specifically collapse Trump's public support. I'm really curious what could be so bad that it's drawing stronger reactions than that hilariously damning transcript, though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:wait, for impeachment, don't you need 2/3s in both houses? Majority in the House to impeach, 2/3 in the Senate to remove.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 02:31
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:thanks people It's not that weird when you consider that it's basically a split between indicting and convicting.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 02:41
|
|
|
This is all moving absurdly fast. Like, holy poo poo. Some of this has to be intentional to prevent the GOP from getting their ducks in a row and developing a cohesive response.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 04:52
|
|
|
Zophar posted:What's also bizarre to me is that the GOP has barely even put up token resistance to this. Could be that they were caught with their pants down, but it almost feels like a tacit admission that they're afraid of impeachment dragging them all through the mud, and would rather get through this all fast before it has a chance to affect downballot elections next year. I said this a few pages ago, but I really do think that Republicans have been blindsided by this. This came out of nowhere over the course of barely two weeks, which is just an insane timeline for a political scandal. It's not even related to any of the other ten thousand scandals that Trump is involved in aside from being vaguely in the same genre of corruption. People keep trying to compare Trump to Nixon, but this is absolutely nothing like Watergate. The Russian collusion and later obstruction angles were the closest thing this administration has had to Watergate, and those took too long to play out and ultimately fizzled anyway. This isn't something that's been brewing for years, it literally happened two months ago.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 05:06
|
|
|
SpaceDrake posted:And likely happened because Trump was emboldened after the failure of Mueller. I think there's a desire to fit things into a coherent narrative so that it feels like everything led here, but it seems way simpler than that. Trump is a corrupt, criminal idiot. His campaign involved crimes. He's been doing crimes since he got into office. His administration is full of corrupt criminals who just constantly do crimes for the hell of it. He should have already been impeached a hundred times over, so literally anything that doesn't result in him being removed from office is going to embolden him. I don't actually think there's any kind of story that got us here, he just happened to finally do a crime that pissed off exactly the right people at the right time.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 05:30
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Not a lot we weren't expecting. The terrible phone call, and a ridiculous coverup. Yeah, I don't really see how this is going to move the needle for Republicans, but we'll see. The wording of the letter seems far more damning than the content which, uh, doesn't feel like the right way to say that but I'm not sure how else to do it. Like, it's not that the content isn't hilariously damning, it's just that it's mostly nothing that wasn't already public knowledge. The biggest thing seems to be that it points the finger at other administration officials as well as part of a conspiracy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 14:00
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i think trump is legit deluded enough to think he did nothing wrong. Right. The complaint makes it seem as if the cover up was the result of other people realizing how bad this was as it was happening. Trump wasn't smart enough to understand that he was doing something wrong that would require a cover up.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
pacerhimself posted:Part of what the whistleblower complaint might show is that the 'transcript' we saw yesterday might be the sanitized version - it would explain the posturing from Trump about what a perfect conversation it was, 'knowing' that what they were going to release would look innocent but also stupidly unaware of how bad it looked anyways. But it's not perfect. This is what I'm still not understanding. What could possibly be on the original transcript? The transcript we got is wildly damning. It is the smoking gun.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 14:18
|
|
|
SKULL.GIF posted:It's also not a transcript, don't fall for the Republican framing It doesn't matter what it is. The words in it literally amount to "I am committing a crime right now." The content of it is incredibly damning. If the content of what we have isn't enough, then I'm not sure what productive purpose is served by worrying about an unsanitized version.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 14:33
|
|
|
I think you guys are reading too much into this. Maguire isn't throwing anyone under the bus, he's just desperately covering his own rear end.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 14:48
|
|
|
Every word this guy says is a slight variation of "I didn't do anything illegal!" Like, I can't totally blame him here, but he's useless.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 14:52
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:Not so sure if he’s on Trump’s side or if he’s afraid of the axe coming from an angry House and a senile, angry Trump, so he’s just trying his damnedest to stay out of the conversation. It's this. Maguire is a huge coward. He knew he was in a world of poo poo when he got the report, so he did everything in his power to try to cover all of his bases while remaining just technically on the right side of legal. Now he's desperately trying to thread a needle in his testimony where he can remain apolitical, unopinionated, and also not in jail.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 14:56
|
|
|
Peter Daou getting super woke has got to be the most hilarious part of this unrelentingly dark timeline that we've fallen into.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 15:12
|
|
|
skylined! posted:It's exactly where Mike Turner is going now in this moment and I couldn't care less. No one outside a very limited scope gives a poo poo about the systematic reasoning of the process; everyone wants to know the crimes and the criminals. Yeah, "if you had followed the proper procedure then the criminals would have never been caught!" is not a winning argument. edit- I'm not sure if this is really meant for their base or the public, though. I'm beginning to think they're just covering for themselves when they inevitably refuse to vote to remove Trump.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
"I did not receive direction from anybody" is going to be a useful sound bite for the GOP. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 15:34
|
|
|
CuddleCryptid posted:I wouldn't worry about what the GOP is going to spin too much. We're operating on "talking points disproven by first page of memo" level of deflection here I'm not worried about spin, I'm just frustrated by this guy's ability to cover his own rear end without implicating anyone else.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 15:37
|
|
|
Gunthen posted:The guy is right tho, he did what his counsel told him to do. And he was legally obligated to do. The issue of executive privilege being used to shield a corrupt president doesn't fall on his shoulders. He was hosed the moment that complaint hit his desk, but he made a judgment call to assume executive privilege and contact the WH counsel for guidance. He didn't do anything wrong, but his decisions were questionable.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
lol I have no idea what giuliani actually does for the president either, buddy
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 15:58
|
|
|
eke out posted:just want to flag this because holy poo poo Yeah wait a minute, how the gently caress would Russian state media know this in May?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 16:09
|
|
|
eke out posted:they could've just learned from Ukraine - I'm sure Rudy and co. made it very clear that the reason that Pence's delegation was cancelled is that Trump was punishing them. Spying on Ukraine is like a primary thing russia does rn Okay, yeah, that definitely seems reasonable.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
Rime posted:None of the reprehensible shitheads blatantly lying on the record here are going to face any consequences whatsoever, are they. No, Republican strategy here is to just grandstand and say random poo poo that might get repeated as sound bites because they know any critical analysis of their statements won't get the same level of play as the statements themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 16:28
|
|
|
Republicans masturbating over this guy’s service record has reached the point of parody. It’s not even annoying, it’s just loving sad.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 16:35
|
|
|
lol he dead the wording of this question makes it slightly less of a slam dunk then it appears at first glance imo
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:Yeah the "if" in that does make things kind of invalid though. When pressed I'm guessing none of the republican respondents would say hes guilty. Yeah, that question boils down to "Do you support impeachment if the president definitely did crimes?" That kind of sucks, because it makes it look more like an upper bound of support for impeachment.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 16:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
Majorian posted:Ahahahaha, Nunes, smugness is not a good look for you right now my dude. But being a smug doofus is the only look that he's got
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2019 16:58
|
|