greg1647545532

There's a reason all of these attempts at deflection are spoken in vague generalities. "The left". "This Summer." Because you cannot connect the dots between a single person and a single dead body the way you can connect the dots between Trump and Brian Sicknick. And that's the difference. Go ahead, give me prominent Democrat, a day/place, and a victim. Should be easy.

Republicans in congress are like an all-white jury acquitting a white man of a lynching in Jim Crow Mississippi. Just because everyone knows that the outcome is a foregone conclusion doesn't make it waste of time.

Yep. Quick conviction here in the senate and we can have this whole thing wrapped up and behind us less than 2 months from the event in question. That's lightning fast compared to the criminal justice system. And wouldn't you say spending 2 months to clean up after a failed insurrection is 2 months well spent? Democrats can't win here. Trump's lawyer yesterday went on and on about, "How can we have this trial when the investigation is still ongoing!" In other words, it's moving far too fast for some. But at the same time, the longer they wait, the more they'll be accused of fixating on Trump "long after he's gone." Which is also an argument he made. "He's already out of office, why do we care at this point?" It is, as they say, to laugh. You were and are going to criticize this process no matter what because you're a true believer. You have no actual beef with the process, you'd only be satisfied if Democrats just rolled over and said, "Yep, insurrection? A-OK in this country!" Like the Republicans did.

/lols in Benghazi Nationally, cases and deaths both peaked in between the election and inauguration and are still going down. Huzzah!

But this is all anecdotal. Are you telling me people didn't fight with their neighbors over stupid shit 70 years ago? Are you telling me people always had "adult conversations" to air their grievances 70 years ago? We can all point to individual examples of A) people being asshats now, and B) people being good and decent Americans now, and C) people being asshats 70 years ago, and D) people being good and decent people 70 years ago. All 4 of those things exist, yes? So what we need to determine if America is getting worse is statistics, aggregate data. And I've seen nothing to suggest that, as a whole, people are shittier now than they were 70 years ago. What's changed is what people consider shitty. For example, making fun of gay people is something that probably happens a lot less now than it did 70 years ago. If you're pro-gay, that means Americans have gotten better, more decent to each other. If you're anti-gay, you probably want to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. But overall, Americans as individuals are just as good and just as shitty as they were at any point in American history. Overall, American policy has gotten better, what with the abolition of slavery and things like that. But there was never a time when individual Americans were somehow better than individual Americans now. People are just people, regardless of their time and place. Convince me I'm wrong.

Ah yes, I remember after Corey Booker told a small group of anti-Homelessness activists to get up in the face of some congress people there was a huge riot and people died. Maybe the charge of "inciting a riot" requires there to actually, you know, be a riot? I'm not a lawyer, can anyone answer that? /s BoTh sIdEs MaN

She said she ran out of hairspray and used this instead, I guess because they both have "glue" in the name? I don't see her having a case.

I believe Panduh hasn't thought about the case in 15 years, but there's a reason it keeps coming up. Part of the conservative ethos is this idea that "America is now a bunch of pussies," logic thus dictating that there was a time when we weren't all a bunch of pussies. Men were tough, women wore dresses, and things made a lot more sense. Conservative mouth-breathers on TV like to bring up the McDonalds coffee case because they see it as an example of the pussification of America. "Back in my day, we took personal responsibility for our actions, but nowadays you can sue for millions if you spill coffee on yourself!" Reality, as we can see from this thread and the changing consensus of that case, is never that black and white. But what does that mean for the modern conservative? If the coffee case is muddled, then maybe that era of American lore where men were men and women were women and nobody was pussies wasn't that black and white either (pun intended?). Maybe we've always been pussies and we just never knew the truth. People like Mace have to stick to their story here because not doing so would chip away at their whole worldview. Also, FUCK SPRING, CR POLITICAL THREADS FOREVER!!!!

The car was stopped and she took the lid off to add cream and sugar. Holding the cup between your knees was pretty standard at the time. And sometimes it would spill. Didn't always cause the sort of damage it did in this case though.

You keep saying "it" and I have no idea what that's referring to. Is "it" your dumbass attempt at clever rhetoric? You don't seem to understanding what "gaslighting" means. Within 2 weeks of taking power Democrats have allocated 1.9T for a COVID stimulus. It's now going back to committees in both chambers, and reports are that they expect to have it out to the citizenry sometime in mid-March -- less than 2 months from Biden's swearing in (and therefore Harris' critical tie-breaking vote). 2 months is going to be too slow for many critics, and too fast for others. I have no comment on either position since I've already stated my opposition to the proposal. What the Senate is NOT doing is "putting COVID relief on hold for the impeachment trial." The rules for the impeachment trial haven't even been set. The vote has already been delayed once, I believe specifically so they could work on COVID relief. The vote for the impeachment trial protocols is scheduled for Tuesday. They've discussed holding the trial in the evenings so as not to impede other work, but I honestly don't know what exactly they're going to vote on. So when you say Democrats are holding up the COVID stimulus until after the impeachment trial and this is going to put blood on their hands, I understand that you're not making a serious argument but rather think you're being clever. But even if it were clever it wouldn't be based on reality. Which is an awfully fresh take for someone who just accused others of gaslighting.

You really do suck at this type of rhetoric, because I have no fucking clue what you're talking about. I'm not a fan. I mean, it's better than borrowing trillions in order to give wealthy people and corporations big tax cuts, but it's still borrowing trillions in an ineffectual way. The time for COVID relief was back in March of 2020, when the government told people they weren't allowed to work in the interest of public health. Since the government was making that call, I was OK with the government providing unemployment benefits and business grants and loans. But then after that first half-assed stimulus Republicans said no more, and so now Americans have had a year to suffer under a hodgepodge of half-assed lockdown measures and a hodgepodge of half-assed financial support. The damage is done. Governments at all levels have massively fucked this up. At the federal level it was mostly Republicans fucking up, but very few blue states seem to have gotten it right either. A big part of that is because states don't really have the borrowing power to pull something like this off, but when they realized that Republicans were fucking a football in congress and Trump wasn't going to do jack shit about public health, they should have just called the whole thing off. But anyway, to refresh your memory, Panduh said he was going to vote for Trump and other Republicans based primarily on the tax cuts that were passed using borrowed money, which is when I started bringing up my children having to pay it back. I did not vote for Democrats based primarily (or at all) based on their COVID relief bill. We all knew it was coming so I knew back then it wasn't going to be something I was happy about. And now here we are with me not happy about it. But it doesn't change my calculus to vote D, and I don't think it makes me a hypocrite which is what I think you're insinuating. Feel free to try and convince me otherwise, but deficits always seem to get smaller under Democrats.

Been reflecting on this a bit, Reddit is still acting like the price drop is a "scam" by hedge funds helping each other out, as though hedge funds helping each other out is even a thing. They all spend millions of dollars on software and hardware to try and outcompete each other but we're to believe that none of them would short squeeze each other if they had the chance? Seems unlikely. Last week seems like a fluke, and anyone who didn't cash out is now left holding the bag, eh?

Right. Sticking with my policy of not getting my news from blurry screenshots, I googled "robinhood selling shares without permission" and found this hastily sourced article from The Verge, and not much else. But according to The Verge, Robinhood says it didn't sell any outright shares (so perhaps Mallard is right about them just closing margins), whereas their customers insist that they did. Do we believe the customers? In this case, I'm inclined not to give much credence to a bunch of WSB bros who willingly call themselves retarded. Gonna wait for more info.

So this has puzzled me for many a year... I still am no closer to coming to a conclusion, after many arguments that is. I don't think it can, others 100% think it will. If you have a plane trying to take off whilst on a tread mill which will run at the same speed as whatever the planes tires rotation speed is will it take off?

Ok. Noted.

Panduh what does the secretary of the treasury have to do with this? This is an SEC issue, and the SEC is an independent commission. Just trying to connect the dots. Thanks.

I get the idea but at some point the hedge funds will have bought everything they need to cover their puts and shorts and then it's just going to be a bunch of WSB autists holding the bag. Who do you sell to when the hedge funds don't need to buy anymore? Other autists? But when I posted that I didn't realize TDA and robinhood had locked it down.

LOL. Yes, that's absolutely the future, soccer moms driving around in HD 2500 3-row "work" trucks. Sigh.

Back to the topic at hand, I don't buy for a second that this has anything to do with a "carbon neutrality pledge". BEVs are simply going to make ICEVs economically unviable in the very near future. I see that the pledge excludes heavy duty pickups (2040) which I'm assuming includes a base model Silverado, and probably excludes all commercial trucks for all time. But I guess we'll see.

Congress isn't accountable for shit, don't pretend otherwise. Did anything happen to those folks or did the DOJ just quietly close their investigations? I think we all know the answer. I don't think that specific trade of Pelosi's is indicative of insider trading (Tesla stonks go up, who knew), but it's also ridiculous to think that the disclosure rules are anything other than a fig leaf.

Down for the day (so far) but fluctuating wildly. I wonder how many late-to-the-game redditors are going to be the suckers left holding the bag on this one.

I just can't believe that a conservative media talking point is apparently "Biden's vaccines goals were realistic based on what he was handed." Fuck him, I guess. And y'all complain about the media manipulating people.

President Biden now says he hopes to administer 1.5 million coronavirus vaccinations a day. Again, when Biden came into office there was no federal vaccination plan, seems like they're doing what they can to put one together and revise it as more data becomes available. Maybe he should have just said it would go away on its own.