Thank you, Freeman, once again for the cogent analysis of (to quote RickyP) "Orange man bad".

I thought you would be able to tell me what you thought about the VP debate. I can only guess your brain cavity is filled with thoughts of Trump, and there is no room for clear thought. Sadly, I hoped you could be unbiased about the VP debate.

If you are looking for an echo chamber, I am sure GeoJanes and I would agree with you that Trump is a blowhard.

Trump is an evil, sociopathic man. He doesn't care who he harms. He has promised mass deportation of immigrants; threatened retaliation against political rivals, uses violent language and racist dog whistles; and of course tried to violently interfere with the transfer of power; has promised this is the last election Christians will have to vote (things will be fixed) admires Viktor Orban, an autocrat, and is under the thumb of Putin, another autocrat; and now also appears to be under the control of Musk and Thiel; his foreign policy would be disasterous,abandoning Ukraine and not supporting NATO and South Korea/Japan, etc could destabilize the thin line that keeps the free world prosperous and aggressors at bay. So sorry if I'm not going to care too much about the VP debate because to me it would be absurd to care about that when it's pretty obvious that no one should vote for Trump. Clearly, you think very, very differently and that's fine. But in my view Trump as president would be calamitous and to me right now thats all that's important in the election.

Yep. You have said all of that before. I hear you. I really do.

I was hopeful that you had more in your mind other than Trump. Sadly I guess not. I tried to talk about something that could enlighten one another (and hopefully others as well) for the benefit of mutual communication and understanding.

I guess if that is all you have, I do not need to hear anything else from you.

Freeman = "Orange Man Bad"

I believe I truly understand your position. No need to further your or the Democratic position. All you would be doing is wasting your keystrokes. I expected more from you based upon your past insightful statements.

You're right. I've expressed how I feel and to continue would be redundant.

Agreed. I've always believed you are above that.

I don't buy into the "threat to democracy" fear mongering from either side. I'll say what my Ambassador said when Trump was elected the first time and grown men were openly sobbing in front of stunned Central Asians. The Republic is stronger than any one person or personality. It was designed to be that way.

When was the last time there wasn't an election that was "critical" or "pivotal?" It just doesn't mean anything anymore.

Here's what will happen to your day to day a year from now...nothing. Those who work in the Executive branch might see something change...a new direction in foreign policy, a military deployment or two. But everything else is going to clunk along as it has been.

I would dearly love to dig into "first 100 days" policies either candidate is promising but both are long on rhetoric and short on detail. So I'll trust in the system. Any enormities either one brings forward will be hampered by lawsuits, leaks, and slow-rolling bureaucrats.

After Jan. 6th? They were pretty close to fraudulently turning over the election. And we werent able to stop the guy responsible from running again! Our system has turned out not to be that strong dealing with bad faith actors looking for flaws in the system. There are "no both sides" here; this is all on the Repub side. And with that ridiculous immunity decision Trump could stash his Admin. with loyalists, he is totally immune for any acts done through core functions (that includes the pardon power btw), and he could pardon any illegal acts done by loyalists. And you have a friendly US Supreme Court.

You may very well be right; the system may hold. The Supreme Court *may* ultimately hold firm. And Trump *may* not be able to do anything about it. But you got billionaires buying influence into the presidency--Thiel got Vance in--and Musk is angling for a big role. What do you think those guys are doing because it's not about low taxes or something like that. Thiel is against democracy and I'm sure Musk is not a fan. Musk spent 44 billion to buy Twitter just to get Trump elected! Think about that for a sec...

Maybe the system will hold but even if it does it will be a very a rocky road I'd rather not chance. Not to mention Trump is going to wreck our alliances at the very least to allow Russia to have its way.

From New York Times:

Breaking NYT:

Trump has spoken with Vladimir Putin as many as seven times since leaving office — even as he was pressuring Republicans to block military aid to Ukraine.

Trump also secretly sent Putin COVID tests — when they were rare and hard to get — while in office.

Putin said to Trump at the time: "I don't want you to tell anybody because people will get mad at you, not me."

Assuming that's true, not sure what other evidence you would need that Trump essentially is controlled by Russia in one way or the other.

And the reality? This news will probably make no difference, which tells you a little something about how strong our democracy is...

PCHiway wrote:I don't buy into the "threat to democracy" fear mongering from either side. I'll say what my Ambassador said when Trump was elected the first time and grown men were openly sobbing in front of stunned Central Asians. The Republic is stronger than any one person or personality. It was designed to be that way.

You may be right, and I hope that you are.

Of course, if this country were ever to lose its democracy, it would likely start with an election of someone with anti-democratic tendencies, like Trump. If you work backwards from what is a possible, even if unlikely event, an election like this is how it would start. Even if you consider disaster to be a low probability event, since the consequences are so high, shouldn't it be of some concern?

PCHiway wrote:When was the last time there wasn't an election that was "critical" or "pivotal?"

There is a qualitative difference. In modern history democracy was a given by everyone who ran for office. That's not true this time.

Jack Smith's Factual Proffer in his Motion for Immunity Determination a must read for informed Americans.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... rminations

freeman3 wrote:Jack Smith's Factual Proffer in his Motion for Immunity Determination a must read for informed Americans.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... rminations

Thank you! It's damning.

Of course. Yes, it is. It's amazing how extensive the attempt to overturn the election and interfere with the transfer of power was.

Trump pushed Republicans to support reinstating him as president and told aides he would move back into the White House in August, 2021, a date that QAnon theorists thought was significant. When Mo Brooks senator from Alabama refused to accede to Trump's request to publicly call for a special election to reinstate Trump, Trump was enraged and withdrew his endorsement for Brooks who later lost in the primary.

For those who think there is any chance of Trump conceding if he loses...

[This is from Bob Woodward's book which I had trouble copying on Twitter. But below is CNN article on Brooks on how he was pressured by
Trump]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.co ... 6-election

Was Replicans a mistype? I have not heard of that term as a slander. It is not like you to throw epithets. That is more like RickyP's style.

I hope you are not taking his place "in abstensia"

Yes it was a typo. I think that does it for my posting on politics here.