Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Democrats Are a Threat to Our Constitution
Biden set up a committee to consider court-packing. A new more sinister form of it emerged in the last week with the threat to murder Justice Kavanaugh.
Other Supreme Court justices have been threatened and the Biden administration has said nothing about it. The Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer threatened Kavanaugh and his colleagues said nothing. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has blocked a bill to provide security for Supreme Court justices.
We face an existential crisis. The assassination of a Justice would be far worse than the caning of Senator Sumner by Representative Brooks. But our leaders are mute. An insurrection is brewing but they don’t care because they can’t blame it on Trump.
Published in Law
That’s hyperbolic. We need specifics.
Look at the whole thread.
bIDen haS BEen a dISaPpoINTmEnT
It’s subjective. People that are overly idealistic and not realistic about what is comprehensively happening are going to come up with some worrisome scenarios that aren’t merited.
The guy admitted in another thread that he is “literally terrified” of Trump. That is an intense, unreasoning fear, almost a classic definition of a phobia. Nothing he says on the subject of Trump has any validity at all.
Trump’s problem is, he’s not intellectually curious about civics and government. It’s not ideal, but that is about the limit of it.
Drew, with all due respect, I suggest that you watch the January 6th Committee Hearings. In the interim read Bill Barr’s book. If it isn’t at the library, I will mail you a copy of it.
That’s not a response to what I said. Please address what I said.
I have no interest in what Lying Barr has to say. It’s clear he never saw the 2000 Mules movie he dismisses, because his “debunking” of cell phone data is itself debunked just by watching the film. Barr dismisses the data as “people just passing by a drop box,” and ignores the actual video footage of those people STUFFING drop boxes. Which is to say, “They weren’t just walking by, idiot! We have them on camera doing the dirty deed.”
Does he ignore it because he didn’t actually see the movie, or is he lying to promote a narrative?
Either way, he’s dishonest, and should not be treated like he’s some kind of expert.
And your fealty to him makes you either similarly dishonest or duped. I don’t know about you, but I get angry when people try to fool me. You should be similarly angry.
I’m a bit behind on my Revolutions podcast episodes. The one I listened to today gives a good preview for how the Hearing is going to turn out.
re: Barr
I’m not the final word on this, but given what happened, this isn’t an a Federal level issue. The initiatives need to be taken below that level.
Trump is a clear and present danger to the wokesters, which is why they tried to convince you – apparently with success – to help get him out of their way.
I thank whatever gods there may be for that.
Yeah, since McCain wasn’t really fighting the crazies back then, and Romney isn’t doing it now.
It’s hard to fight them when you’re one of them.
Yes.
While telling them to peacefully cheer on the perfectly ordinary airing of concerns about the election by Cruz and Hawley.
Look, I disapprove of Trump and some others jumping on every reporting Kraken sighting like it was Mary Magdalene saying “I have seen the Lord.”
But which claims were lies, Gary? Illegally cast or counted votes were more than double the Biden margin of victory in 5 swing states. Which claims were lies, and which lie was the Big One?
You know what’s a threat to the Constitution? Not taking election illegalities seriously.
“Preach!”
Good luck getting an actual response out of this one.
I actually did on Sunday. I could show you my PowerPoint.
Oh there might be an actual response, but it likely won’t make a bit of sense.
You gave a Sunday morning sermon on election irregularities … in Hong Kong? You’re tough. I like tough.
It was on Acts 3 and 4, because this was the Sunday after Pentecost.
I want to see a link to that!
I can give you one, but it’s really just about Pentecost and Old Testament prophecy and stuff.
Gary, an enthymeme is an argument with an unstated step, usually an unstated premise.
Aristotle explains that enthymemes can be useful rhetorically. You don’t have to spell out every step, talk like a robot, and lose your audience. Sometimes, it’s ok to say “The defendant was seen at the pier on the night of the crime, and therefore did not commit the murder” without explicitly telling people who already know the local geography that the pier is a long way from the crime scene.
But enthymemes have a dark side.
Obama gave us a fine example of a bad enthymeme. He used to diss McCain by saying he agreed with George W. Bush 90% of the time. The whole argument against McCain depended on the premise Obama didn’t say out loud–the premise that talks about how often Bush was actually wrong. If it was that Bush is wrong 100% of the time, then the premises of the argument do a good job beating up McCain, but one premise is ridiculous: No one is wrong 100% of the time. If it was that Bush is only wrong 65% of the time, then the argument only establishes that McCain is wrong 58.5% of the time. But whatever it was, if we said it out loud, then we’d start thinking for ourselves instead of doing what Obama wanted, which was to scurry along from the conclusion that McCain is wrong a lot into an enthusiastic vote for his opponent.
Obama had to keep it quiet just how often Bush was wrong. If he let it out into the open, then it would be easy to see two things:
1. There’s no general agreement on how often Bush was wrong, and therefore no clarity on how powerful Obama’s argument against McCain was.
2. The most powerful versions of Obama’s argument would rely on an obviously false premise.
Gary, you are using an enthymeme. You keep saying that Trump told some heinous lies, and therefore he’s a big problem, a threat to the Constitution, etc.
Your unstated premise is the one that tells us exactly what Trump said that was a lie. Why don’t you tell us what the premise is?
If the premise is that Trump lied when he said the election was rigged, then the Hemingway book shows that your premise is false.
If the premise is that Trump lied when he said that there was a lot of fraud, then the currently available evidence indicates that your premise is false.
If the premise is that Trump lied when he said that illegal actions flipped swing states, then the currently available evidence indicates that your premise is false.
If the premise is that Trump lied when he said the election was stolen electronically, then we need to talk. We need to talk about how electronic fraud is actually plausible, and then figure out what sort of evidence there is either for or against it happening in 2020.
If the premise is that Trump lied when he said that the Senate should not have certified the Electoral College vote, then he was not lying since he honestly believed it, but at least I can agree with you that he was mistaken.
If the premise is that Trump lied when he said that the election was stolen when Dominion applied an algorithm and the voters “broke the algorithm” before some jerks brought in some fake ballots or whatever, then maybe that was a mistake, but it wasn’t a lie because he believed it.
If the premise is that Trump lied when he said that we knew all that stuff at the time, then maybe that was a lie.
If the premise is that Trump lied when he said the election was stolen, then we need to talk. We have to talk about what he meant by “stolen” and whether it was a true statement after all.
But you realize, don’t you, that [standard response the mods told me not to use any more]?
He lied, okay? Just admit it.
And then you don’t have to go to Camp.
Is there a word for someone who lies about someone else lying?
???