Election results discussion thread (and sadly the inevitable aftermath)

[Silvanus]

Well, they did tell the FBI to investigate Michael Flynn literally for talking to a foreign diplomat during the transition period. Now people are arguing that stalling the transition is a national security risk.

Michael Flynn, who pled guilty to lying to the FBI. Some important context seemed to be missing there.

I also wait for the moment AOC returns to be a random nobody on twitter.

Right, so it's just speculation that it's anything greater than some yahoo nobody, then. And this is what you're comparing to anti-Semitism and white supremacy.

Develop a sense of perspective.

EDIT: This section was edited, as I initially misinterpreted an earlier post.

How about marking Supporters?

Uh, I don't know if you've actually looked at that guy's twitter, but he's clearly not in favour of the idea. He's being sarcastic in response to Atkins.

So nobody has unironically suggested "marking supporters" there.

 

[tstorm823]

Michael Flynn, who pled guilty to lying to the FBI. Some important context seemed to be missing there.

No. Even if you run under the assumption that he did lie to the FBI and was rightfully prosecuted, that isn't important context for my statement.

The "lie" occurred while they were investigating him for talking to a foreign diplomat during the transition period. Claiming that's relevant is anachronistic. He talked to the FBI after they decided to investigate an incoming national security advisor for the crime of talking to a foreign official during the transition period. The lie can't have caused the interview in which it took place.

 

[Silvanus]

No. Even if you run under the assumption that he did lie to the FBI and was rightfully prosecuted, that isn't important context for my statement.

The "assumption" that he admitted to under penalty of perjury, yep, okay...

The "lie" occurred while they were investigating him for talking to a foreign diplomat during the transition period. Claiming that's relevant is anachronistic. He talked to the FBI after they decided to investigate an incoming national security advisor for the crime of talking to a foreign official during the transition period. The lie can't have caused the interview in which it took place.

Obviously. Now, I wonder, why would somebody lie to the FBI about a perfectly innocent conversation taking place? And with the backdrop of all the US intelligence services agreeing that Russia was involved in trying to sway the election... If only there was some rational explanation! I'm wracking my brains!

 

[Iron]

Michael Flynn, who pled guilty to lying to the FBI. Some important context seemed to be missing there.



Right, so it's just speculation that it's anything greater than some yahoo nobody, then. And this is what you're comparing to the persecution of Jewish people in Nazi Germany.

Develop a sense of perspective.



Uh, I don't know if you've actually looked at that guy's twitter, but he's clearly not in favour of the idea. He's being sarcastic in response to Atkins.

So nobody has unironically suggested "marking supporters" there.

I didn't compare it, though.

 

[Silvanus]

I didn't compare it, though.

Imagine if it were lists of jews by right-wingers, how would you feel about it?

It's all the same kind of list, made for the same purpose.
The jews on the list were there because of their actions, as well.

Bolding mine. Yes you did.

 

[Iron]

Bolding mine. Yes you did.

Did you read the link I provided?

 

[Agema]

edit: Hey Agema, why is natural gas considered to be non-renewable? If methane isn't strictly biogenic, doesn't it mean that natural gas can be abiogenic and therefore could continue to be produced on earth and be found in the solar system? There's signs of abiogenic methane in space (other planets and meteorites)

Natural gas effectively means stuff we drill out of the ground, and to the extent more gas may be generated there, it's not generated at anything close to the rate at which we use it, therefore it is non-renewable. As far as I'm aware it was mostly biogenic - the activity of bacteria on decomposing organic matter trapped under the surface over the ages - although there could be contribution from geothermal processes also.

We could of course make methane and other gaseous fuels by other mechanisms renewably. A big tank full of organic matter and the right bacteria would do it: just pipe out the gas and keep topping the tank up with mulch. We produce a lot of "spare" organic matter, like when we mow our lawns. Or we could make it with synthetic chemistry which might be faster and better for mass production, although that would likely require more external powering and inefficiency of energy conversion.

 

[Silvanus]

Bolding mine. Yes you did.

Ah, right, so you were only comparing it to modern-day anti-Semites and white-supremacists.

I've edited that original post to remove the claim I originally made, since it's quite an emotive one.

 

[Iron]

Ah, right, so you were only comparing it to modern-day anti-Semites and white-supremacists. Much better.

Um, you went straight for the jugular without even batting an eye. You can't dismiss an argument out of hand because I made a hitler reference, when I didn't make it and it was your imagination, and then after you realize it you still dismiss it.

 

[Silvanus]

Um, you went straight for the jugular without even batting an eye. You can't dismiss an argument out of hand because I made a hitler reference, when I didn't make it and it was your imagination, and then after you realize it you still dismiss it.

I did indeed misinterpret the earlier post. I've acknowledged that and edited it to make it clear. For what it's worth, I think it's an understandable misinterpretation, given that numerous other Hitler and Nazi references have already been tossed around, and the comparison you were making was still with anti-Semites and white supremacists.

The line about developing a sense of perspective stands, because it's still a grotesque comparison to make with modern anti-Semites and white supremacists.

 

[Iron]

I did indeed misinterpret the earlier post. I've acknowledged that and edited it to make it clear. For what it's worth, I think it's an understandable misinterpretation, given that numerous other Hitler and Nazi references have already been tossed around, and the comparison you were making was still with anti-Semites and white supremacists.

The line about developing a sense of perspective stands, because it's still a grotesque comparison to make with modern anti-Semites and white supremacists.

Despite my fondness for holocaust-jokes, I don't make hitler comparisons lightly.

You still forgot to engage with my argument from earlier. That is, those proscribed lists are ominous. It isn't a grotesque comparison, it's warranted.

 

[Silvanus]

You still forgot to engage with my argument from earlier. That is, those proscribed lists are ominous. It isn't a grotesque comparison, it's warranted.

If all you have are a couple of twats on Twitter, then I don't think it's worth engaging with. It's a dumb idea that has zero relevance or traction.

I mean, I would hope that involvement in an attempted anti-democratic coup would reflect poorly on someone running for federal office in the future, but I have faith that those doing the hiring are perfectly capable of looking at someone's career history themselves. It's a routine part of recruitment.

 

[Iron]

If all you have are a couple of twats on Twitter, then I don't think it's worth engaging with. It's a dumb idea that has zero relevance or traction.

I mean, I would hope that involvement in an attempted anti-democratic coup would reflect poorly on someone running for federal office in the future, but I have faith that those doing the hiring are perfectly capable of looking at someone's career history themselves. It's a routine part of recruitment.

Therefore the link I provided is also relevant : A couple of twats on telegram made lists of jewish journalists, so you shouldn't engage with it. Making these lists are irrelevant, so you should just ignore it.

Ignore antisemetism, ok, got it.

 

[Agema]

Well, they did tell the FBI to investigate Michael Flynn literally for talking to a foreign diplomat during the transition period. Now people are arguing that stalling the transition is a national security risk.

The FBI investigated Flynn in line with ongoing worries about Russian influence in US politics, and the fact that the Trump team was full of people with iffy Russian connections and kept telling everyone about dirt Russia had on Hillary Clinton and encouraging them to spill it.

I'm not sure why everyone thinks it's such a problem that law agencies did the responsible thing and checked out whether the USA's geopolitical opponents were trying to infiltrate a presidential campaign and thus even the White House itself, especially when that campaign seemed to be welcoming Russian "assistance".

 

[Iron]

CNN in 2020: There was no fraud
CNN in 2006:

This is the best timeline

 

[Silvanus]

Therefore the link I provided is also relevant : A couple of twats on telegram made lists of jewish journalists, so you shouldn't engage with it. Making these lists are irrelevant, so you should just ignore it.

Ignore antisemetism, ok, got it.

Almost as if violent racists are more of a concern than randos mouthing off about Trump!

And almost as if there's a difference in scale between a group of 2,400+ subscribers and 2 people on Twitter!

 

[Iron]

Almost as if violent racists are more of a concern than randos mouthing off about Trump!

And almost as if there's a difference in scale between a group of 2,400+ subscribers and 2 people on Twitter!

Why did you assume they were violent racists? They could be just mouthing off about jews.

 

[Silvanus]

Why did you assume they were violent racists? They could be just mouthing off about jews.

Yeah, I'm sure a bunch of people using Nazi symbolism and targeting ethnic groups aren't a danger to anyone. /s

 

[Silvanus]

Back on topic: Jim Troupis leads the Trump legal team's efforts in the partial recount in Wisconsin.

Part of Troupis' argument has been that "in-person absentee" ballots (i.e., ballots cast early in person by those who know they won't be present on election day) should be thrown out, as he alleges that's illegal (it isn't).

He and his wife voted that way themselves.

Where do they find these clowns?

 

[deleted20220709]

DELETED