Jump to content
Happy Birthday Singapore

All USA Political Discussions (Compiled)


oralb
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 11/24/2021 at 3:03 PM, singalion said:

 

Then please go ahead and show your substantiation in your first post !

 

Here is your post. Please show your substantiation that

 

"an activist district attorney influenced by Critical Race Theory"

 

was involved.

 

While you go around demanding people to show their substatiation first, you can go around making claims like those below without substantiation? Who do you think you are? God?

 

On 11/24/2021 at 2:49 PM, singalion said:

The District Attorneys in Wisconsin are of an age group that surely did not go through Critical Race Theory in school.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 11/24/2021 at 9:57 AM, 7heaven said:

Darrell Brooks, the suspect in the recent Christmas parade killing in Waukesha, Wisconsin is the product of Critical Race Theory because he was granted measly bail amounts by activist district attorneys despite having committed violent crimes. 
 

 

 

On 11/24/2021 at 1:57 PM, 7heaven said:

... don’t fit into your own imagined narrative. Can’t help you. You are confusing state regulations and discretion of what is allowed under state regulations. Activist district attorney will be influenced by Critical Race Theory to offer low bail amounts. State regulations allow bail and it also allows discretion to set the bail amounts. 

 

It is always my imagined narrative... when what I wrote about the State's guidelines and regulation on bail amounts was correct from the start.

 

The District Attorneys throughout Wisconsin follow the directive on bail amounts and it has nothing to do with "activism" or being influenced by Critical Race Theory. and there is no discretion left. You got the section of the Criminal Code and then the guideline on the bail amount.

 

Can you read the word "uniform"???

 

These guidelines are meant to harmonise the bail amounts within Wisconsin => uniform.

 

 

STATE OF WISCONSIN
Revised Uniform State Traffic Deposit Schedule
and Alcohol Beverages, Harassment, Safety, Tobacco, UW Rule, and Drug Paraphernalia and Rental Unit Energy Efficiency Violations Deposit Schedule
and
Uniform Misdemeanor Bail Schedule
and
Trespass to Land Deposit Schedule
2021

 

Revised deposit schedules established pursuant to
sections 345.26 (2)(a), 778.25 (3), 778.26 (3), and 969.065, Wis. Stats.
Adopted by the Wisconsin Judicial Conference

 

Here are the guidelines for bail amounts.

 

Just look at the amounts.

 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj7gpOPu7D0AhUXzDgGHe2uAQ0QFnoECBcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wicourts.gov%2Fpublications%2Ffees%2Fdocs%2Fbondsched21.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1mEQy__aOONsUibVXGhpYY

 

 

CRIMES – BODILY SECURITY:
939.32 Attempted Battery 100.00
940.19 (1) Battery A 500.00
940.195 (1) Battery to unborn child A 500.00
940.20 (2m) Battery to probation/parole agent A 250.00
940.225 (3m) Fourth degree sexual assault A 250.00
940.285 (2)(b)4 Negligently subjects an individual at risk to maltreatment likely to cause bodily harm A 150.00
940.285 (2)(b)4 Recklessly subjects an individual at risk to maltreatment likely to cause bodily harm A 500.00
940.285 (2)(b)5 Negligently subjects an individual at risk to maltreatment not likely to cause bodily harm B 150.00
940.285 (2)(b)5 Recklessly subjects an individual at risk to maltreatment not likely to cause bodily harm B 250.00
940.295 (3)(b)4 Negligently abuses or neglects a patient/resident that causes or is likely to cause bodily
harm A 150.00
940.295 (3)(b)4 Recklessly abuses or neglects a patient/resident that causes or is likely to cause bodily
harm A 500.00
940.295 (3)(b)5 Negligently abuses or neglects a patient/resident that does not cause or is not likely to
cause bodily harm B 150.00
940.295 (3)(b)5 Intentional or reckless abuse or neglect of patient/resident not causing and not likely to
cause bodily harm B 250.00
940.34 (2) Duty to aid victim or report crime C 200.00
90
CLASS BAIL
940.42 Intimidation of witnesses A 500.00
940.44 Intimidation of victims/dissuade complaints A 500.00

 

 

 

Still want to claim that District Attorneys have discretion in setting the amounts or do they follow such state guidelines?

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for matter of accurateness.

 

The Bail Reform process in Wisconsin is a bipartisan project, suggested and proposed by both Democrat and Republican Party.

 

 

There has been legislation proposed recently seeking to amend this provision and add consideration of dangerousness as a factor in setting a monetary bail.
See Legislative Council Study Comm. on Bail and Conditions of Pretrial Release, Wis. State Leg. (2018), available at https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/misc/lc/study/2018/1783/.

A bi-partisan Legislative Council Study Committee that is “directed to review Wisconsin’s pretrial release system, including considerations for courts in imposing monetary bail and for denying pretrial release” is currently underway.” Id. This Committee also has been directed to “review relevant Wisconsin constitutional and statutory provisions and best practices implemented by Wisconsin counties and other states, including use of risk assessment tools for informing pretrial detention decisions.” Id. At the conclusion of their work, the Committee is to “recommend legislation regarding bail and pretrial release that enhances public safety, respects the constitutional rights of the accused, considers costs to local governments, and incorporates evidence-based strategies.”

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 3:28 PM, singalion said:

Thanks for the admission that 7heaven posts nothing else than unsubstantiated claims at this thread.

 

 

Admission? What admission? Something is seriously wrong with you.

 

It might seems like a joke if anyone is to ask if you are growing as senile as Biden or whether you are high on drugs all the time. But looking at the things you post all over the forum, I assure you that it's no joke. 

 

Something is really seriously wrong with you. No wonder the Singaporeans on this thread asked how a foreign trash like you got into the country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 3:27 PM, singalion said:

 

 

 

 

It is always my imagined narrative... when what I wrote about the State's guidelines and regulation on bail amounts was correct from the start.

 

The District Attorneys throughout Wisconsin follow the directive on bail amounts and it has nothing to do with "activism" or being influenced by Critical Race Theory. and there is no discretion left. You got the section of the Criminal Code and then the guideline on the bail amount.

 

Can you read the word "uniform"???

 

These guidelines are meant to harmonise the bail amounts within Wisconsin => uniform.

 

 

STATE OF WISCONSIN
Revised Uniform State Traffic Deposit Schedule
and Alcohol Beverages, Harassment, Safety, Tobacco, UW Rule, and Drug Paraphernalia and Rental Unit Energy Efficiency Violations Deposit Schedule
and
Uniform Misdemeanor Bail Schedule
and
Trespass to Land Deposit Schedule
2021

 

Revised deposit schedules established pursuant to
sections 345.26 (2)(a), 778.25 (3), 778.26 (3), and 969.065, Wis. Stats.
Adopted by the Wisconsin Judicial Conference

 

Here are the guidelines for bail amounts.

 

Just look at the amounts.

 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj7gpOPu7D0AhUXzDgGHe2uAQ0QFnoECBcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wicourts.gov%2Fpublications%2Ffees%2Fdocs%2Fbondsched21.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1mEQy__aOONsUibVXGhpYY

 

 

CRIMES – BODILY SECURITY:
939.32 Attempted Battery 100.00
940.19 (1) Battery A 500.00
940.195 (1) Battery to unborn child A 500.00
940.20 (2m) Battery to probation/parole agent A 250.00
940.225 (3m) Fourth degree sexual assault A 250.00
940.285 (2)(b)4 Negligently subjects an individual at risk to maltreatment likely to cause bodily harm A 150.00
940.285 (2)(b)4 Recklessly subjects an individual at risk to maltreatment likely to cause bodily harm A 500.00
940.285 (2)(b)5 Negligently subjects an individual at risk to maltreatment not likely to cause bodily harm B 150.00
940.285 (2)(b)5 Recklessly subjects an individual at risk to maltreatment not likely to cause bodily harm B 250.00
940.295 (3)(b)4 Negligently abuses or neglects a patient/resident that causes or is likely to cause bodily
harm A 150.00
940.295 (3)(b)4 Recklessly abuses or neglects a patient/resident that causes or is likely to cause bodily
harm A 500.00
940.295 (3)(b)5 Negligently abuses or neglects a patient/resident that does not cause or is not likely to
cause bodily harm B 150.00
940.295 (3)(b)5 Intentional or reckless abuse or neglect of patient/resident not causing and not likely to
cause bodily harm B 250.00
940.34 (2) Duty to aid victim or report crime C 200.00
90
CLASS BAIL
940.42 Intimidation of witnesses A 500.00
940.44 Intimidation of victims/dissuade complaints A 500.00

 

 

 

Still want to claim that District Attorneys have discretion in setting the amounts or do they follow such state guidelines?

 

 

 

 

Which part of the article in the post below is it that you couldn't read? 

 

On 11/24/2021 at 2:47 PM, Guest Guest said:

 

And which party is the one controlling the Wisconsin: Democrats or the Republicans? And it actually took a Republican State Rep Cindy Duchow to challege this bail system?? Shame on the Democrats!

 

And by the way, why wasn't @7heaven right when he called the DA an activist?? Take a look at this link itself here: https://nypost.com/2021/11/23/the-da-behind-waukesha-christmas-parade-attack-suspects-low-bond/?utm_campaign=iphone_nyp&utm_source=pasteboard_app 

 

See how the very exact same "District Attorney John Chisholm, who was elected to the position in 2007, has spent his career supporting cash-bail system reform because he argues it criminalizes poverty", now has an office claiming that "The state’s bail recommendation in this case was inappropriately low in light of the nature of the recent charges and the pending charges against Mr. Brooks” .

 

If someone has " has spent his career supporting cash-bail system reform because he argues it criminalizes poverty" is not an activist, who is?? And the very office which pushed for those low bails are the very office which says that the bail is too low?? What a JOKE!

 

Your repeated self defending and face saving posts to repeat your illogical blabber when you already have been debunked just add more to your own embarrassment.

 

 

 

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you??

 

Here, let me cut and paste the link again for you : https://nypost.com/2021/11/23/the-da-behind-waukesha-christmas-parade-attack-suspects-low-bond/?utm_campaign=iphone_nyp&utm_source=pasteboard_app  

 

And in case you need the font size to become bigger, here's the most important part of them all: 

 

The person who pushed for those low bails was a DA: 

"Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm, who was elected to the position in 2007, has spent his career supporting cash-bail system reform because he argues it criminalizes poverty."

 

 

Furthermore, when those bails were set years ago, the DA who was pushing for such low bails already knew it will get someone killed like what he was saying below: 

 

" In an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel the year he was elected, Chisholm said: “Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into treatment program, who’s going to go out and kill somebody?”

“You bet. Guaranteed. It’s guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach.” "

... and guess what? That's what is happening (or may soon be happening) now. 

 

 

And on top of that, he himself is also saying that the bail that has been set is NOT right:

“The bail recommendation in this case is not consistent with the approach of the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office toward matters involving violent crime, nor was it consistent with the risk assessment of the defendant prior to setting of bail."  

... so even if the bail amount was set, who has that discretion in following which state guidelines? The District Attorney Office! 

 

 

Now, where is Kamala and Joe Biden now? Why aren't they trying to say that the Judicial System is broken this time? But yet, they can have so much comments when it came to the Kyle Rittenhouse case? 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

By the way Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm has been taken out of context, what he said referred to reformative drug programs and he did not say this to bail conditions at all.

 

As usual Republicans are now misusing his words to shame blame him and try to make him liable for the killings when in fact this never said anything on relaxing bail conditions or on bail at all.

 

The Republicans are just pushing again an agenda to paint a picture that Democrats are not handling criminals too lenient.

 

The one liable for the killings is the criminal and nobody else.

As said before, he could have been out on a 15,000 bail and still drive into the  people at the Christmas march.

 

 

Here is what this Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm really said:

 

https://archive.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/overdose-death-highlights-deferred-prosecutions-in-milwaukee-county-b99101314z1-224745852.html/

 

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm has long been a proponent of diverting nonviolent offenders from the traditional criminal justice system to programs aimed at giving them a second chance.

 

These programs have a proven track record, Milwaukee County officials say, at helping drug addicts curb their substance abuse while relieving the overburdened court system.

 

From the start, however, Chisholm realized these programs could have serious consequences.

"Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into treatment program, who's going to go out and kill somebody?" Chisholm said in a 2007 interview with the Journal Sentinel. "You bet. Guaranteed. It's guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach."

 

 

 

To me this is realism.

There is nothing that can prevent any drug addict on a "second chance" program to kill someone.

 

But then you have to ask, how many of these drug addicts took their second chance and got clean and live a normal life now without drugs and crime?

 

It is not easy to draw the line.

 

The article even evidences that the programs have a good track record.

 

Same as too harsh programs may fail and in fact cultivate more criminals who spend terms in jail and getting to know the wrong people, then come out of jail and are even worse, the same applies to drug offenders.

 

 

This is all another example of taking things out of the context, sensationalised  and exaggerated to push a certain agenda by certain political directions.

 

 

The main fact remains that the District Attorney had to follow the Wisconsin State guideline on bail terms. That is exactly what happened.

The State legislators or judiciary have to draft up more stringent bail terms, District Attorneys just apply the rules and execute the guidelines handed to them to set the bail amounts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 6:07 PM, singalion said:

 

 

Biden and Harris are not in charge to set bail terms for state crimes.

 

State crimes are governed by the individual US states.

 

As simple as that.

 

but I assume this is too difficult for you to understand.

 

 

 

And yet they both commented on the Kyle Rittenhouse which happened in the same State. 

 

But I assume the hypocrisy is too difficult for you to see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 2:29 PM, singalion said:

Here is a professional article on this:

 

 

Time to bail on cash bail? A growing number of states are scrutinizing current systems

May 2, 2019

 

Bail, in its most ideal form, serves two purposes. First, it maintains the American ideal of innocent until proven guilty by allowing suspects to continue their daily lives as normally as possible while they await further court actions. Second, it incentivizes the accused to attend future hearings or face financial consequences.

States have used a variety of methods for exploring, and sometimes changing, their systems: for example, bills signed into law in Illinois, Indiana and Nebraska; the use of a legislative study committee in Wisconsin; and initiatives led by the state supreme courts of Kansas and Ohio.

However states get there, two interconnected policy changes are typically part of these legislative- or judicial-led initiatives...

In Wisconsin, Sen. Van Wanggaard helped lead a recent legislative study of his home state’s bail system. One of his end goals: Ensure that public safety plays a larger role in bail decisions.

Between August 2018 and February of this year, a bipartisan, 14-member group of state legislators, judges, district attorneys and others studied Wisconsin’s policies on bail and pretrial release. “It gives us a little more direction [compared to the traditional legislative process] when we work through a study committee,” says Sen. Wanggaard, who served as chair of this Wisconsin Joint Legislative Council group.

“We were able, over that period of time, to have six separate meetings. We heard from different experts in the field and we were able to ask if this really answered all of our questions. And if not, who else do we need to bring in for our next meeting?”

The committee’s final report recommends that the Joint Legislative Council propose an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution.

 

But go on with your blabber and continue to embarrass yourself at BW.


Thanks Guest Guest. It’s as if he read my mind.
 

Have a read: 

 

On 11/24/2021 at 2:47 PM, Guest Guest said:

 

And which party is the one controlling the Wisconsin: Democrats or the Republicans? And it actually took a Republican State Rep Cindy Duchow to challege this bail system?? Shame on the Democrats!

 

And by the way, why wasn't @7heaven right when he called the DA an activist?? Take a look at this link itself here: https://nypost.com/2021/11/23/the-da-behind-waukesha-christmas-parade-attack-suspects-low-bond/?utm_campaign=iphone_nyp&utm_source=pasteboard_app 

 

See how the very exact same "District Attorney John Chisholm, who was elected to the position in 2007, has spent his career supporting cash-bail system reform because he argues it criminalizes poverty", now has an office claiming that "The state’s bail recommendation in this case was inappropriately low in light of the nature of the recent charges and the pending charges against Mr. Brooks” .

 

If someone has " has spent his career supporting cash-bail system reform because he argues it criminalizes poverty" is not an activist, who is?? And the very office which pushed for those low bails are the very office which says that the bail is too low?? What a JOKE!

 

Your repeated self defending and face saving posts to repeat your illogical blabber when you already have been debunked just add more to your own embarrassment.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 2:57 PM, singalion said:

 

Don't be so dump and ask whether Cindy is setting bail amounts.

 

Wisconsin follows a pretrial assessment guideline that sets the conditions for bail and specifies bail amounts and District Attorneys are following these rules in the relevant districts.

 

You are already confusing what bail in criminal cases is meant for!

 

Bail's sole purpose is to assure the individuals appearance in a criminal court trial.


 

As bail is simply meant to make a criminal appear in court, the whole discussion of Fox and consorts goes fail.

 

Bail is not meant to protect the society from potential mental ill people to commit crimes, while waiting for their trial.

 

Even if the bail amount had been 30,000, there is nobody who can say whether this Brooks had committed the same crime or not. In no other US State bail had been denied to this Brooks with same conditions.

 

From that point the whole discussion on activist, leftist, progressive, liberal goes fail.

 

 


Bail is not to protect the society from potential mental ill people people to commit crimes, while waiting for their trial. Lol.

 

If so why did the activist district attorney John Chisholm said “The State’s bail recommendation in this case was inappropriately low in light of the nature of the recent charges and the pending charges against Mr Brooks.

 

In this latest incident where Mr Brooks drove and killed 5people, his bail amount is $5million. Why is that so? It’s precisely to ensure Mr Brooks don’t go around doing silly things again and the District Attorney recognised his office own failure in giving him a $1,000 bail previously that led to this unnecessary tragedy. 

Edited by 7heaven
j
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 6:28 PM, singalion said:

Further, all this partisanism doesn't achieve anything.

 

The parties should sit together to draft programs that suits the society instead of putting up endless fights.

 

OH! Now that the Democrats are losing major support, you come and say "Further, all this partisanism doesn't achieve anything. The parties should sit together to draft programs that suits the society instead of putting up endless fights."??

 

If you had said that to yourself when you were bashing Donald Trump and the Republican Party, this thread wouldn't have lasted so long with so many people bashing you all over the place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 6:27 PM, singalion said:

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm has long been a proponent of diverting nonviolent offenders from the traditional criminal justice system to programs aimed at giving them a second chance.

 

These programs have a proven track record, Milwaukee County officials say, at helping drug addicts curb their substance abuse while relieving the overburdened court system.

 

These programs also have a proven track record in letting out murderers like Brooks on $1000 bail....

 

Well done!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another week with another "Gaffe of the Week from Biden"

- end of quote! 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16834264/joe-biden-end-quote-cue-teleprompter-gaffe/

 

 

GAFFE-PRONE Joe Biden awkwardly read his “end of quote” cue off his autocue in his latest embarrassing blunder.

 

The president was addressing Americans about rising gas prices and the supply chain crisis - just days before Thanksgiving.

 

He was referring to a statement from the CEO of Walmart when he made the blunder.

 

Biden said: “And, by the way, you may have heard the CEO of Walmart yesterday on the steps we’ve taken. He said and I quote ‘The combination of private enterprise and government working together has been really successful.’

 

“He went on to say, ‘All the way through the supply chain, there’s a lot of innovation. Because of the actions we’ve taken, things have begun to change.' End of quote.

 

The gaffe-prone commander-in-chief then continued with his speech.

 

Some social media users compared Biden to the character Ron Burgundy, the New York Post reports.

 

San Diego anchorman Burgundy is played by actor Will Ferrell in the movie Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2021 at 10:28 PM, singalion said:

 

Your word travesty is inappropriate here. It was not a travesty but District Attorneys following the rules set by the US State.

 

The State rules  or Federal rules on bail amounts and release seem not adequate in that state.

 

What I don't understand why this Brooks was not brought to a mental facility.

His mental issues are evident.

[But I would need to research, whether the State's rules permit for critical people being admitted to such facilities, if advised...]

 

 

I didn't specify the source of the travesty but defined the act itself.  I understand that the officials there followed the rules that guides them.  The rules are the travesty, and the ideology of "innocent until proven guilty" they are based on.

 

No sane individual would do what Brooks did. So he certainly belongs in a mental institution. And for this it should not be necessary that he is "guilty".    After all, when a person is injured in an accident,  there is no waiting to bring him to a hospital "until proven guilty of being injured".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HURRAH!    HURRAH!    HURRA!

JUSTICE!    JUSTICE!    JUSTICE!

 

Justice at last in America, where Black Lives are starting to Matter.

 

The three good-for-nothing scumbag armed vigilantes who run after a young black guy, Ahmaud  Arbery,  who obviously unarmed was jogging in his neighborhood, stopped him,  and when he started defending himself, killed him, these three vigilantes in Georgia were found GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY,  with the one worthless fat couch-potato who did the fatal shooting found GUILTY of ALL charges. :thumb:

 

There was concern when the coward weakling fat murderer testified in his defense, all elegantly dressed in suit and tie instead of the cheap rugs when he committed the act, and made a tearful story that HE feared for his life and HAD to shoot the victim in "self defense", there was concern that the jury would buy that farce.  But fortunately, they did not.

 

And an additionally positive sign was that this sentencing of the White defendants was done in the deep South, by mostly White jurors. 

 

The racist White supremacists will have to be more careful from now on.

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 8:35 AM, Steve5380 said:

HURRAH!    HURRAH!    HURRA!

JUSTICE!    JUSTICE!    JUSTICE!

 

Justice at last in America, where Black Lives are starting to Matter.

 

The three good-for-nothing scumbag armed vigilantes who run after a young black guy, Ahmaud  Arbery,  who obviously unarmed was jogging in his neighborhood, stopped him,  and when he started defending himself, killed him, these three vigilantes in Georgia were found GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY,  with the one worthless fat couch-potato who did the fatal shooting found GUILTY of ALL charges. :thumb:

 

There was concern when the coward weakling fat murderer testified in his defense, all elegantly dressed in suit and tie instead of the cheap rugs when he committed the act, and made a tearful story that HE feared for his life and HAD to shoot the victim in "self defense", there was concern that the jury would buy that farce.  But fortunately, they did not.

 

And an additionally positive sign was that this sentencing of the White defendants was done in the deep South, by mostly White jurors. 

 

The racist White supremacists will have to be more careful from now on.

.

 

HURRAH!    HURRAH!    HURRAH!

JUSTICE!    JUSTICE!    JUSTICE!

THE CRITICAL RACE THEORY HAS JUST BEEN FALSIFIED RIGHT IN THE FACE OF Guest Meanly Preacher! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 8:35 AM, Steve5380 said:

HURRAH!    HURRAH!    HURRA!

JUSTICE!    JUSTICE!    JUSTICE!

 

Justice at last in America, where Black Lives are starting to Matter.

 

The three good-for-nothing scumbag armed vigilantes who run after a young black guy, Ahmaud  Arbery,  who obviously unarmed was jogging in his neighborhood, stopped him,  and when he started defending himself, killed him, these three vigilantes in Georgia were found GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY,  with the one worthless fat couch-potato who did the fatal shooting found GUILTY of ALL charges. :thumb:

 

There was concern when the coward weakling fat murderer testified in his defense, all elegantly dressed in suit and tie instead of the cheap rugs when he committed the act, and made a tearful story that HE feared for his life and HAD to shoot the victim in "self defense", there was concern that the jury would buy that farce.  But fortunately, they did not.

 

And an additionally positive sign was that this sentencing of the White defendants was done in the deep South, by mostly White jurors. 

 

The racist White supremacists will have to be more careful from now on.

.


Some things take very long in the US legal system to improve.

 

Most countries in the world abolished the jury system for criminal trials or at least reduced the impact of jury only trials.

 

In some countries there will be two laymen next to three judges or 3 laymen with 2 judges in a court panel, but this jury system in the US seems very outdated.

 

Common people are too easily influenced by sweet words of lawyers, public prosecutors and don't forget the media.


There is no case in the US which is not overly reported. You can't exclude the jury members from reading media reports or separate them from the world during trials.

 

If the US insists on such jury criminal trials then they should not complain or lament the outcome of court cases and surprising guilty verdicts. 
 

We wonder what will the verdict be if the defendants are non-white or the victim is non-black. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 4:59 PM, 7heaven said:

 

Some things take very long in the US legal system to improve.

 

Most countries in the world abolished the jury system for criminal trials or at least reduced the impact of jury only trials.

 

In some countries there will be two laymen next to three judges or 3 laymen with 2 judges in a court panel, but this jury system in the US seems very outdated.

 

Common people are too easily influenced by sweet words of lawyers, public prosecutors and don't forget the media.


There is no case in the US which is not overly reported. You can't exclude the jury members from reading media reports or separate them from the world during trials.

 

If the US insists on such jury criminal trials then they should not complain or lament the outcome of court cases and surprising guilty verdicts. 
 

We wonder what will the verdict be if the defendants are non-white or the victim is non-black. 

 

But... but... but... Senile Biden says the judicial system WORKS! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 2:59 AM, 7heaven said:

 

Some things take very long in the US legal system to improve.

 

Most countries in the world abolished the jury system for criminal trials or at least reduced the impact of jury only trials.

 

In some countries there will be two laymen next to three judges or 3 laymen with 2 judges in a court panel, but this jury system in the US seems very outdated.

 

Common people are too easily influenced by sweet words of lawyers, public prosecutors and don't forget the media.


There is no case in the US which is not overly reported. You can't exclude the jury members from reading media reports or separate them from the world during trials.

 

If the US insists on such jury criminal trials then they should not complain or lament the outcome of court cases and surprising guilty verdicts. 
 

We wonder what will the verdict be if the defendants are non-white or the victim is non-black. 

 

Yes, the US constitution assumes that all citizens are intelligent rational educated people like they were.  Then, the idealistic principles of democracy and "being judged by their peers" makes sense.

 

In reality, such a large segment of the American population is made up of dumb, ignorant, disinterested, malevolent, unprincipled, vicious people that very simple demagogy seems to pull them by their noses into voting what a political party wants them to vote.  Similarly,  slick lawyers and court theatrics can easily influence a jury one way or the other. 

 

It seems so absurd that the persons who pass judgment are ignorant of the law and should be ignorant of the facts of the cases except for what these slick lawyers tell them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Viennetta Scoops Out Betta
On 11/23/2021 at 4:20 AM, Guest 2003 said:

Andy Ngo is a self-loathing Vietnamese-American masochist who boasts an insatiable and unquenchable desire to render himself subservient to white penises. He seems to think that, by slaving away as a foot soldier in the right wing effort to reassert white supremacy as the bedrock of American society, he will curry favor from that small portion of right wingers who are not 100% racist and might enjoy having a submissive Asian around to use and abuse any way they want. Ngo is no better than the few Singaporeans who wanted our nation to remain a weak British colony until the end of time. Screw all of them.

 

Just to be clear, I don't really care if Ngo is a Vietnamese-American bottom only attracted to white tops ("potato queen"), regardless of how many Grindr profiles that contain the phrase "No Asians" he happens to scroll across. The problem with someone like him is the willingness to lie, fabricate, and distort the truth in hopes that such acts will improve his social life. I am not saying he should date other Asians, Hispanics, or Blacks ... and can understand if he was traumatized and turned off due to bullying from macho boys of "darker" races as an effiminate high school student ... but his current path in life is pathetic.

 

People like Andy Ngo and any other non-white individuals, and really all women of every race, need to wake up and see that they are being used to further the ideas of white straight male supremacy and extreme right wing fascism. If the powers behind the curtain ever wind up taking contol of the United States and European Union, shills like Ngo will be discarded as soon as they no longer serve any useful purpose, and have nowhere to turn for help after their illusions of personal gain have been shattered. Blacks protesting police brutality will be a quaint memory if a Fourth Reich is busy dispensing of everybody in its way.

 

That is a vicious assessment of the wimpy right wing provacateur Andy Ngo but also 100% correct based on everything I have seen of his wannabe internet celebrity behavior. He is a sniveling sissy seeking sycophantic satisfaction from the rich old white daddies he idolizes ー and will do anything to get what he desires ー including lie, manipulate, and slander. I have no doubt this so-called young Vietnamese-American conservative would be extremely happy starring in a drama called "Uncle Tran's Cabin" (or something along those lines).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lachrymosed Yourself
On 11/16/2021 at 3:56 PM, singalion said:

Some Guests here are advised to take up some history lessons prior to posting untruths at BW. 

 

Bill Clinton was acquitted on all charges in the impeachment trial at Congress in 1999. The impeachment case against Bill Clinton was unsuccessful!!!

 

The approved articles of impeachment would be submitted to the United States Senate on January 7, 1999. A trial in the Senate then began, with Chief Justice William Rehnquist presiding. On February 12, Clinton was acquitted on both counts as neither received the necessary two-thirds majority vote of the senators present for conviction and removal from office—in this instance 67. On Article One, 45 senators voted to convict while 55 voted for acquittal. On Article Two, 50 senators voted to convict while 50 voted for acquittal.[3] Clinton remained in office for the remainder of his second term.[4]

 

=> Clinton was never impeached as President. (original version of initial post)

=> Clinton faced an impeachment trial at Congress but was never successfully

     impeached as President. (Amended version of my inital post, so that  certain

     dumbest posters at BW may hopefully also understand.)

 

For the sake of further accuracy ... impeachment by itself can't remove a U.S. President from office ... removal requires Impeachment & Conviction.

 

Bill Clinton and Donald Trump were both impeached, as was Andrew Johnson, but none of the three were convicted and therefore never removed.

 

The U.S. is different from many other countries in this regard, as impeachment alone can remove leaders in some other nations, but not in the U.S.

 

Part of the problem is the lazy, and in some cases ignorant, U.S. media's failure to properly explain that removal requires Impeachment & Conviction.

 

Saying they "weren't successfully impeached" is a meaningless phrase because it wrongly conflates impeachment with being the same as conviction.

 

Impeached is impeached, but it doesn't matter since impeachment does not do anything meaningful in the short term, and only conviction has teeth.

 

Because impeachment alone is meaningless, other than a reputational stain ... or two stains in Trump's case ... the goal is Impeachment & Conviction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 8:35 AM, Guest Viennetta Scoops Out Betta said:

 

That is a vicious assessment of the wimpy right wing provacateur Andy Ngo but also 100% correct based on everything I have seen of his wannabe internet celebrity behavior. He is a sniveling sissy seeking sycophantic satisfaction from the rich old white daddies he idolizes ー and will do anything to get what he desires ー including lie, manipulate, and slander. I have no doubt this so-called young Vietnamese-American conservative would be extremely happy starring in a drama called "Uncle Tran's Cabin" (or something along those lines).

 

Yes, it seems to be 100% correct that Andy Ngo lies, manipulates, slanders.  This is what he found out he is at his best.

 

This guy is a perfect example of how a person who is good for nothing can get a "political sciences" degree and start spewing the most provocative political, ideological trash to appeal to people who are addicted to it. 

 

He strongly complains about receiving personal threats and moved his residence to seek more safety.  There is of course a direct correlation between the damaging trash he produces and the desires of individuals to get the world rid of him.

 

Now the interesting part will be to see if any of these individuals succeeds,  and sends him to another world, not to put him out of his suffering,  but to put out the suffering of those he victimizes with his evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biden releasing 50 million barrels of oil. What happened to his wanting to fight climate change? And why is he coordinating with other countries to pump more oil? Shutting down gas pipelines in US then release oil from reserves that are meant for emergencies like wars. 

Fighting gas prices, US to release 50 million barrels of oil

By JOSH BOAK and COLLEEN LONGyesterday
 
 
President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the economy in the South Court Auditorium on the White House campus, Tuesday, Nov. 23, 2021, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden on Tuesday ordered a record 50 million barrels of oil released from America’s strategic reserve, aiming to bring down gasoline and other costs, in coordination with other major energy consuming nations including India, the United Kingdom and China.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 10:09 PM, Steve5380 said:

 

Yes, the US constitution assumes that all citizens are intelligent rational educated people like they were.  Then, the idealistic principles of democracy and "being judged by their peers" makes sense.

 

In reality, such a large segment of the American population is made up of dumb, ignorant, disinterested, malevolent, unprincipled, vicious people that very simple demagogy seems to pull them by their noses into voting what a political party wants them to vote.  Similarly,  slick lawyers and court theatrics can easily influence a jury one way or the other. 

 

It seems so absurd that the persons who pass judgment are ignorant of the law and should be ignorant of the facts of the cases except for what these slick lawyers tell them. 

 

But... but... but... Senile Biden says the judicial system WORKS! 

 

Are you saying that Senile Biden is one of those dumb, ignorant, disinterested, malevolent, unprincipled, vicious people you spoke about? 

 

 

GOP Attacks on Joe Biden for Being Old, 'Senile' Were a Mistake

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 1:27 AM, 7heaven said:

Biden releasing 50 million barrels of oil. What happened to his wanting to fight climate change? And why is he coordinating with other countries to pump more oil? Shutting down gas pipelines in US then release oil from reserves that are meant for emergencies like wars. 

Fighting gas prices, US to release 50 million barrels of oil

 

We already knew that will happen when this happened during Cop26, didn't we?

 

gv110221dAPR.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 4:31 PM, Guest Guest said:

 

But... but... but... Senile Biden says the judicial system WORKS! 

 

Are you saying that Senile Biden is one of those dumb, ignorant, disinterested, malevolent, unprincipled, vicious people you spoke about? 

 

 

Biden said that the judicial system WORKS, meaning that the system WORKED in the case of Arbery's murder trial.  He didn't say that it worked in the trial of Rittenhouse.   In his position of president, it would be inappropriate that he criticizes the judicial system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 8:10 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

Biden said that the judicial system WORKS, meaning that the system WORKED in the case of Arbery's murder trial.  He didn't say that it worked in the trial of Rittenhouse.   In his position of president, it would be inappropriate that he criticizes the judicial system.

 

For someone who has been defending Biden teeth and nail all the time, you definitely have no clue what Biden have said, do you? Or are yu really as senile as Biden?

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/19/politics/joe-biden-kyle-rittenhouse-verdict/index.html

Biden reacts to Rittenhouse verdict: 'The jury system works, and we have to abide by it'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 6:19 PM, Guest Guest said:

 

For someone who has been defending Biden teeth and nail all the time, you definitely have no clue what Biden have said, do you? Or are yu really as senile as Biden?

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/19/politics/joe-biden-kyle-rittenhouse-verdict/index.html

Biden reacts to Rittenhouse verdict: 'The jury system works, and we have to abide by it'

 

Well,  I don't quite now what to make out of what Biden said.  

 

But one thing is clear:  he didn't say that the jury system works GOOD ! :lol:   What I interpret is that he meant to say that good or bad, that jury trial worked according to the law and therefore we must accept it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 10:17 AM, Steve5380 said:

Well,  I don't quite now what to make out of what Biden said.  

 

But one thing is clear:  he didn't say that the jury system works GOOD ! :lol:   What I interpret is that he meant to say that good or bad, that jury trial worked according to the law and therefore we must accept it. 

 

Oh? That's not "GOOD"? You guys already have it VERY GOOD, and you are COMPLAINING?? If that is not GOOD enough for you, you just wait for the day when the entire judgement is laid by just ONE single judge under the intense pressure from the political system and/or the President and/or Prime Minister himself. Let's see if it will only be the blacks talking about "critical race theory" then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2021 at 8:32 PM, Guest Guest said:

 

Oh? That's not "GOOD"? You guys already have it VERY GOOD, and you are COMPLAINING?? If that is not GOOD enough for you, you just wait for the day when the entire judgement is laid by just ONE single judge under the intense pressure from the political system and/or the President and/or Prime Minister himself. Let's see if it will only be the blacks talking about "critical race theory" then. 

 

I realize that the system you have in SG where sentences are decided entirely by the judge is not ideal either.

 

So we have either a judge corruptible by political pressures, or a jury influenced by corrupted system and lawyers.

 

My conclusion is that there is no acceptable solution today.  Maybe in the future sentences will be decided by Artificial Intelligence that is driven by the data, evidence fed into the machine and the law already programmed in the machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 1:27 AM, 7heaven said:

Biden releasing 50 million barrels of oil. What happened to his wanting to fight climate change? And why is he coordinating with other countries to pump more oil? Shutting down gas pipelines in US then release oil from reserves that are meant for emergencies like wars. 

Fighting gas prices, US to release 50 million barrels of oil

By JOSH BOAK and COLLEEN LONGyesterday
 
 
President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the economy in the South Court Auditorium on the White House campus, Tuesday, Nov. 23, 2021, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden on Tuesday ordered a record 50 million barrels of oil released from America’s strategic reserve, aiming to bring down gasoline and other costs, in coordination with other major energy consuming nations including India, the United Kingdom and China.

 

 

And again!

Inconsistency in reasoning and sign of loss of memory.

 

 

Just some weeks ago you, 7heaven, unfairly blamed Biden for the increase of oil prices, which is not under his control at all as prices for oil are a result of supply and demand. The increase of oil prices is solely made by market factors which the US administration (Biden) has no real means of control or influence.

 

...And now you blame him for trying to slow down increasing oil prices?

 

What do you want? Lower oil and gasoline prices or higher prices???

 

Your reasoning does not show any consistency.

It is nonsensical!

It is mere rhetoric to blame certain people but devoid of any intellectual thoughts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone wrote here:

For the sake of further accuracy ... impeachment by itself can't remove a U.S. President from office ... removal requires Impeachment & Conviction.

 

This is also not correct.

 

You need to understand that impeachment has two procedures:

 

a) the allegation of factors/facts that would permit a president to be impeached

 

and

 

b) the vote of 2/3 of Senators in the Congress to approve an impeachment application made by Congress.

 

But the process of impeachment should separated from criminal procedures, it is a mere political procedure to conclude that a

President is unfit to hold/ continue the office due to his acts. Therefore, using the word "conviction" is wrong. it is not any criminal conviction.

 

What is conviction?

A formal declaration by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law that someone is guilty of a criminal offence.

 

Conviction always refers to a criminal offence. Using the word "conviction" is not accurate for impeachments.

However, for impeachment the wrong act of a president must not amount to a criminal offence.

 

Whereas the second part of the Impeachment procedure in the Senate is modeled like a Court proceedings, namely the "High Court of Impeachment", it is still a political proceeding and not a criminal one.

 

While I admit, that the second part , namely the 2/3 vote in the Senate to achieve the removal of office from an impeachment procedure is often confused or forgotten.

 

 

What I meant by writing

"The impeachment case against Bill Clinton was unsuccessful!!!"

in an earlier post was

simply to state that Clinton was not found guilty by the Senate and acquitted of all the allegations made against him.

As such the impeachment did not lead to a guilty "verdict" in the Senate.

 

In normal understanding "having been impeached" would be understood that the person was found guilty on the impeachment charges by the Senate and removed from office.

 

Note that judges can be impeached also and the last US judge impeached was G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. in December 2010. Correctly, it is said that this judge was "impeached" in the media headlines.

 

 

Nov. 16, 2021

Ex-Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Impeached by U.S. Senate, Dies

 

December 08, 2010

Senate Votes to Impeach Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr.

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 4:20 PM, singalion said:

 

And again!

Inconsistency in reasoning and sign of loss of memory.

 

 

Just some weeks ago you, 7heaven, unfairly blamed Biden for the increase of oil prices, which is not under his control at all as prices for oil are a result of supply and demand. The increase of oil prices is solely made by market factors which the US administration (Biden) has no real means of control or influence.

 

...And now you blame him for trying to slow down increasing oil prices?

 

What do you want? Lower oil and gasoline prices or higher prices???

 

Your reasoning does not show any consistency.

It is nonsensical!

It is mere rhetoric to blame certain people but devoid of any intellectual thoughts.

 

 


And again! Diversion and digression. 
 

Nowhere my post even remotely suggest I was blaming Biden or anyone for lowering oil prices.
 

If are not devoid of intellect or not diverting or digressing, you would know my post was to highlight Biden’s hypocrisy in asking people to focus on climate change and stop using oil and move to renewable energy but then he released 50million barrels of oil that will cause climate change? 
 

What I want is to have Biden and his so called competent staff lower the pump prices without resorting to releasing 50million barrels of oil because he needs to be consistent in his policies; fight climate change by not relying on oil and still lower oil prices. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 11/26/2021 at 4:20 PM, singalion said:

Just some weeks ago you, 7heaven, unfairly blamed Biden for the increase of oil prices, which is not under his control at all as prices for oil are a result of supply and demand. The increase of oil prices is solely made by market factors which the US administration (Biden) has no real means of control or influence.

 

... and yet, Michigan Gov. Democrat Gretchen Whitmer ordered fossil fuel company Enbridge to shut down the Line 5 oil pipeline. And on top of that, Biden revokes a key permit causing the Keystone pipeline to be canceled . So much for "prices for oil are a result of supply and demand", when it is Biden and his own administration which is making the supply of oil into the country so damn difficult. 

 

Oh ... but don't worry .... we all know you lack common economic sense. In fact, we all know you lack common sense.

 

Wait ... let me sum it all up: We all know you lack a brain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2021/11/02/sorry-president-biden-this-is-not-opecs-fault/?sh=b871d2225617

 

Sorry, President Biden, This Is Not OPEC’s Fault

 

Just ahead of OPEC’s next virtual meeting, President Joe Biden cast blame at Russia and OPEC for the current state of high oil prices. He said "If you take a look at gas prices and you take a look at oil prices that's a consequence of thus far the refusal of Russia or the OPEC nations to pump more oil."

 

Javier Blas, Chief Energy Correspondent at Bloomberg News, posted video of Biden’s statement on Twitter.

 

Let’s be clear on a couple of things. First, a fundamental reason oil prices have surged over the last year is that U.S. oil production declined by 3 million barrels per day (BPD) during the pandemic. That decline was exacerbated by a price war between Russia and Saudi Arabia just ahead of the pandemic, but then the pandemic crushed demand (and oil prices).

 

 

In response to the collapse in prices, last summer U.S. oil production fell by 3 million BPD — the largest short-term decline ever recorded. Demand started to come back in summer, and by fall demand was recovering faster than supply in the U.S. Our crude oil imports began to climb, and along with that so did the price of crude oil and oil products.

 

One could make the alternative argument that rising gas prices are from the refusal of U.S. producers to increase production. However, it’s more complex than that. During the pandemic, some producers went out of business. Some low-production stripper wells were certainly shut down. That’s production that won’t come back easily. (And some of those factors also impact production from Russia and OPEC).

 

But here’s the thing. Whether you think it was the right thing to do, the reality is that passing legislation that is hostile to the U.S. oil and gas industry makes it even more difficult for domestic production to bounce back. So, instead of asking Russia and OPEC to pump more oil, we could look internally to what we could do in the U.S. to pump more oil.

 

I highlighted the risks of President Biden’s energy policies earlier in the year, because this is the sort of situation that can arise (not that this is the primary cause of this crisis, but it could be the cause of a future crisis).

 

OPEC and Russia have some spare capacity, but they may be reluctant to use it to help Americans out with lower fuel prices. The International Energy Agency (IEA) recently estimated that OPEC+ spare capacity (primarily OPEC plus Russia) was 9 million BPD in the first quarter of 2021, but it sees that potentially falling below 4 million barrels BPD by the fourth quarter of 2022.

 

It is certainly in Russia’s and OPEC’s self-interest to keep prices high. They are under no obligation to boost output to give us relief in the U.S. We can pressure them and dangle incentives, but this situation didn’t arise from their refusal to pump more oil.

 

Nevertheless, they could probably do so if they wanted and give us some relief. Think of it like a doctor responding to a distress call on an airplane. They didn’t cause the problem, but they may be in a position to assist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-products/where-our-oil-comes-from.php

 

The United States is one of the largest crude oil producers

The United States became the world’s top crude oil producer in 2018 and maintained the lead position in 2019 and 2020. U.S. oil refineries obtain crude oil produced in the United States and in other countries. Different types of companies supply crude oil to the world market.

 

Many countries produce crude oil

About 100 countries produce crude oil. However, in 2020, five countries accounted for about 50% of the world's total crude oil production.

 

  • The top five crude oil producers and their percentage shares of world crude oil production in 2020 were
  • United States15%
  • Russia13%
  • Saudi Arabia12%
  • Iraq6%
  • Canada5% 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 11/26/2021 at 5:59 PM, 7heaven said:


And again! Diversion and digression. 
 

Nowhere my post even remotely suggest I was blaming Biden or anyone for lowering oil prices.
 

If are not devoid of intellect or not diverting or digressing, you would know my post was to highlight Biden’s hypocrisy in asking people to focus on climate change and stop using oil and move to renewable energy but then he released 50million barrels of oil that will cause climate change? 
 

What I want is to have Biden and his so called competent staff lower the pump prices without resorting to releasing 50million barrels of oil because he needs to be consistent in his policies; fight climate change by not relying on oil and still lower oil prices. 

 

Assuming your post was a sign of intellect, the you surely just hit the jackpot of intelligence!

This was ironic!

 

And what should Biden do with the oil reserves? Dump the oil into the ocean?

 

You demonstrated to everyone here again how little you know about market forces and economic principles such as prices derived from supply and demand conditions.

 

How can pump prices be lowered without increasing oil supply?

Please elaborate!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 8:51 AM, singalion said:

 

Assuming your post was a sign of intellect, the you surely just hit the jackpot of intelligence!

This was ironic!

 

And what should Biden do with the oil reserves? Dump the oil into the ocean?

 

You demonstrated to everyone here again how little you know about market forces and economic principles such as prices derived from supply and demand conditions.

 

How can pump prices be lowered without increasing oil supply?

Please elaborate!

 

 

We should avoid putting blame on @7heaven or Biden or OPEC or other producers.

 

I dare to put the primary blame on THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

 

The spoiled Americans don't want to give up the freedom of using and abusing energy, mostly derived from oil.  These days nearly 50 million Americans crisscross the land in their cars, burning gas refined from oil. They want ever bigger houses,  the one story family homes in my neighborhood are being replaced by multi-story 'mansions'. They crisscross the land and the world flying in big jets that swallow aviation fluid.  And they keep doing it while seeing how climate change is starting to do its ravages.

 

Politicians in government, on their side, are well aware of the ire raised in their constituents by the raise in gas prices, and they cannot stay in power if they don't sympathize with them and try to reduce their pain,  forgetting about the climate and looking at ways to rise oil supply. This is why Biden now misuses the country's strategic oil reserves intended to help in cases of national emergencies, which we have not today.

 

If the electorate would allow it,  Biden should declare that the raise in gas prices is a welcomed motivator for his people to reduce consumption. Try to stay home and avoid flying on holidays,  lower the thermostat for heating and raise it for cooling.  Then he and the Europeans should tell the oil producers, Russia, Saudi Arabia, to fuck themselves.

 

Another thing Biden should do is to disregard public misconceptions and start pressing for urgent construction of more nuclear plants, maybe the model Bill Gates proposes, since this has the potential to be the best replacement for fossil fuels. 

 

But all these things so nice to happen...  are of course stopped by the reality of human nature!  :( :angry:

.

Edited by Steve5380
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Viennetta Scoops Out Betta
On 11/25/2021 at 12:17 PM, Steve5380 said:

Yes, it seems to be 100% correct that Andy Ngo lies, manipulates, slanders.  This is what he found out he is at his best.

 

This guy is a perfect example of how a person who is good for nothing can get a "political sciences" degree and start spewing the most provocative political, ideological trash to appeal to people who are addicted to it. 

 

He strongly complains about receiving personal threats and moved his residence to seek more safety.  There is of course a direct correlation between the damaging trash he produces and the desires of individuals to get the world rid of him.

 

Now the interesting part will be to see if any of these individuals succeeds,  and sends him to another world, not to put him out of his suffering,  but to put out the suffering of those he victimizes with his evil.

 

Please don't allow yourself to give in to hate or you will be no better than the other side. I don't wish harm to happen to Ngo (or even Trump for that matter) regardless of how evil he is, but I instead pray that he he will come to understand that his actions and loyalties are wrong, and make amends by spending the rest of his life helping people in less fortunare circumstances than he is blessed to enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 10:51 PM, singalion said:

 

 

Assuming your post was a sign of intellect, the you surely just hit the jackpot of intelligence!

This was ironic!

 

And what should Biden do with the oil reserves? Dump the oil into the ocean?

 

You demonstrated to everyone here again how little you know about market forces and economic principles such as prices derived from supply and demand conditions.

 

How can pump prices be lowered without increasing oil supply?

Please elaborate!

 

 


Assuming you still have a brain although at least 1 other here think u lacked one (lol), the Strategic Petroleum Reserve from which Biden is going to draw 50million barrels from is meant for emergencies such as war. 
 

Next, didn’t Biden and his Special Presidential Envoy for Climate attended COP26 to preach about climate change recently, and here we have Biden begging OPEC+ to supply more oil and he releasing 50million barrels of oil. Have he or his Energy Secretary compute how much carbon emission that will be released into the atmosphere? This shows his hypocrisy and especially so when he cancelled Keystone and Enbridge gas pipelines citing environmental and climate concerns? 
 

Your response of “Dump the oil into ocean” immediately disqualifies you as someone being capable of rationally discuss or debate an issue. Can’t Biden just keep that 50million barrels of oil where they belong i.e. which is in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Why must he release it for usage (just to save his skin to bring down pump prices) to damage the environment and cause climate change? 
 

As for solutions to lower pump prices, didn’t some here and elsewhere claim that Biden has competent and intelligent staff? One wonders really how competent and intelligent his staff are if their solution is a band-aid one by tapping on their emergency oil reserves and not forgetting the damage to climate resulting from the carbon emissions from these millions of barrels of oil. 
 

On 11/26/2021 at 8:01 PM, Guest Guest said:

Oh ... but don't worry .... we all know you lack common economic sense. In fact, we all know you lack common sense.

 

Wait ... let me sum it all up: We all know you lack a brain. 

 

Edited by 7heaven
hypocrisy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 11:24 PM, Steve5380 said:

We should avoid putting blame on @7heaven or Biden or OPEC or other producers.

 

I dare to put the primary blame on THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

 

 

Shocked GIFs | Tenor

 

OH MY GOODNESS! YOU MEAN IT IS NOT TRUMP'S FAULT NOW? AND IT IS THE FAULT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE NOW?

 

WHAT A CHANGE IN ATTITUDE! IF YOU HAD ONLY REALISED THAT DURING THE ONSET OF THE COVID-19 PERIOD! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2021 at 11:56 PM, 7heaven said:


Assuming you still have a brain although at least 1 other here think u lacked one (lol), the Strategic Petroleum Reserve from which Biden is going to draw 50million barrels from is meant for emergencies such as war. 
 

Next, didn’t Biden and his Special Presidential Envoy for Climate attended COP26 to preach about climate change recently, and here we have Biden begging OPEC+ to supply more oil and he releasing 50million barrels of oil. Have he compute how much carbon emission that will be released into the atmosphere? This shows his hypocrisy and especially so when he cancelled Keystone and Enbridge citing environmental and climate concerns? 
 

Your response of “Dump the oil into ocean” immediately disqualifies you as someone being capable of rationally discuss or debate an issue. Can’t Biden just keep that 50million barrels of oil where they belong i.e. which is in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Why must he release it to damage the environment and cause climate change? 
 

 

 

Hey, but 7heaven your response post is kid blabber again!

 

Can you tell us the relation of climate change to gasoline or oil prices?

 

I used my ironic sentence to dump the US oil reserves into the ocean only to demonstrate how nonsensical your posts is.

 

By the way: If you 7heaven would be so climate change concerned and environmentally friendly you wouldn't mind higher oil prices as these help to reduce consumption or foster initiatives to reduce oil requirement.

 

From that angle also your post is inconsistent and illogic.

 

 

Edited by singalion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...
counter