Hmmm

[Crazyhole]

A Letter from the Nye County Chairman

Update 1/18/21 As so many have requested for ways to show support, please consider joining us in this fundraiser: Update 1/10/21 With the publishing of the “Letter from the Chairman” on January 8…

nyegop.org

I dismissed this initially and largely still do, but I'm seeing this same kind of thing being talked about elsewhere. I'm not sure what exactly a "black out" in Washington means, but I guess I wouldn't be surprised if something did happen inside the government this week. Capitol police didn't seem to mind what happened last week, maybe for a reason.

 

[DaShuckster]

I'm a big advocate of freedom of speech. But at what point does the crap this GOP chair is spreading to his fellow Republicans become insurrection? Is it all considered perfectly fine Trumpster-talk -- until something happens? Wondering for a friend.

 

[Crazyhole]

I'm a big advocate of freedom of speech. But at what point does the crap this GOP chair is spreading to his fellow Republicans become insurrection? Is it all considered perfectly fine Trumpster-talk -- until something happens? Wondering for a friend.

I suppose the obvious answer is when it calls for action that goes against the constitution. This guy didn't reach that level IMO.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if some high-level officials or elected leaders were arrested. Let's say there was actual irrefutable evidence against them for treason or sedition. How would people respond if someone like Adam Schiff, Mitch McConnell, or a cabinet member were arrested?

 

[DaShuckster]

Let's say there was actual irrefutable evidence against them for treason or sedition. How would people respond if someone like Adam Schiff, Mitch McConnell, or a cabinet member were arrested?

I think it's natural for Americans to want to give our leaders the benefit of a doubt -- to the extreme, in fact -- before charging someone with treason or sedition.

But, as we witnessed this past week, when the 'mode of operation' of nearly every member of one of our two major political parties is to deliberately perpetuate or ignore unfounded, baseless lies for their own crass, selfish purposes, that's playing with fire.

 

[Crazyhole]

I think it's natural for Americans to want to give our leaders the benefit of a doubt -- to the extreme, in fact -- before charging someone with treason or sedition.

But, as we witnessed this past week, when the 'mode of operation' of nearly every member of one of our two major political parties is to deliberately perpetuate or ignore unfounded, baseless lies for their own crass, selfish purposes, that's playing with fire.

Should all leaders be given that same benefit of the doubt?

 

[DaShuckster]

Should all leaders be given that same benefit of the doubt?

I don't think you can stretch 'the benefit of a doubt' thing further than we have with Trump.

This is a tough question because cracking down on political descent is an equally scary prospect. But this particular situation grew out of a coordinated, wide-spread effort to support Trump's BS. If Republican law-makers would have stood up after the election and spoke the truth, this would never have happened.

 

[Crazyhole]

I don't think you can stretch 'the benefit of a doubt' thing further than we have with Trump.

This is a tough question because cracking down on political descent is an equally scary prospect. But this particular situation grew out of a coordinated, wide-spread effort to support Trump's BS. If Republican law-makers would have stood up after the election and spoke the truth, this would never have happened.

But you never gave Trump the benefit of the doubt. Ever. On anything.

Your point about political dissent is well put until you pivoted. There was a wide-spread coordinated effort to remove Trump from office from day one. Is that better than trying to keep him in office? Would you be ok with the same thing happening to Biden that happened to Trump and say we shouldn't crack down on political dissent?

 

[DaShuckster]

But you never gave Trump the benefit of the doubt. Ever. On anything.

My country elected him President and, although I didn't vote for him, I was ready to given him the loyalty and respect a person in that office should receive, regardless of party.

But I will admit that I was already going 'WTF?' the day after the inauguration when Sean Spicer, Trump's new press secretary argued with reporters in the White House briefing room over the size of Trump inauguration crowd (the White House expected us to believe it was the largest crowd of all time.) We also were to believe that Trump won the popular vote too because Hillary had 3 million illegal immigrants voting for her. That was Day 2 of the Trump Administration for crying out loud.

It only got worse from there.

 

[DaShuckster]

But you never gave Trump the benefit of the doubt. Ever. On anything.

I have to take exception to that comment. It is untrue. For the record, I made a big deal about supporting Trump when he announced his Administration's Covid-19 guidelines for States to use in planning for the reopening of their economies.

Sadly, the day AFTER Trump had his presser where he announced them, he began back-tracking on them.

OH WELL....

 

[Crazyhole]

My country elected him President and, although I didn't vote for him, I was ready to given him the loyalty and respect a person in that office should receive, regardless of party.

But I will admit that I was already going 'WTF?' the day after the inauguration when Sean Spicer, Trump's new press secretary argued with reporters in the White House briefing room over the size of Trump inauguration crowd (the White House expected us to believe it was the largest crowd of all time.) We also were to believe that Trump won the popular vote too because Hillary had 3 million illegal immigrants voting for her. That was Day 2 of the Trump Administration for crying out loud.

It only got worse from there.

Fair enough. I also gave Biden the benefit of the doubt until he started calling republican senators "Nazis".

 

[DaShuckster]

Fair enough. I also gave Biden the benefit of the doubt until he started calling republican senators "Nazis".

You'll have to remind me when and under what context that spurious comment was made.

 

[Crazyhole]

You'll have to remind me when and under what context that spurious comment was made.

When he said Cruz and Hawley are part of "the big lie". Thats a pretty direct reference, or at the very least its a dog-whistle.

 

[DaShuckster]

When he said Cruz and Hawley are part of "the big lie". Thats a pretty direct reference, or at the very least its a dog-whistle.

WTF? Cruz and Hawley WERE a part of the big lie.

That's a Nazi reference?

 

[Crazyhole]

WTF? Cruz and Hawley WERE a part of the big lie.

That's a Nazi reference?

Yeah.

 

[DaShuckster]

WTF? Cruz and Hawley WERE a part of the big lie. That's a Nazi reference?

Yeah.

MY GOD! BIDEN IS SUCH AN A-HOLE!!!!*

 

[Cubs79]

When he said Cruz and Hawley are part of "the big lie". Thats a pretty direct reference, or at the very least its a dog-whistle.

They were part of it, and it was most certainly a lie that was meant to appease people which greatly consisted of holocaust deniers, neo nazis, white supremacists, proud boys etc. You guys downplaying Trump's rhetoric for 4 years is precisely what has lead us here, so forgive me if I dont think it is a bad thing that they are being called out on it.

 

[Crazyhole]

They were part of it, and it was most certainly a lie that was meant to appease people which greatly consisted of holocaust deniers, neo nazis, white supremacists, proud boys etc. You guys downplaying Trump's rhetoric for 4 years is precisely what has lead us here, so forgive me if I dont think it is a bad thing that they are being called out on it.

So Biden thinks that Hawley and Cruz are white supremacist Nazis?

 

[Cubs79]

So Biden thinks that Hawley and Cruz are white supremacist Nazis?

I thinks he knows they were pandering to them, because they were.