Wray testifies in front of a bunch of Qlowns

I didn’t watch. I know what they didn’t seize Hilary’s server. It’s because she produced the government emails. Trump didn’t give multiple classified documents back and willfully secreted them. Boasting about at least one document which apparently he still hasn’t returned and hasn’t been seized because it was at Bedminster. As they teach in law school, “the facts make the law.” Different facts different law. Biden and Pence returned what was found in their files and allowed the government to search. Hilary was under no compulsion when she wiped her server, including personal emails. And, of course. We have been over the different facts in terms of the markings in what she had, the historical use of private emails by others (which happened in the Trump Administration too), and that the communications were with people authorized to receive the documents. Yet Trump is The GOP front runner. Cowards afraid to speak the truth and supporters bound To Trump by their common bigotry and selfishness. They will all run to DeSantis if Trump leaves the race.

 

Well I kind of take altalias’ point that you probably wouldn’t be much swayed by a thread from a right wing poster titled “Jim Jordan schools Wray!!” Most of our takes on here can predicted with pretty high accuracy.

That said, a relevant memory springs to my mind from the GC deep archives. It was a post from the Minister of Information, who boasted a curious cocktail of extreme intelligence and even more extreme conspiracy belief. I believe the topic was the Russia investigation, and MOI wrote of Christopher Wray, and I quote: “I think we can all agree that he has his head on straight.” (Ok this is more of a paraphrase from an old memory than a direct quote, but that has a terrible ring to it).

So there it is. FBI Director Chris Wray was deemed to have his head on straight by perhaps the biggest deep state theorist we’ve ever known. I am sure that the good minister has since disavowed and forgotten this footnote from history, but I have not.

 

as Teddy Roosevelt once quipped: “any American who watches Congress deliberate on CSPAN for educational purposes will remain an idiot”

i’m not really sure why you think anyone reading your partisan opinion is going to take it as being neutral. But, thank God, we live in a country that people are able to disagree without being called Nazis. Oh wait…..

 

I only caught part of the hearing, because I will do anything to avoid having to look at or listen to Jim Jordan or that pride of the sunshine state Matt Gaetz. When I want to vomit I'll stick my finger down my throat.

 

I remember that dude was bigly into the Seth Rich conspiracy theory.

Seems high degree of correlation where they believe essentially “all of the above” conspiracy theories that infowars and the like puts out there. Whether that’s Seth Rich. Crisis Actors standing in for shooting victims. Ray Epps. 2000 Mules. 5g vaccine chips. Chemtrails. Etc etc etc.

I always found it weird how conspiracy theorists disbelieve anything the “mainstream media” puts out there, but then nearly without question believe the craziest shit the internet puts out there. That’s one way of making sure you are wrong… just about all the time. We saw the result of that massive rw media “psy op” on 1/6. To be sure it’s good to have healthy skepticism. Conspiracy theorists don’t do “skepticism”, they do contrarianism.

 

Just so. I recently read a book on science denial, which explained that the belief in a conspiracy theory is highly correlated with science denial as well as belief in other conspiracy theories. Once one accepts that NASA faked the moon landing, I guess it makes it easier to believe that the government is changing our behaviors with chem trails.

And your point about differing standards of belief is really fascinating. The extreme amount of evidence that a climate change denier (read: not skeptic but denier) will require to accept the possibility that humans can alter the climate suggests an individual that likely accepts almost no claims about the world. And then suddenly you find out that they are absolutely convinced that COVID vaccines have microchips in them. The amount of evidence they require is mind numbingly variable from one topic to the next. Occasionally, we even see the fascinating concept that the lack of evidence for a conspiracy is itself evidence for that theory because of course the architects would cover it up. This logic seems to bizarrely imply that if evidence for the conspiracy were uncovered, the theory should then be considered less likely!

 

climate change a/k/a weather is not what people reject. They reject the rhetoric about causation and doom.

 

Where did I say I wasn’t partisan? Where did I say a partisan opinion is necessarily a bad thing? What I did say was hyper-partisanship, that is, clinging to the party line despite all contrary evidence, is a corrosive thing….and evidence of a closed mind.

 

That was Mark Twain!

 

You might be surprised. I’ve witnessed all kinds of rejections from challenging the rhetoric to arguing it’s all caused by sun spots to claiming that people can’t possible change the climate to complaints about climate sensitivity to suggestions about future changes cloud cover to that Earth’s temperature is not even changing, which was common before the big 2015 El Niño. Often people will argue several of these, even though many are rather contradictory.

 

Well, who decides what is hyper Partisanship? the answer: a Partisan! No difference in my book.

 

I think you missed my point. Nobody rejects the weather because it’s smacking you in the face every day. People reject man’s impact on it.

 

I’ve been calling politics human cartoons since I can’t remember when.

 

Well, I've followed American politics for decades, but I've never seen anything like the pitiful state of affairs today. Many good Republicans from the past have to be turning over in their graves to see what's become of, or what has been done to, their party.

 

Has the opposite effect on me

 

I’d submit it’s recognizable by anyone who is not hyper-partisan and has an open mind. (Your position appears to be such people don’t exist.) For example, only a hyper-partisan would fail to recognize Gaetz or MTG or Boebert as extremists with generally unacceptable viewpoints. For them to continue asserting, as just one example, that the election was “stolen” is beyond mere partisanship and is outright dangerous to the country.

 

agreed. Also, all the good dead Democrats are all trying to crawl out of their fiery hole.

 

My favorite Teddy quote is from the Battle of San Juan Hill, when he said, "I hope CNN is covering this live!"

 

Especially when the performers are clowns like Jim Jordan, James Comer and Matt Gaetz just to name a few.

 

I happened to notice the “few” you named were of the same political persuasion….chance or intentional? Asking for a friend.