ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Coronavirus , Coronavirus conspiracies , donald trump , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 10th September 2020, 02:00 PM   #161
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,087
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
If the Senate convicts a President and removes them from office during an Impeachment, they have the option of adding a "And can no longer hold an elected office" addendum to it. Specifically Article I, section 3, clause 7 of the Constitution which states: “Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States."

So theoretically it's up to the Senate who impeached Trump to decide if he can try to run again or not.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...ply&p=13219221

Right, thank you!


I guess, I imagine, if there actually is an impeachment, they'll stick in that addendum. Why risk having back again someone who's shown himself unfit for office. Stands to reason, right? On the other hand, not everything politicians do always stands to reason!

On the other -- third! -- hand, wonder why they didn't stick in the clause of the addendum in to the definition of impeachment already? I guess the answer can only be, to leave in enough room for some maverick President whom everyone else deems unfit for office because of things he's done or not done, but whom the public nevertheless supports. So that, in practice, if impeachent did happen, they might leave that addendum thingy out after all, in order to comport with the letter and spirit clearly intended.

In which case I guess, impeachment would be very unwise this close to the election. Shouldn't even be thought of, no matter the chances of it going through.

Only thing to be done is eject him fair and square, via ballot.
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 02:07 PM   #162
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,918
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Since Woodward sat on this for months, I guess that makes him an accomplice to murder.

First of all, whataboutism. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Second of all, to get the interviews Woodward had to agree on a timeframe for release. That was Trumps decision, not Woodward.

Nice try though. So now how about acknowledging your boy is a murderer instead of changing the subject?
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 02:13 PM   #163
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,559
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
It’s not a legal argument but a moral one. Remember, I don’t think there is a legal case here, murder or otherwise. Trump had a moral duty to protect us and so did Woodward.
Your theoretical legal argument regarding Woodward’s culpability is shaky at best, and the moral argument is nonexistent.

Woodward was not in possession of unique or unknown information. Everyone has known from the beginning that Trump has been downplaying the virus because we’ve watched him do it on live television over and over again.

Quote:
I disagree that this confirmation is not also a revelation. Many speculated about Trump knowing the truth and hiding it. But the only words we had out of his mouth were words indicating that it was a hoax, it would go away, etc. That he actually voiced this understanding of the reality is revelatory of his true motivations, even if it confirmed suspicions that were already floating around.
Your disagreement is not only rooted in a comically naive misconception of how Trump operates, but it’s just silly.

To extend the metaphor, it would like seeing someone commit murder, but then act shocked to find out later that they also admitted murder is wrong.

To grant Trump the benefit of the doubt that maybe he didn’t know any better is off-the-charts absurdity.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 02:14 PM   #164
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,918
The whole "didn't want to cause panic" damage control is easily debunked.

Situation #1: Lie to not cause panic but take appropriate actions. That arguably could be a reasonable decision. This is not what Trump did but it is what they are hoping their damage control leads people to believe.

Situation #2: Lie to not cause panic but also DON'T take appropriate actions as if the lie were true. This is what Trump did. Therefore he is on the hook for the deaths.
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 02:16 PM   #165
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 47,151
Originally Posted by This is The End View Post
Second of all, to get the interviews Woodward had to agree on a timeframe for release. That was Trumps decision, not Woodward.

Nice try though. So now how about acknowledging your boy is a murderer instead of changing the subject?
I'm pretty sure that's not how complicity works. I'm also pretty sure that agreement would be null and void - ethically and legally - the moment Woodward believed he'd just received a criminal confession.

That being said, Woodward is significant in my mind because I'm more inclined to trust his judgement about whether he received a criminal confession, than the judgement of a stranger on the Internet with a longstanding anti-Trump bias.

(On the other hand, if Woodward is the kind of guy who receives criminal confessions of such magnitude and sits on them for personal gain, then he's an unreliable narrator and we probably shouldn't form legal opinions based on anything he's ever published for money.)
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 02:31 PM   #166
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 19,492
This is all ********.

Ok, let's agree that Woodward should have made it public earlier.

Now what? Does that make Trump actions ok?
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 02:34 PM   #167
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,087
Isn't this some species of the-messenger-has-lice fallacy?
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 03:33 PM   #168
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,671
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
This is all ********.

Ok, let's agree that Woodward should have made it public earlier.

Now what? Does that make Trump actions ok?

Of course not. Who said that?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 03:44 PM   #169
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 47,151
Originally Posted by Chanakya View Post
Isn't this some species of the-messenger-has-lice fallacy?
Doesn't seem like it.

If Woodward thought it was a crime, he would have reported it earlier. He didn't report it, therefore he doesn't think it's a crime. Do you trust his judgement?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 03:51 PM   #170
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,671
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Of course not. Who said that?

Just to add on a bit: The whole idea is that if Trump is a murderer, Woodward is an accessory to murder. Which I used to illustrate the absurdity and hyperbole of the whole “literally murder” angle.

The Governors are murderers. Everyone who refused to shelter in place and wear a mask are murderers. Take it far enough and you can cast all your political opponents as murderers. Which has happened right here on this forum: “You don’t want Universal Healthcare? You must want people to suffer and die, murderer.”
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 04:33 PM   #171
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,966
Trending on Twitter: President Woodward.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 04:39 PM   #172
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 19,492
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Of course not. Who said that?
So what's the point of it? There is apparently some reason why it is being brought up, by Trump and his supporters.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 04:43 PM   #173
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,087
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Doesn't seem like it.

If Woodward thought it was a crime, he would have reported it earlier. He didn't report it, therefore he doesn't think it's a crime.

Sounds like sophistry to me, like trying to talk rings around the actual issue.

He may have thought it a crime, but wanted to take the time to clearly formulate this in detail. He may have thought it a crime, but may have waited till he could make some money out of it. He may not, at that time, have thought it a crime at all. How does it matter?

Like I said, a bit like probing him to see if he's got lice. I don't see that it matters.


Quote:
Do you trust his judgement?

Me personally? To be honest, my answer would be "I don't have a view on this", to quote that forum meme.

No reason for mistrust, not even if he waited for a book deal, because that's what people do, and it doesn't matter in this context. TBH, though, no reason to necessarily trust him either: except, of course, why would he lie? Just for the book dollars? Seems unlikely, and so very risky for him, given who he'd be lying about, and how relatively small his pay-off.

So, in sum, I guess, while there's no reason particularly to trust him, I don't see there's call to not trust him either. Those lice don't count, I don't think.
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 04:48 PM   #174
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,980
The Woodward tapes also have Trump admitting he "saved (Crown Prince Bin Salman's) ass" over the murder of Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul a couple years ago. Intelligence pegged Bin Salman as ordering the murder but Trump took Bin Salman's word that he had nothing to do with it just as he took Putin's denial that he had nothing to do with the Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 04:57 PM   #175
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,702
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Of course not. Who said that?
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
So what's the point of it? There is apparently some reason why it is being brought up, by Trump and his supporters.
The point is exactly what they are doing. To say it and then go "What? Who's saying that!?" when someone points out that they are saying it.

Unapologetic, weaponized obtuse argumentatives in the face of defending the undefendable.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 10th September 2020 at 05:05 PM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 05:04 PM   #176
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,702
Originally Posted by Chanakya View Post
Right, thank you!


I guess, I imagine, if there actually is an impeachment, they'll stick in that addendum. Why risk having back again someone who's shown himself unfit for office. Stands to reason, right? On the other hand, not everything politicians do always stands to reason!

On the other -- third! -- hand, wonder why they didn't stick in the clause of the addendum in to the definition of impeachment already? I guess the answer can only be, to leave in enough room for some maverick President whom everyone else deems unfit for office because of things he's done or not done, but whom the public nevertheless supports. So that, in practice, if impeachent did happen, they might leave that addendum thingy out after all, in order to comport with the letter and spirit clearly intended.
It's weird.

While we don't really have enough Presidential Impeachments to really start mapping out trends, the Senate has impeached a fair number of other elected officials. As of this writing 3 Presidents (4 if you count Nixon which I sort of do, 5 if you want to count the Covode Committee against James Buchanan which seemed to have been an impeachment in everything but name), 15 Federal Judges, One Senator, and One Cabinet Secretary have been impeached, 8 removed from office, but only 3 disbarred from future office.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 10th September 2020 at 05:08 PM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 05:10 PM   #177
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 47,151
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
So what's the point of it? There is apparently some reason why it is being brought up, by Trump and his supporters.
What's the point of this thread. There must be some reason Horatius brought it up. Obviously it wasn't for skeptical debate. But what else could it be?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 05:11 PM   #178
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 47,151
Originally Posted by Chanakya View Post
Sounds like sophistry to me, like trying to talk rings around the actual issue.

He may have thought it a crime, but wanted to take the time to clearly formulate this in detail. He may have thought it a crime, but may have waited till he could make some money out of it. He may not, at that time, have thought it a crime at all. How does it matter?
How does Horatius's opinion matter?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 05:15 PM   #179
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 19,492
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Of course not. Who said that?
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What's the point of this thread. There must be some reason Horatius brought it up. Obviously it wasn't for skeptical debate. But what else could it be?
You are so predictable.

I can safely say that Trump was not replying to this thread when he brought it up.

But go ahead, continue to play the role of the ignorant dolt, exactly as JoeMorgue describes.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 06:15 PM   #180
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,991
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm pretty sure that's not how complicity works. I'm also pretty sure that agreement would be null and void - ethically and legally - the moment Woodward believed he'd just received a criminal confession.
Trump did not literally confess to murder. If Woodward went to the police with a criminal confession that stated "I wanted to always play it down. I still like playing it down, because I don't want to create a panic." they would laugh at him.

Quote:
That being said, Woodward is significant in my mind because I'm more inclined to trust his judgement about whether he received a criminal confession, than the judgement of a stranger on the Internet with a longstanding anti-Trump bias.
Woodward isn't a lawyer, so we cannot expect him to weigh up all possible legal arguments for and against it being a confession to 'literal murder'. But he surely would be familiar with the decades-old DOJ policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted. What is the point of reporting a crime if you know the authorities won't act on it - or even worse, make you a target? Trump owns the Department of Justice, and we have all seen what he does to people who cross him. Woodward could be quite convinced that Trump is in fact a murderer, and yet feel he had justification for not immediately reporting it.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 06:20 PM   #181
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 28,346
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What's the point of this thread. There must be some reason Horatius brought it up. Obviously it wasn't for skeptical debate. But what else could it be?


Because I think there's a legitimate argument to be made that, under the standards I posted in the first post, he's literally guilty of murder. The "skeptical debate" would be to show that the standard doesn't apply in this case, or that his actions don't rise to that standard*.

So far, no one has posted anything to convince me that my conclusions were wrong. His actions were not just negligent, they actively tried to get people to act in ways contrary to their own survival.

If I knew a cave was filled with a poisonous gas, but I kept telling people it was fine to walk into the cave without an oxygen supply, just because I got ten bucks for everyone who visited the cave, I'd be clearly guilty of murder under this standard. How is encouraging the entire population of the United States to engage in activities likely to lead to their infection and possible death different? He knew the virus was in the US, he knew it was far more contagious than most people realized, and he knew it was more deadly than most people realized. And yet, he kept pushing people to ignore it and go shopping.

**** him. Dying in prison would be too good for him.



*And oddly enough, rocky is the only one who seems to have even tried to address this issue.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 06:38 PM   #182
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,087
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
How does Horatius's opinion matter?

I don't see it does matter, what he personally thinks and says here. Except for the obvious: it sparks off this discussion here, these thoughts. Yours included, even if I don't agree with you.

And, in the larger context? Opinions like Horatius's matter, that particular opinion matters no matter who holds it, because (a) who knows, it may get translated into action; and (b) it intensifies the anti-Trump sentiment, and may, just perhaps -- cumulatively, along with other such opinions on other such matters -- 'convert' enough undecideds to actually make a difference come November.
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 06:41 PM   #183
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,559
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Just to add on a bit: The whole idea is that if Trump is a murderer, Woodward is an accessory to murder. Which I used to illustrate the absurdity and hyperbole of the whole “literally murder” angle.

The Governors are murderers. Everyone who refused to shelter in place and wear a mask are murderers. Take it far enough and you can cast all your political opponents as murderers. Which has happened right here on this forum: “You don’t want Universal Healthcare? You must want people to suffer and die, murderer.”
“It’s a slippery slope!” - The person dumping gallons of oil down a hillside.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 06:45 PM   #184
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,087
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
It's weird.

While we don't really have enough Presidential Impeachments to really start mapping out trends, the Senate has impeached a fair number of other elected officials. As of this writing 3 Presidents (4 if you count Nixon which I sort of do, 5 if you want to count the Covode Committee against James Buchanan which seemed to have been an impeachment in everything but name), 15 Federal Judges, One Senator, and One Cabinet Secretary have been impeached, 8 removed from office, but only 3 disbarred from future office.

That's a whole lot of information about that disbarred-from-future-office part, that I hadn't known about. Again, thank you.

What, I wonder, set apart those three? Can we extrapolate from that, to whether Trump might, if he were impeached, be "barred from future office"? Because if we have reason to think he would, then what I'd said earlier won't apply, about impeachment not making sense (in respect specifically of that future office bit).
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 06:46 PM   #185
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,980
Horatius, I think ethically/morally you have a basis for an argument but that is different than a legal argument. I agree that Trump is morally responsible for thousands of unnecessary deaths and much suffering but he does not meet the requirements for murder charges.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 06:57 PM   #186
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 28,346
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Horatius, I think ethically/morally you have a basis for an argument but that is different than a legal argument. I agree that Trump is morally responsible for thousands of unnecessary deaths and much suffering but he does not meet the requirements for murder charges.


I'd be willing to accept that, if someone could explain why his actions don't meet the standards of depraved indifference. So far, no one has.

But as was said earlier, the whole, "It wasn't technically murder, it was manslaughter" argument is pretty telling in its own right. Whatever you finally decide to call it, he's guilty as sin and should rot in jail.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 07:05 PM   #187
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 48,359
Murder ,no.
Manslaughter, yes.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 07:35 PM   #188
Guss
New Blood
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 16
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
You keep ignoring the substance of what I posted about "depraved indifference", which, I'm sure you'll ignore again, is literally a legal definition of what constitutes "murder" in many US states.

But sure, go ahead and keep acting like it's all just "Orange Man Bad", since that's literally all you have.
Jan 31 on the China travel ban
"Hysterical xenophobia and fear-mongering" ~ Joe Biden
Governors and Mayors also charged?
Sweden, W.H.O. ?
Guss is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 08:36 PM   #189
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Elagabalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,493
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
Trending on Twitter: President Woodward.
Woodward Wilson?
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 08:55 PM   #190
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 13,068
The lack of blowback Trump is getting from his supporters over this highlights the cult character of MAGA.
Democracy depends on voters doing more than just follow their leader.
__________________
Prediction
https://xkcd.com/2370/
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 10:01 PM   #191
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,671
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
So what's the point of it? There is apparently some reason why it is being brought up, by Trump and his supporters.
I can only tell you what my point is and why I brought it up. I'm not a Trump supporter. A complete reading of any of my posts here should make that clear.

The OP is absurd. If it's literally murder, then Woodward has some culpability. The point of that statement is to illustrate the absurdity. The point is to illustrate the absurdity and put forth the argument that this kind of hyperbole is not useful. What Trump did was bad enough from a moral/ethical/duty standpoint and nothing is gained by the hyperbole.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 10:03 PM   #192
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,671
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
“It’s a slippery slope!” - The person dumping gallons of oil down a hillside.
Oh, we slid down that slope a looooonnngggg time ago. A perusal of many of the USA Politics threads will illustrate.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 10:38 PM   #193
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,671
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
I'd be willing to accept that, if someone could explain why his actions don't meet the standards of depraved indifference. So far, no one has.
They don't meet the standards of depraved indifference because you can't prove he caused the death of someone in particular, for starters. It's impossible to directly trace Person X's death to an action by Trump. The virus is a natural pathogen, spread through droplets in the air. Trump didn't put the virus droplets in the air. Trump didn't force anyone not to wear a mask. He didn't force Governors, Mayors and County Judges to open their jurisdictions.

What he did was fail to act in ways that might have had some impact. He downplayed the danger. That's negligence, deriliction of duty and incompetence, not murder.

Quote:
But as was said earlier, the whole, "It wasn't technically murder, it was manslaughter" argument is pretty telling in its own right. Whatever you finally decide to call it, he's guilty as sin and should rot in jail.
You could not make a legal case to that effect. You can make a great case for impeachment, though. You can make a great case to vote him out.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 10:53 PM   #194
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,980
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
I'd be willing to accept that, if someone could explain why his actions don't meet the standards of depraved indifference. So far, no one has.

But as was said earlier, the whole, "It wasn't technically murder, it was manslaughter" argument is pretty telling in its own right. Whatever you finally decide to call it, he's guilty as sin and should rot in jail.
You've got that backwards. Just as in a court of law, you have to prove they do meet the standards, we don't have to prove they don't.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 11:06 PM   #195
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,966
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
They don't meet the standards of depraved indifference because you can't prove he caused the death of someone in particular, for starters. It's impossible to directly trace Person X's death to an action by Trump. The virus is a natural pathogen, spread through droplets in the air. Trump didn't put the virus droplets in the air. Trump didn't force anyone not to wear a mask. He didn't force Governors, Mayors and County Judges to open their jurisdictions.
If the U.S. had the same death rate as the EU, 80,000+ more Americans would still be alive. If the US had the same death rate as Canada, 100,000+ more Americans would still be alive. Granted, we can't exactly blame Trump: It's not his fault so many Americans inhabit the US. Stupid people almost deserve stupid leaders.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 11:12 PM   #196
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,980
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
If the U.S. had the same death rate as the EU, 80,000+ more Americans would still be alive. If the US had the same death rate as Canada, 100,000+ more Americans would still be alive. Granted, we can't exactly blame Trump: It's not his fault so many Americans inhabit the US. Stupid people almost deserve stupid leaders.
The problem is, people who didn't vote for him are dying thanks to the stupid people who did vote for him.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2020, 11:29 PM   #197
Lurch
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,540
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The problem is, people who didn't vote for him are dying thanks to the stupid people who did vote for him.
Those who are won't to minimize Drumpf's culpability in this case seem to regard the virus as almost some force beyond nature, which no one can properly grapple with, predict or control. And so such a manifestly craven act as knowingly lying about it while having an appreciation of the danger it poses is still too indefinite an act of willful disregard to warrant a charge of manslaughter.

How about, instead of an invisible virus, we were dealing with, say, a grizzly bear in a shopping mall. Drumpf knows the bear is there, but doesn't want business to slacken. And so he tells everyone it's safe to go shopping. People go, and someone becomes bear scat.

Is Drumpf legally culpable for that death?
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th September 2020, 01:08 AM   #198
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 30,088
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
To be fair, that's exactly what Lindsay would do.
I just like that the best defence of Trump by one of the people closest to him is that Trump was sabotaged by talking. That the way to prevent Trump from being harmed is to prevent him from talking.

This tweet was originally intended as a joke, but it's now being put forwards by Carlson in all earnestness: https://twitter.com/trentcapelli/sta...656641?lang=en

Quote:
I understand there is a liberal plot to make Republicans look stupid. It’s called “Operation Just Let Them Speak.”
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th September 2020, 01:15 AM   #199
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 30,088
FWIW, I don't know how true this is, but Woodward has said that he didn't reveal this information earlier because he was fact-checking it. I don't know quite how that would work in this particular instance, but that's what he's said.

Woodward is a distraction, though. Woodward, at the very least, wasn't telling the public that young people were "almost immune", that the virus would disappear like "a miracle", or pushing medicines that increase the chances of death.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th September 2020, 01:20 AM   #200
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 30,132
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
FWIW, I don't know how true this is, but Woodward has said that he didn't reveal this information earlier because he was fact-checking it. I don't know quite how that would work in this particular instance, but that's what he's said.

Woodward is a distraction, though. Woodward, at the very least, wasn't telling the public that young people were "almost immune", that the virus would disappear like "a miracle", or pushing medicines that increase the chances of death.
Yes, but he failed to immediately release these recordings - which doubtless would have resulted in them being branded as #FakeNews - which is far, far, worse than any of the things you've mentioned.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:50 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.