Political News w/o Added Commentary

[userque]

This is discussion, Benedict. You still won’t deny you want to see the US not to fail. Which only pushes me to prod more.

Just tell me you want to see the USA and President Trump fail, and I will chill out.

This will be the sixth time I've reported your posts tonight, fyi.

If you address me properly (as I have been addressing you), we can talk.

[Billionair]

Incase you didn’t notice, Benedict Que, I am using some of your name. A famous quote was “say something see something,” in the Marines.

You speak bullshit, and you have for months. I’ve been gone for a while, so a ban or remove really isn’t high on my priority factor. It’s to remind other users that there are still some of us who will retort back against insurrection campaigns. You’ve been running one for months.

[userque]

Incase you didn’t notice, Benedict Que, I am using some of your name. A famous quote was “say something see something,” in the Marines.

You speak bullshit, and you have for months. I’ve been gone for a while, so a ban or remove really isn’t high on my priority factor. It’s to remind other users that there are still some of us who will retort back against insurrection campaigns. You’ve been running one for months.

A ban or removal likely isn't just about you, and whether you care. It's about maintaining law are order in the forum. That same concept you spoke about earlier, but don't seem to practice yourself.

Your ban or removal would likely be for the forum, and less about getting you to care about how you've disrupted the forum. Imo.

Your ban or removal would also likely be for the deterrence of others believing it is ok to behave the way you have been doing.

You talk about the riots, but essentially, have done the same thing here. You have rioted on this forum. This is not my website. This is not my house. You are trashing what belongs to someone taking over this site to keep it alive, when he had better things to do.

Bravo!

Users are free to question, disagree, ignore, and debate me. But no one, imo, is entitled to disrupt this website as you've done.

Yes, you've been reported again.

[userque]

YouTube Link

[userque]

YouTube Link

[userque]

CITY LEADERS TO TRUMP: HELP US FIGHT THE CORONAVIRUS BY PAYING YOUR BILLS
https://publicintegrity.org/politics/el ... our-bills/

"Fourteen city governments say the president’s campaign now owes them a collective $1.82 million. The campaign says it’s not responsible. ..."

[Billionair]

Let’s see Benedict Que:

Donations to Anti-government groups. Violation of the Hatch Act.
Threats to the President as a government employee. Insurrection? Definitely an interesting cause for speculation the union could argue free speech.
However, actively plotting insurrection against the country. Mmm. That’s a warrant.

I may have broke forum rules, you broke Legal laws.

Benedict Que, ball is in your “court.” Literally.

[userque]

Let’s see Benedict Que:

Donations to Anti-government groups. Violation of the Hatch Act.
Threats to the President as a government employee. Insurrection? Definitely an interesting cause for speculation the union could argue free speech.
However, actively plotting insurrection against the country. Mmm. That’s a warrant.

I may have broke forum rules, you broke Legal laws.

Benedict Que, ball is in your “court.” Literally.

Same response as before regarding whether you really want to have a civil discussion.

Reported.

[userque]

YouTube Link

Tear gassing peaceful protesters near White House.
Mentions 2nd amendment with no reason to.

[userque]

YouTube Link

_________________

One senior aide was exuberantly telling friends the photograph of him holding a Bible in front of the church that had been attacked by vandals was an “iconic” moment for the president.

But a senior White House official told Axios that when they saw the tear gas clearing the crowd for Trump to walk to the church with his entourage: “I’ve never been more ashamed. I’m really honestly disgusted. I’m sick to my stomach. And they’re all celebrating it. They’re very very proud of themselves.”


YouTube Link

_________________________

[VIDEO ALSO] ‘I Am Outraged’: D.C. Episcopal Bishop Decries Trump Clearing Protestors With Tear Gas to Use Church as a ‘Prop’
https://www.mediaite.com/trump/i-am-out ... as-a-prop/

"...

“I am outraged,” Budde said. “The president did not pray when he came to St John’s nor, as you just articulated, did he acknowledge the agony of our country right now — in particular, that of the people of color in our nation who wonder is anyone in public power will ever acknowledge their sacred worth and who are rightfully demanding an end to 400 years of systemic racism and white supremacy in our country … We distance ourselves from the incendiary language of this President.”

“I feel that the soul of our nation is at stake right now and we need moral leadership,” Budde added. “And we also need moral leadership. We also need political leadership.”

At around 6:30 p.m. EST, protests following the death of George Floyd were cleared near the White House when police began firing tear gas and smoke bombs toward the peaceful crowd. Those protests were right near St. John’s Episcopal Church.

..."

___________________
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."--John F. Kennedy

[userque]

White nationalist group posing as antifa called for violence on Twitter
https://news.yahoo.com/twitter-takes-do ... 00318.html

"A Twitter account claiming to belong to a national “antifa” organization and pushing violent rhetoric related to ongoing protests has been linked to the white nationalist group Identity Evropa, according to a Twitter spokesperson.

..."

__________________
“As a nation, we began by declaring that 'all men are created equal.' We now practically read it 'all men are created equal, except negroes.' When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”
― Abraham Lincoln, Lincoln Letters

Emphasis added

[Tomanyiron]

[Aitrus]

As I said in the other thread, let's keep it civil, guys.

Billionair - I agree with what you're doing (calling out something you disagree with), but there's better ways of going about doing so (and more effective, as well).

userque - While you are free to post what you wish (within reason and according to site rules), but I would suggest more than just posting a video and nothing else. When you post a clipped news story or link to a video without providing your thoughts and commentary on it, readers are only left with an impression without understanding why you are posting. Given your past discussions and thoughts, it's easy to conclude (rightly or wrongly) that you are posting with certain intent or political stance. This invites a response akin to what Billionair is doing - making assumptions about you based solely from what you've posted but without clarifying commentary and in light of your posting history. Then, when he questions you about it, you question him in return insinuating that you have done nothing wrong and challenging him to prove his positions. This seems disingenuous of you - you post something inflammatory without stating your point, then jumping on somebody who questions you based on assumptions. You're not doing yourself any favors by using the presentation method that you've chosen to employ.

What I'm saying is: it would be helpful if we knew why you were posting what you're posting. This might help avoid misunderstandings or incorrect assumptions. Otherwise, what you're doing can be easily interpreted as "s*!t stirring" or "poking the bear".

[userque]

...
userque - While you are free to post what you wish (within reason and according to site rules), but I would suggest more than just posting a video and nothing else. When you post a clipped news story or link to a video without providing your thoughts and commentary on it, readers are only left with an impression without understanding why you are posting. Given your past discussions and thoughts, it's easy to conclude (rightly or wrongly) that you are posting with certain intent or political stance. This invites a response akin to what Billionair is doing - making assumptions about you based solely from what you've posted but without clarifying commentary and in light of your posting history.

Billionair's responded immediately with name calling. That's inappropriate, regardless my position.

If I included the quote, "I AGREE WITH ARTICLE" his response would have been the same as he assumed things outside of the article.

I post articles for information. People are free to read them, and be informed. Or not read them.

If they want to know how I feel, they can ask.

Freedom to speak also includes the freedom to not speak. Sometimes I have more to say. Sometimes I don't.

Right now, we can decide for ourselves whether we want to add our own commentary to news articles we post, financial or otherwise.

If there is now a rule that everyone must now include their personal thoughts when posting news articles, I'll continue to decide for myself whether I want to add my own opinion to news articles that I post.

Then, when he questions you about it, you question him in return insinuating that you have done nothing wrong and challenging him to prove his positions.

No. He called me out of my name, in violation of the rules. You seem to want to gloss over that part.

This seems disingenuous of you - you post something inflammatory

How is posting that China tells Trump don't hide inflammatory?

Anything can unreasonably inflame another. Whether we are inflamed or not, we should still be civil.

without stating your point, then jumping on somebody who questions you based on assumptions. You're not doing yourself any favors by using the presentation method that you've chosen to employ.

Show me where I jumped on someone. It seems others saw the attack for what it was.

What I'm saying is: it would be helpful if we knew why you were posting what you're posting. This might help avoid misunderstandings or incorrect assumptions. Otherwise, what you're doing can be easily interpreted as "s*!t stirring" or "poking the bear".

I explained above.

[userque]

This guy is probably the one who incites chaos at protests. He doesn’t want to retire wealthy. He doesn’t support his/her President. He just wants the President out.

Newsflash, you scalawag, the rioters and looters are disrupting law and order. China is taking advantage of this because it wants to leverage less tariffs. For the first time in decades we have a President trying to take on China and you cheer for the other team. You Are un-American defeatist.

Here is his first post.