jakee

No you weren’t.

So Trump’s trade war isn’t the Democrats’ fault. I think you just reached peak Fox.

So in that situation, the ownership of guns by the populace did not help. In your situation, since you aren't currently living under an tyrannical dictatorship, the ownership of guns by the populace would seem to be one of the most likely ways for you to end up with one. If you're genuinely worried about a mass famine, get rid of some guns.

It's hard to imagine the Soviet Revolution without an armed and organized militia. What's your point?

OK, but what does that have to do with him being highly connected?

Of all places, a prison is one where a highly connected and high profile person should not be treated any differently to anyone else. If they'd made a special effort to watch Epstein, would they have had to stop watching someone else completely? A hiring freeze by the Trump administration has left thousands of staff vacancies across the Bureau of Prisons, creating "dangerous conditions" for both staff and inmates, said Eric Young, president of the American Federation of Government Employees Council of Prison Locals in a statement. The remaining officers are regularly forced to work 70- and 80-hour work weeks, Mr Young said. He also described a tactic to address the shortages called "augmentation", which allows teachers, nurses, clerical workers and other support staff to fill in for correctional officers. "The low pay, understaffing, augmentation, and mandatory overtime have created an environment inside our prisons where something like this is even possible," he added. One of the corrections officers was reportedly on his fifth straight day of overtime shifts, while another guard had been forced to work overtime, Serene Gregg, president of the AFGE Local 3148, told the Washington Post newspaper. "If it wasn't Mr Epstein, it would have been somebody else, because of the conditions at that institution," she told the newspaper.

I can only think you haven’t read the original post you were responding to. If you have, then I have no idea what relevance you think this statement has to it.

So Tesla did a better job than the driver of trying to avoid the collision. Cool.

According to the BBC the answer is probably a simple one that's repeated across the entire prison system. Too many prisoners and not enough staff to watch them properly.

The guy who started this thread couldn’t even be bothered to say why he wanted to talk about him. The guy who resurrected the thread hasn’t bothered to mention anything he supports about the man’s philosophy or why he cares if others dislike him. Why should anyone else be bothered to provide any evidence when the instigators can’t be bothered to do even say what they’re thinking, let alone support it?

And then compares it to the murder of tens of millions of people. Because obviously.

You saw where I asked him to clarify his issues with my claims, right? Again, if absolute accuracy is the issue, I want to know exactly which parts of my post he thinks do not reflect what the guy said. But you know that already, so stop stirring the pot for no reason.

Nothing on this? Ok then.

Those are the types of guns used in all murders, not mass shootings.

But since the position of one side is to do nothing, how did you manage to swing around to blaming the other side for nothing happening?

But presumably the place you work does not use a Juilliard audition, right? The universities you co-workers went to probably didn't either, right? And the reason you like the Juilliard audition must be because you realise that the visual appearance and identity of the performer can impact how the performance is judged, right? So, don't your hard working and competent colleagues ever wonder that their years of hard work are rendered suspect by the fact that they may not have been the best candidates in the first place? That conscious and unconscious biases may have helped them skip the line for college places and in the job hunting world? Do they ever wonder if it matters whether that process was entirely fair?

Personal attack against who?

You just quoted my entire post containing multiple points. So what exactly sounds like paraphrasing? If you're going to hang your hat on specific wording, be specific. Do they? From a BBC article; ""I don't think any legal expert would say using an inappropriate pronoun, while not something that respects the human rights of trans people, would ever result in a criminal conviction," said Kyle Kirkup, a law professor with the University of Ottawa who specialises in gender identity and sexuality law." No, even if you could be prosecuted the comparison with killing tens of millions of people is not reasonable. It's a stretch that Mister Fantastic would be proud of.

Right, we know what Trump actually said - the video covers that. Problem is they don't quote anything that was actually said by the people they accuse of deliberately lying.

He says that any woman whose primary concern in life by the age of 30 isn't having kids has something wrong with her, has a disagreeable temperament and is incompassionate. He says the idea that women have been discriminated against throughout history is appalling. I didn't say he's awful, but I think that statement is awful. He's so obsessed with transgender people that he directly compares pressure to call them by their chosen pronouns with the Marxist/Leninist/Stalinist state policies of the Soviet Union that killed tens of millions of people. Like... really? I have no interest in calling him a nazi. That kind of hyperbole is more his style.

Say what? Whose idea is that? Are they?

You do not recall correctly. That's the thing about these videos, they skip straight over establishing what was actually said and get right into slowly, clearly and repeatedly (the same way you deal with a small child, by the way) their judgement on the matter and in doing so fool you into thinking they gave you the facts.

Right, and those are the only things that matter so you don’t need to apply any critical thinking to the matter. Did you notice though, that through the whole video they never provided any examples of the news outlets explicitly lying about what Trump said?

And I guess I'll take that as a 'no' from you.

Clearly the above statement is entirely facetious - so you're really not going to revisit any of your opinions about the US having unique problems even though you know the data you used to form those opnions is false?