Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by Brian McFarland

Google is your friend.

From Merriam Webster:

"Transitive verb: to understand profoundly and intuitively"

Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land, if I remember correctly.

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Hi Jim,

I think it's not necessarily the health care itself that is the issue but rather access to it due to the reported denials by health insurance carriers and the ensuing delays in obtaining care.

Reasonable point.

Originally Posted by David Cotterell

Understanding is not approval. I see that you, Rod, clearly grok the distinction.  Alas, others do not.

e.g.  I understand why a guy would rob a bank.  He's poor, or too lazy to work for an honest living or mentally unstable or a combination. But I do not approve of the robbing of banks.

Dave

People rob banks, to quote Willie Sutton (I think), "Because that is where the money is."

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

https://www.politico.eu/article/joe-biden-presidential-bid-family-business-history-democrats/

2019?

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Ask him if he either thinks, or cares one iota that perhaps anyone involved in the Jan 6th riot is innocent and whether or not he is the slightest bit curious about some of those people who were indicted by Biden's corrupt DOJ and who served time in their Jail, had excessive fines placed upon them, or that they were railroaded by the corrupt Biden gov't DOJ?

You'll hear crickets in the background.  

I always answer when you politely ask questions, Richard.  Why would you lie about that?

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

BTW, you just claimed above that you always answer my questions of you, but in that very response you completely ignored this question I asked of you:


Ask him if he either thinks, or cares one iota that perhaps anyone involved in the Jan 6th riot is innocent and whether or not he is the slightest bit curious about some of those people who were indicted by Biden's corrupt DOJ and who served time in their Jail, had excessive fines placed upon them, or that they were railroaded by the corrupt Biden gov't DOJ?

Did you want to answer that?   

Technically, that was not a question.  You see that don't you?  

Anyway, I think it is likely some J6 defendants were over-sentenced for minor crimes and others were appropriately or under-sentenced for very serious crimes.  I am supportive of each defendant who thinks they were over-sentenced making his or her appeal to Trump's clemency team.   If the team deems that clemency is appropriate after full review of any particular case, that is how the system is supposed to work, especially if the defendant has done some or all of their time.   I would be opposed to any blanket multi-defendant pardon without detailed and specific review.  In my view it is critical to examine any clemency petition on a case by case basis.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Nonsense.  That wasn't a lie.  Recently, you've changed your tune but my experience is that you've ignored my postings.

Fair point, I often ignore your postings.  I'll revise to say that I always answer your questions, and always have, if you ask politely, and if I notice the question.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

BTW he served MONTHS in solitary confinement.  You previously claimed that nobody from Jan 6th were placed in solitary confinement and you called me a liar when I suggested it.

My recollection is you claimed some J6 defendants were held in solitary confinement for months without being charged with any crime.  That contention is and was BS when you made it.

Originally Posted by James Brown

My recollection is you claimed some J6 defendants were held in solitary confinement for months without being charged with any crime.  That contention is and was BS when you made it.

My recollection was correct.  Back then you were not arguing that convicted J6 defendants were getting solitary.  No, you were arguing that J6 defendants were being thrown into solitary confinement before they were even arraigned.  Your specific words:

"Since you apparently know something about this and some of the people in Jail right now, who are awaiting trial on charges they've not been informed of, do you think they are receiving Due Process?  Many have been in jail well over a year, some in solitary confinement."

https://astromart.com/forums/commentary-careful-read-the-terms-of-service/politics/fox-news-tuckers-cherry-picking-of-jan-6th-riot?page=2  (Post 17)

https://astromart.com/forums/commentary-careful-read-the-terms-of-service/politics/fox-news-tuckers-cherry-picking-of-jan-6th-riot?page=3  (Post 29)

And my final correction of your misunderstanding:  https://astromart.com/forums/commentary-careful-read-the-terms-of-service/politics/fox-news-tuckers-cherry-picking-of-jan-6th-riot?page=4 (Post 32)

At no point did I call you a "liar."  I did however, conclusively prove that your assertion of "solitary confinement for persons not yet accused of any crime" was BS.  It is a lot of work to prove it when you are trying to re-write your own history on this forum, but it is worth it now and then, just to remind people that revisionist history is one of your tactics.  This time, it was not too hard to find the old thread, since I had a good idea of the time frame.  Jim

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"At no point did I call you a "liar."  I did however, conclusively prove that your assertion of "solitary confinement for persons not yet accused of any crime" was BS."

This seems to be an example of a distinction without a difference particularly in regards to Rich who routinely calls anything that may be in error or simply wrong as a "lie".
Frankly, I don't understand why you're coddling this guy especially when you know his MO and you know what he is and how he behaves.

I didn't think I was coddling him.  I pointed out and documented a clear cut case of revisionist history.   Sure, I did not call names.  I think sidelining the name calling is more persuasive anyway.  At least in my view, nothing is less persuasive than Richard's name calling and profanity laced rants.