|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jun 14, 2018 15:43:56 GMT
Even the arrogance of Crimson cat coming onto this thread to "suggest" that the Republicans split into two factions is a continuation of that mindset. ummm- @#notlauren: A number of people were posting on this very thread about how they feel the Republican party doesn't stand for their values any longer; I was asking about the possibility of creating another political party, to fill that void. I wasn't bashing anyone, I didn't think I wrote anything incendiary. Apparently it was to you. Just so you know, starting my sentence with the word 'perhaps' and ending it with a question mark ---> ? (just in case you're not familiar with it) means I was asking a QUESTION. You know, that thing when you inquire about something, to get others' opinions, or get discourse going... maybe you're not familiar with back-and-forth discussion, I don't know (I don't typically see your posts). carry on, and I apologize for intruding... I just couldn't let the statement about my 'arrogance' go without a response. |
|
|
|
Post by busy on Jun 14, 2018 16:25:19 GMT
If marijuana would be legalized at the federal level, I think we’d largely see these kinds of crimes go away. Because banks can not provide services to marijuana businesses, even if its legal in the state they operate in, they are forced to operate on a cash basis, which makes them lucrative targets for thieves. Interesting. I did not know banks could not service them. SaveSaveIt's considered money laundering, since the sale of marijuana is still against federal law. There are some small credit unions in Colorado and Washington that do provide depository accounts to marijuana businesses but it's risky for both parties, and not widely available. |
|
|
|
Post by Skellinton on Jun 14, 2018 16:34:27 GMT
They wouldn’t be anymore of a target for what they are selling then any other store. People are not robbing the stores for the pot, they just want the cash, I am not a pot smoker, never have been, and originally I thought legalizing pot was a bad idea for many reasons I believe most people think it is a bad idea, but it has been legal in our state for quite awhile and I haven’t seen any of the things I was semi worried about happen. I absolutely agree it should be legalized at the federal level so they don’t have to operate with cash and then states and cities even could make their own decisions, I think there are cities in Oregon where it is illegal still, but I don’t know that for sure. Actually in many cases they are robbing the store for the pot - one article - but you can find dozens: www.denverpost.com/2016/12/21/teens-arrested-dispensary-burglaries-boulder-county/Of course they are, just as they rob electronic store for electronics and other stores for what they are selling. I guess my last sentence negated what my first sentence said. My iPad is randomly deleting things when editing. I meant that sentence to say they are primarily robbing the stores for the cash, not the pot. I don’t know what my original sentence was, but I did have more on there, hence ending the sentence with a comma. Obviously, no one could possibly know that and I need to be more aware after posting to proof and correct mistakes until my iPad stops being dumb. In any event, I don’t think the pot stores are more of a target for their product then any other store. They are more or a target because of the cash. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 14, 2018 16:51:01 GMT
To assert that a person was or should be awarded the Nobel Prize solely based upon his skin color boggles my mind, especially when the Nobel is an award offered for achievements, not one's DNA. Whether he was awarded it prematurely or without cause is the Nobel committee's issue to deal with. I appreciate that idea. It pretty much flies in the face of constantly being told to check our privilege and the attention paid to members of the NFL choosing to kneel during the Star Spangled Banner though, doesn't it? It was illegal for a man with skin as dark as Barack Obama's to be president for a very long time. Even if he was born a free man, it was possible for him to have been captured and dragged onto a plantation and forced into slavery with very little possibility for him to return to freedom without running away. The color of his skin is historically significant. Maybe if more positive attention had been given to that simple fact, race relations within our own country may have gotten better and not worse. But hey. You have a different perspective and that's perfectly fine. My perspective is equally fine, whether you approve of it or not. it has been legal in our state for quite awhile and I haven’t seen any of the things I was semi worried about happen. In any event, I don’t think the pot stores are more of a target for their product then any other store. They are more or a target because of the cash. That's good to hear. |
|
|
|
Post by chlerbie on Jun 14, 2018 19:09:40 GMT
Marijuana has been legal here for a couple of years in MA, yet we don't have a single store open, as the state argues about how they want to go about it. I think, as a state, we're missing out on a lot of funding because of it and although I'm not a smoker, am anxious for them to get their act together.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103 
|
Post by Rainbow on Jun 14, 2018 21:12:07 GMT
No. You both are as wrong as wrong can be. peano I actually spelled it out. I'll elaborate more for those who missed it. From our beginnings as a country, we had slavery in every state. The Quakers were instrumental in changing that tide beginning in the 1700's, first within their own group. By the time of the Revolutionary War, the idea that all men (and women) are created equal and thus should be treated equally was taking hold and really beginning to spread. By the time of the Civil War, all of the northern states had abolished slavery. By the mid-1960's we had enacted national laws guaranteeing equal rights to women and people of color. By the mid 2010's we had enacted national laws guaranteeing equal rights to citizens regardless of sexual preferences or choices of whom to marry. That's a lot of change we as a nation should be proud of and recognized for, and nothing was more evident of our continuing work towards individual freedom than electing a man of color to represent us on a world stage as President of the United States of America. Obama won the election. He earned the title of President. I have no qualms in awarding him the Peace Prize individually as being the first to have broken through that most elite barrier. Likewise, I think that people who voted for Obama because of his race/birace had just as valid a reason for their vote as anyone else did for policy reasons.
To turn that into something deserving of a whole handful of negative emojis was downright silly and reflective of a preconceived bias that is very difficult to get past.To assert that a person was or should be awarded the Nobel Prize solely based upon his skin color boggles my mind, especially when the Nobel is an award offered for achievements, not one's DNA. Whether he was awarded it prematurely or without cause is the Nobel committee's issue to deal with. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 14, 2018 21:35:16 GMT
To assert that a person was or should be awarded the Nobel Prize solely based upon his skin color boggles my mind, especially when the Nobel is an award offered for achievements, not one's DNA. Whether he was awarded it prematurely or without cause is the Nobel committee's issue to deal with. Exactly! If, and that is a very big if, the committee felt that Obama should have gotten the award, it should have been made to mean something. I gave some kind of meaning to it as an example of what they could have used as a reason. As reality goes, though, it was meaninglessly given. |
|
|
|
Post by peano on Jun 15, 2018 3:48:18 GMT
To assert that a person was or should be awarded the Nobel Prize solely based upon his skin color boggles my mind, especially when the Nobel is an award offered for achievements, not one's DNA. Whether he was awarded it prematurely or without cause is the Nobel committee's issue to deal with. Why are you telling me? You need to address your commentary to the Nobel committee. |
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Jun 15, 2018 4:26:46 GMT
We have three pot shops in our town. They get robbed often and the robberies have escalated to armed robbery. It’s scary, but data and studies are usually years behind real time, so right now it’s just opinion and observation that crime has increased. If marijuana would be legalized at the federal level, I think we’d largely see these kinds of crimes go away. Because banks can not provide services to marijuana businesses, even if its legal in the state they operate in, they are forced to operate on a cash basis, which makes them lucrative targets for thieves. Yes, I agree, that would lessen them. I doubt it would eliminate them, but it would lessen them. |
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
|
Post by Rainbow on Jun 15, 2018 4:46:57 GMT
Giving it as a gift renders it meaningless. Why are you telling me? You need to address your commentary to the Nobel committee. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 26, 2024 11:37:24 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 15:45:55 GMT
What is your take on the IG report?
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jun 15, 2018 17:44:35 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 26, 2024 11:37:24 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 18:15:04 GMT
Peter Strzok texts about stopping Trump from being elected and having an "insurance policy" against him and the report saying "implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects" makes me wonder wth Peter Strzok still has a job with the FBI.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 15, 2018 18:35:23 GMT
What is your take on the IG report? I think it's the beginning, not the end. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 26, 2024 11:37:24 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 18:59:09 GMT
I think if Comey hadn't written the letter, and if Hillary would have won, the public would still be in the dark about all the shady things that went on.
"It was a close election, decided by fewer than 78,000 votes in three states, so it is certainly possible that but for the letter she would have won–which also means that but for her indefensible email conduct, she would have won. But her own flaws and choices as a candidate led to Trump’s being in striking distance in the first place."
Personally, I think her own actions were the reason she lost the election. The Bengazi episode certainly didn't help her chances, all the people that went out and lied to the American people after that incident was the worst part. I think the email conduct was just the icing on the cake for a Trump victory. And yes, I was surprised about a Trump victory--she had all but taken the victory lap before the election. Her arrogance in that area probably didn't help her chances either. And her health certainly a factor, as was her choice of a vice presidential running mate. All mistakes.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 26, 2024 11:37:24 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 18:59:38 GMT
What is your take on the IG report? I think it's the beginning, not the end. definitely. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 15, 2018 19:05:58 GMT
I think if Comey hadn't written the letter, and if Hillary would have won, the public would still be in the dark about all the shady things that went on.
"It was a close election, decided by fewer than 78,000 votes in three states, so it is certainly possible that but for the letter she would have won–which also means that but for her indefensible email conduct, she would have won. But her own flaws and choices as a candidate led to Trump’s being in striking distance in the first place." Hell, I believe that if there were equal justice under the law, Hillary would have been hauled off to jail and would have been ineligible to have continued to run for president. Therefore, she would not have won. It's taken all this time for a report to tell us what we saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears - Comey's actions were beyond his authority and are inexcusable. These news people have missed the real story for so long, it's as indefensible as the way Comey behaved. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 26, 2024 11:37:24 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 19:24:27 GMT
I think if Comey hadn't written the letter, and if Hillary would have won, the public would still be in the dark about all the shady things that went on.
"It was a close election, decided by fewer than 78,000 votes in three states, so it is certainly possible that but for the letter she would have won–which also means that but for her indefensible email conduct, she would have won. But her own flaws and choices as a candidate led to Trump’s being in striking distance in the first place." Hell, I believe that if there were equal justice under the law, Hillary would have been hauled off to jail and would have been ineligible to have continued to run for president. Therefore, she would not have won. It's taken all this time for a report to tell us what we saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears - Comey's actions were beyond his authority and are inexcusable. Exactly! Do you think they missed it or deliberately ignored it to put their spin on it? I can't help but think if they actually put those journalistic skills to use they would have seen it and should have reported it. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 15, 2018 19:37:03 GMT
Do you think they missed it or deliberately ignored it to put their spin on it? I can't help but think if they actually put those journalistic skills to use they would have seen it and should have reported it. There are very few innocent journalistic reporters. I do believe that some have been completely hoodwinked. I believe the others are part of the story and are corrupt. ETA - Those that have continued this narrative, that is. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 26, 2024 11:37:24 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 23:42:42 GMT
Do you think they missed it or deliberately ignored it to put their spin on it? I can't help but think if they actually put those journalistic skills to use they would have seen it and should have reported it. There are very few innocent journalistic reporters. I do believe that some have been completely hoodwinked. I believe the others are part of the story and are corrupt. ETA - Those that have continued this narrative, that is. Totally agree with this AND your post about Hillary. |
|
|
|
Post by mom on Jun 16, 2018 0:23:39 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 26, 2024 11:37:24 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2018 0:26:21 GMT
If I could believe that news, I totally agree, but it is so hard to trust any of the news agencies these days! I hope he didn't do it, because that really is a stupid thing to do!! |
|
|
|
Post by mom on Jun 16, 2018 0:29:27 GMT
If I could believe that news, I totally agree, but it is so hard to trust any of the news agencies these days! I hope he didn't do it, because that really is a stupid thing to do!! DH and I were just talking about it. He HAD to know he would get caught - and the app we hear he used doesn't delete covnersations - so there would be an electronic paper trail. Maybe he didn't. But man, if he did then he isn't as smart as I thought. SaveSave |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 26, 2024 11:37:24 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2018 0:52:06 GMT
If I could believe that news, I totally agree, but it is so hard to trust any of the news agencies these days! I hope he didn't do it, because that really is a stupid thing to do!! DH and I were just talking about it. He HAD to know he would get caught - and the app we hear he used doesn't delete covnersations - so there would be an electronic paper trail. Maybe he didn't. But man, if he did then he isn't as smart as I thought. SaveSaveThe part that is disconcerting to me is that he's been locked up without a trial. |
|
|
|
Post by mom on Jun 16, 2018 0:57:39 GMT
DH and I were just talking about it. He HAD to know he would get caught - and the app we hear he used doesn't delete covnersations - so there would be an electronic paper trail. Maybe he didn't. But man, if he did then he isn't as smart as I thought. SaveSaveThe part that is disconcerting to me is that he's been locked up without a trial. Yeah, I don't feel sorry one bit. He was offered bail and couldn't come up with it (legally). So they gave him house arrest. And instead of keeping his nose clean he was harassing witnesses. In any other case, this would not be allowed either. He broke the terms of his house arrest. It would land anyone in jail if they did what he did. When you are in shit, quit digging. He is in shit and instead of playing by the rules (and laws), he did his own thing and got caught. Time to accept the consequence. SaveSave |
|
Just T
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,887
|
Post by Just T on Jun 16, 2018 1:01:14 GMT
DH and I were just talking about it. He HAD to know he would get caught - and the app we hear he used doesn't delete covnersations - so there would be an electronic paper trail. Maybe he didn't. But man, if he did then he isn't as smart as I thought. SaveSaveThe part that is disconcerting to me is that he's been locked up without a trial. People are "locked up without a trial" all the time if they can't make bail or if they are denied bail. Sometimes, they are "locked up without a trial" for a very long time while they await trial. Manafort was out on bond and put on house arrest and today, his bond was revoked. Nothing to be disconcerted about. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jun 16, 2018 1:19:39 GMT
DH and I were just talking about it. He HAD to know he would get caught - and the app we hear he used doesn't delete covnersations - so there would be an electronic paper trail. Maybe he didn't. But man, if he did then he isn't as smart as I thought. SaveSaveThe part that is disconcerting to me is that he's been locked up without a trial. He can join the 99% of accused who can't make bail. That's the reality for the vast majority of people. |
|
|
|
Post by peano on Jun 16, 2018 1:36:29 GMT
DH and I were just talking about it. He HAD to know he would get caught - and the app we hear he used doesn't delete covnersations - so there would be an electronic paper trail. Maybe he didn't. But man, if he did then he isn't as smart as I thought. SaveSaveThe part that is disconcerting to me is that he's been locked up without a trial. I believe his trial is in September. |
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 16, 2018 14:31:56 GMT
I know in many states, the law requires you to be tried within a certain period of time if you are incarcerated, otherwise they must release you pending the trial. Don't know about federal laws.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jun 16, 2018 15:39:11 GMT
If I could believe that news, I totally agree, but it is so hard to trust any of the news agencies these days! I hope he didn't do it, because that really is a stupid thing to do!! This isn’t a matter of which news agency is reporting it. It’s a matter of public record - the findings of the special prosecutor, with enough evidence that the court agreed and jailed him. It’s not hard to trust a news agency when they’re reporting verifiable fact. |
|
