jakee

If you don’t understand that how Hungary manages to do something inevitably comes back to Orban then I have no idea why you even bother talking about politics at all. When the question is how does Hungary manage to do X - well, Orban controls the government, Orban controls the press and Orban controls the courts. So how else does anything happen?

I see. It’s kinda odd that you phrased it in a way that implied parity when you actually meant that there is evidence of an incredibly small scale of wrongdoing from Biden compared to Trump. Also odd that you contrasted calls for jail time for Trump and excuses for Biden even though you actually meant there was no evidence of wrongdoing from Biden of the sort that has lead people to call for jail time for Trump.

Hungary is ruled by a proto-dictator leading his country further and further down the Vladimir Putin model of government. Using them as an example of how to do anything right now is about as MAGA as it gets. (Seriously, the US right’s idolisation of Orban couldn’t be a bigger warning sign if it was literally written in the sky with fireworks.)

So much utter fucking partisan bullshit. You can’t say ‘there is ample evidence of Biden’s wrongdoing’ then hide behind ‘the investigation is still ongoing’ when someone asks what the fucking evidence is and expect to have anyone believe that you’re being honest. Leaving aside that Biden’s documents case is nothing whatsoever like Trump’s. Did Biden defy subpoenas? Did he obstruct justice? Did he send minions to delete security footage? Did he show journalists war plans that he knew were still secret? If you keep claiming not to like Trump you know what you have to do - vote for Biden. Otherwise you have to admit you’re just as in thrall to him and just as taken in by right wing conspiracy theories as the rest of your looney party.

Brent will be along soon to explain why that all sounds exactly like Biden.

Right, but that's really just a technicality, isn't it? Nebraska doesn't exist in a vacuum. The political parties still exist, and all but one of the state legislators are registered members of the two major parties.

The other thing is that without political parties / alliances you just can’t get anything done. How you would create and negotiate legislation that has a chance of passing when everyone is singing from their own hymn sheet I have no idea - and regardless of what the libertarian nutters would like to believe (not you Jerry), the government does actually have to be able to do stuff. Plus due to human beings natural tendencies to clump together then without political parties there would still be political alliances and factions, the voting public would just be even less aware of what they were.

You make an excellent point. On the other hand, in just one recent thread, you said that people who disagreed with you on the topic in question haven’t been paying attention, are a waste of time to talk to, are impervious to evidence, have weak reading comprehension, have questionable sanity, are lost causes, have poor values, and represent the idea that stupidity is the only inexhaustible natural resource. So I would point out that there’s a saying about specks, planks and eyes, but I guess I’m too stupid to know what it means.

Which part of that would you call evidence, exactly?

Ok cool - so people are either progressives or monarchists. Which one are you? Let's see what the other Hitchens has to say: "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence"

Hitler was an authoritarian, militaristic, xenophobic nationalist. You join the dots.

I haven’t actually heard those calls, apart from actual Nazis or genuine Islamic extremists. While I think the comments from the University Chairs were ill advised, I’m pretty sure that’s what they were trying to head off. Expecting that if they said ‘yes we would expel any students calling for genocide against Israel’ they would be presented with examples of students saying things that really don’t mean that but that their Republican questioners claim does mean that, then get bogged down in a horrible quagmire of pointless argument. Which would be par for the course for Republicans on committees right now.

I think he solidly loses.

No, that’s not what happened. Firing Viktor Shokin was a policy goal of a large international coalition of suppliers of aid to Ukraine. It also wasn’t an isolated incident - reducing corruption across all areas of Ukrainian government was one of the absolute priorities of the plan to build Ukraine’s ability to defend itself. Joe Biden was the messenger not the architect of this particular policy goal. You’re right about one thing - you are just parroting the conspiracy theorists.

This one sentence is a masterpiece of journalistic writing. "Precisely what led so many people to offer Thomas money and other gifts remains an open question." *Chef's kiss*

Define a credible source. What’s your credible source for firing the prosecutor being something Biden decided would be done? Heres the thing - firing the prosecutor was an official state department policy goal before Biden got involved. It was an international policy goal shared with the leadership of the EU and the World Bank. The reason for that is not that senior diplomats across the world really wanted Joe Biden to keep getting a few kickbacks from his kid. The reason is that the prosecutor was abjectly corrupt, was actually slow rolling the Burisma investigation among others, and was helping sustain the endemic Ukrainian corruption that was siphoning off and lessening the effectiveness of all the aid being provided. Biden was just the ‘big enough’ stick that was used to make the Ukrainian government at the time do what almost the entire west wanted them to do. It was not his policy. It was not his decision. The fact that all of this is news to you just shows what an uninformed right wing puppet you are, and how much of your news comes from the conservative media echo chamber.

I vaguely recall back in the mists of time that cancel culture and the practice of universities and student groups deplatforming ‘undesirable’ speakers was one of the greatest extant threats to free American society. I believe it was a truth universally accepted on the Right that even if an actual, literal Nazi was invited by one student group to speak at a university, other students should meet them on the battlefield of ideas, and demanding instead that they be stopped from speaking or the group who invited them sanctioned in any way would be unconscionable. I wonder what changed.

Keep in mind, this is the guy (maybe even the only one?) who staunchly defended Trump over the 'bleach and very strong light' covid treatment speech. Seriously, even that was not a bridge too far for him when it came to toeing the party line.

I take it you've never criticized anything Biden has ever said, then? All speech is free speech, and free speech is always to be supported, right?

Unfortunately, by simply ignoring his tendency to try and demolish democracy and the rules based order in politics as we know it, these people are acting just as moronically as the ones who hang on his every word. Especially when they try and convince themselves that it's no different to supporting a Democrat, and buy into any anti-Biden conspiracy going just so they don't have to think too hard about what voting for Trump means.

His legal team made one fatal mistake: "If the jury awards Freeman and Moss what they are seeking, his lawyer, Joseph Sibley said, it "will be the end of Mr. Giuliani."" I think the jury heard that and immediately said "OK!"

Ah, so you're one of those Republican parrots. This is one of those things that has been so thoroughly dismantled as an anti-Biden story for anyone willing to engage their own brain for all of ten seconds that it's just not worth anyone's time to explain it to you again. You're clearly never going to change your mind no matter what anyone says.

First, those are two different things. There are many other reasons not to think highly of someone than corruption. You said corruption, and are now frantically backpedalling because you can't back it up. Second, you used the word 'or'. So while the second group may not be worth your time, the first group surely is worth your time - they only think highly of Biden because they don't know what you know. So why keep it to yourself? Do you want him to win?

It’s even worse than that - like with Trump in NY the trial is just to decide damages. Rudy refused to engage with the discovery process until summary judgement was made against him. So he’s standing outside court saying he regrets nothing and makes no apologies because all the things he said were true…. when it’s already a matter of legal fact that they were not true and were intentionally defamatory.

As far as British infrastructure projects go that wouldn't be too terrible, tbh.