[Discussion] discussions & debates videos

videos with subject matter more suited to d&d than everything else. to be discussed and / or debated, with offshot threads if discussion on a particular video or subject warrants it.

Lol. She keeps quoting Margaret Thatcher. Good job the audience wasn't English.

I found that one odd as well. All I could think of was three letters: N, H and S. Thatcher was perfectly happy with them.

So beautiful. Brings a tear to my eye.

And yet my dad still worships Hannity. Whatcha gonna do.

Trophy Husband wrote:

To answer their questions, the investigation was carried out by Loeb & Loeb. Dykstra didn't participate because she chose not to (this was covered at the very end of the video.) I'd also note the 4 other women who had relationships with Hardwick that supported him.

I wonder if the people that quit in protest because ex wasn't apart of the investigation will come back now since that was her choice. hmmm that is if they can even come back.

My wife and I are happy that he has been reinstated. Neither of us found the blog Dykstra posted to bd enough to warrant a firing, but it made sense for the networks to to take time to investigate this and make sure there was not more. We both felt the same way about Al Franken, until more reports emerged and a pattern was established.

We also felt like this was not a situation in which she had to be wrong in order for Hardwick to keep his job. I believe she felt exactly the way she felt, and bringing this up was important, because maybe it was part of a pattern, and just needed the first person to bring this to light. It was good to hear that she was not part of the investigation because of her own desire, because it deserved a real investigation.

For me, this is how the #metoo movement should work. Women should feel comfortable bringing up treatment by men that they feel is problematic to criminal. Men should be able to allow an investigation to take place without trashing the woman or the movement. It seems like all parties involved felt heard and respected the investigation.

So basically it stands to reason that they (AMC) believes that Dykstra lied about the whole thing? I would hate to think that they chose to look the other way and go with a guy that makes them money. History tells us that enabling and empowering him won’t fix the behavior. If anything it will embolden him to think he can get away with it again (and again).

TheGameguru wrote:

So basically it stands to reason that they (AMC) believes that Dykstra lied about the whole thing? I would hate to think that they chose to look the other way and go with a guy that makes them money. History tells us that enabling and empowering him won’t fix the behavior. If anything it will embolden him to think he can get away with it again (and again).

In this case I'm willing to believe his three exes and wife, who support him. Their accounts go back more than 15 years. How often do men have a single, abhorrently abusive relationship in between two decades of regular ones?

It is entirely possible for both to be telling the truth form their prospective. From what I read I don't think she lied about anything. I also don't think Chris abused her or did anything wrong. For example she said Chris would let her drink around him. Chris is recovering alcoholic so should demand that his girlfriend not drink around him or they can't be together. Really I don't even think he should have had to ask her not to drink around him. Seems like a extremely crappy thing to do when you know your partner is in AA meetings. He is trying to control her but is that a bad thing in this case? The only threat was that if she didn't stop he would leave her.

I hope a future President brings him back to intelligence work, if he isn't too attached to his farm.

Wow. Brennan is a class act!

This is just the worst week for all the late night shows to be on break.

BadKen wrote:

Wow. Brennan is a class act!

Especially impressive considering he's from New Jersey! Same home town as Ice-T, actually.

Kamala Harris is brilliant.

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Kamala Harris is brilliant.

To be fair, I think he did answer the question - "not to my knowledge, but I'm not entirely sure who works there". The repeated drilling of the same question over and over again seems to me to be poor form when he's already given an answer. "I don't know" is a perfectly valid response to a yes or no question.

Keldar wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Kamala Harris is brilliant.

To be fair, I think he did answer the question - "not to my knowledge, but I'm not entirely sure who works there". The repeated drilling of the same question over and over again seems to me to be poor form when he's already given an answer. "I don't know" is a perfectly valid response to a yes or no question.

Tag checks out

It was an oddly specific question, which makes me think she knows more than she let on. He seemed quite flustered by it. Given the rest of his BS especially when he avoided answering about Roe v. Wade, it was nice to see him squirm.

Keldar wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Kamala Harris is brilliant.

To be fair, I think he did answer the question - "not to my knowledge, but I'm not entirely sure who works there". The repeated drilling of the same question over and over again seems to me to be poor form when he's already given an answer. "I don't know" is a perfectly valid response to a yes or no question.

Shge clearly had a document that said he did. Repeatedly asking the same question until you get an unambigious answer is the proper way to do these things.

It also gets mighty fishy when the you get "Did you talk to anyone about x?" "No, i never discussed X with anyone" followed later by "did you talk to anyone at company Y about x?" "well... uh... I don't know it depends on who is at Y"

That squirm was an "Oh sh*t I perjured myself and they might can prove it" squirm

Keldar wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Kamala Harris is brilliant.

To be fair, I think he did answer the question - "not to my knowledge, but I'm not entirely sure who works there". The repeated drilling of the same question over and over again seems to me to be poor form when he's already given an answer. "I don't know" is a perfectly valid response to a yes or no question.

Except Kavanaugh switched his "I don't know" to a more definitive "no" later when he remembered that he actually did know a partner at Kasowitz--Edward McNally, someone he had worked with for years during the Bush administration

Politico wrote:

Kavanaugh was unable to answer Harris at first, generating one of the confirmation hearing’s most talked-about moments, but he gave more complete “no’s” to Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Harris on Thursday. Before that moment, Democrats have said they have reason to suspect Mueller’s investigation did come up in Kavanaugh’s dealings with someone from Kasowitz – pointing to Edward McNally, a partner at the firm who worked closely with Trump’s high court pick in George W. Bush’s White House.

McNally appears in nearly two thousand of the Bush-era documents released to the Senate from Kavanaugh’s past, according to one Senate Democratic aide.

However, when Harris first posed her question to the nominee Wednesday night, he appeared uncertain if he knew anyone affiliated with Kasowitz.

“I’m just trying to think, do I know anyone who works at that firm?” Kavanaugh said.

Hours later, on Thursday afternoon, Kavanaugh was able to freely name McNally as someone in his orbit. The nominee told Blumenthal that he has not discussed Mueller’s investigation with the Kasowitz lawyer and later told Harris that he hadn’t discussed the probe of Trump with anyone at the firm.

Harris responded by noting that a clearer answer by Kavanaugh would have “put to rest” the issue on Wednesday night.

The guy is clearly a partisan arch-conservative hack based on his writings and e-mails. The whole "I call em like I see em, I decide the case based on the facts in front of me" and dodging any real questions is theater designed to limit the amount of complaints the Dems can muster.

He's also incredibly smart, which is the real shame of it. What a waste of an intellect.

Stay til the end:

Ouch

You get blackout drunk at one reunion...
Here's some news:

Oops, already posted.

But H.P., it's only audio...

Shut up!! You're only audio!

NSFW.

bwaaaaaaaaaaaaah

Probably the best vote for me ad I've ever seen.