John: I know like me you are a fiscal conservative, so this question is probably right in your wheelhouse. The situation in France seems like a harbinger of things to come in the United States. Decades of deficit spending have finally caught up to them (they last had a budget surplus in 1974), and France is having to cut basic services in education. This has led to violent protests, encouraged by French leftist politicians. The same ingredients seem to exist over on this side of the pond: Low social trust, low trust in the government, yet high expectations for cradle-to-grave government services. When the math ain’t mathin’ anymore, you get rioting in the streets. Is this about to happen in the U.S?
You don't know the meaning of the word"worshipping ". Maybe that word fits your opinion of your thoughts. If you are so great, why are depriving us of your political service? If Trump is making mistakes, where is your podium so that he and the rest of us can see the light?
The thing is that you are just another envious carper of Trump with a small voice who I happened upon because Goldberg was begging for viewers on O'Reilly. I think Trump with his MANY highly intelligent and informed advisors rate a few clicks above your jaundiced opinions.
>>If you are so great, why are depriving us of your political service?
As in running for office? Lol. I'd be a non-starter in either party. They both vilify honest conservatives, and have effectively purged all of them from their ranks.
>>If Trump is making mistakes, where is your podium so that he and the rest of us can see the light?
I do what I can through my writing and broadcasting (and, of course, voting and even the occasional donation), but again: Neither party is interested in honest, principled conservatism. Hopefully it will make a rebound once Trump's gone from the scene, and the personality-cult fizzles out, but who knows?
>>The thing is that you are just another envious carper of Trump
Now that's funny. The "envy" claim always tells me a lot about the person making it.
>> with a small voice who I happened upon because Goldberg was begging for viewers on O'Reilly.
Lol. Dude, if all we cared about was big voice, we'd just tell you exactly what you want to hear, and rake in the big bucks (like those other guys). I'd rather be honest and intellectually consistent with my readers and listeners.
>>I think Trump with his MANY highly intelligent and informed advisors rate a few clicks above your jaundiced opinions.
Oh, I don't doubt that you actually believe that. Lol.
When Trump does something I think is correct, I support him on it. When he does something I think his bad, I criticize it.
He's an elected leader who works for us, not the other way around. Worshiping and unconditionally supporting or defending a politician is bad for the country.
I am not defending Schmitt. CHATgpt says Schmitt was concerned about Smith wanting to meet with people connected to the Atlanta prosecution. That was apparently the line of questioning. Forget about the basketball game error and the extent Schmitt took it. That is meaningless. And according to CHATgpt, that line of questioning was important.
No. I did not hear the entire exchange, but I can recognize when critcs are blowing an unimportant fact out of proportion. The "some question" is exactly that connection. Not about basketball games. Good grief! What lengths some people will go to in order to distract from what is important is amazing. Jack Smith is a dishonest lawyer, and you are defending him.
My research is CHATgpt's research. I don't sit around watching CSPAN every day.
I am not defending or worshipping (your nonsense at play again) on helping corporations. Maybe it is good that government helps corporations to keep people employed or maybe you can find another nit to pick trying to criticize Trump. I merely say that other Presidents did the same kind of help. It is all intervention.
It is amazing how you can get off the point. Defending Trump??? Holding up Obama??? I am merely stating the facts.
OK. If other countries did not tariff us and we did not tariff them, that would be a free trade economy. So says CHATgpt.
Your last few paragraphs have to do more than strive to find cute ways to insult me. Insults and name calling signal that one has lost the debate. I do not worship Trump. But I can easily see that his critics are devoid of any constructive criticism- just merely criticism.
Burning down the republican party is a stretch. O'Reilly, Victor Davis Hanson, Mark Levin, and more astute well educated republicans agree with me almost 100%. Only democrats are in lock step with one another.
You've literally been defending him throughout this entire exchange.
>>CHATgpt says Schmitt was concerned about Smith wanting to meet with people connected to the Atlanta prosecution.
Lol. Schmitt asked if Smith had done that, and Smith said no. Question answered.
But then, Schmitt used that response to do an "aha!" moment, presented his insane conspiracy-theory nonsense (based on the nothing more than a wrong basketball game), called Smith a bunch of names, and accused him of perjury. Schmitt made a complete idiot out of himself. If he had any honor at all, he'd apologize to Smith. He hasn't.
>> That was apparently the line of questioning.
Apparently? You haven't even watched the video, have you?
>>Forget about the basketball game error and the extent Schmitt took it. That is meaningless.
Lol. Why? Because you love Trump, and Schmitt loves Trump? And thus, everyone should pretend Schmitt, a U.S. senator, didn't make a complete ass out of himself in front of the world?
>>And according to CHATgpt, that line of questioning was important.
Important to what? Important to demonstrating that Schmitt didn't bother to actually verify the ridiculous claims and accusations he made?
>>No. I did not hear the entire exchange, but I can recognize when critcs are blowing an unimportant fact out of proportion.
Beautiful. You've been telling me to do my research, when you haven't even bothered to watch the video you've been commenting on this entire time. Just beautiful.
>>The "some question" is exactly that connection. Not about basketball games. Good grief!
Stop digging, Craig, and try actually watching the video so you have some kind of clue of what you're talking about.
>>What lengths some people will go to in order to distract from what is important is amazing.
You can't even tell me what you think Schmitt said or asked that was important, because you haven't watched the exchange.
>>Jack Smith is a dishonest lawyer
How is he dishonest? Explain to me your argument for what makes him dishonest. Give me some examples. Simply upsetting Trump doesn't make someone dishonest.
>>and you are defending him.
How have I defended him? What defense does he require? Schmitt falsely accused him of something. I pointed out that it was a false accusation. That's called defending the truth.
>>My research is CHATgpt's research.
You have yet to provide an example of CHATgpt stating anything contradictory to what Alex and I have said.
>>I don't sit around watching CSPAN every day.
You don't have to. The video is all over YouTube. Have at it.
>>I am not defending or worshipping (your nonsense at play again) on helping corporations. Maybe it is good that government helps corporations to keep people employed or maybe you can find another nit to pick trying to criticize Trump.
You're literally defending socialism right now, out of love for Trump.
>>I merely say that other Presidents did the same kind of help.
No. What Trump is doing, and the volume with which he's doing it, goes well beyond past presidencies.
>>Defending Trump??? Holding up Obama??? I am merely stating the facts.
Dude, you're rationalizing what Trump did by pointing to something Obama did (which was far less interventionist).
>>Your last few paragraphs have to do more than strive to find cute ways to insult me. Insults and name calling signal that one has lost the debate.
Uh Craig... You've been insulting and calling me names since you first subscribed to this website.
>>I do not worship Trump.
"support Trump at all costs."
"What IS true is that Trump critics are not pro America."
>>But I can easily see that his critics are devoid of any constructive criticism- just merely criticism.
Lol. That's because you don't believe ANY criticism of Trump is valid or constructive, because you worship and love the dude.
>>O'Reilly, Victor Davis Hanson, Mark Levin, and more astute well educated republicans agree with me almost 100%.
CHATgpt said,"There is an additional wrinkle: Schmitt subsequently said he stood by his BROADER questioning, arguing that his texts concerned Smith wanting to meet with people connected to the Atlanta prosecution. So the basketball-game error DOESN'T necessarily RESOLVE the SEPARATE question of what the messages ACTUALLY showed. "
This is the fundamental question that went unanswered. Do some research instead of asking me.
Involvement in corporations is a common practice. Remember the bank bailout and the $5.9 billion loan to Ford by Obama? Free markets? Get the other countries to stop ripping us if and we will have free markets.
Right. Support Trump at all costs because democrats and his critics are our REAL enemies within much more than Iran and China. They are immoral and striving to destroy our culture. Do some more research or listen to O'Reilly.
Right again. I want Trump to burn down the Democratic /Socialist/Communist party.
>>CHATgpt said,"There is an additional wrinkle: Schmitt subsequently said he stood by his BROADER questioning, arguing that his texts concerned Smith wanting to meet with people connected to the Atlanta prosecution.
Lol! Who cares what Schmitt later said, in his embarrassing efforts to mitigate his earlier, embarrassing crap-show. Schmitt made a complete ass out of himself in that hearing — for all to see. And your argument is effectively: "No he didn't, because CHATgpt says that Schmitt says he didn't make a complete ass out of himself."
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound with that, Craig? You don't have to embarrass yourself the way he did, just because he's on Team MAGA. Have some self-respect.
>>So the basketball-game error DOESN'T necessarily RESOLVE the SEPARATE question of what the messages ACTUALLY showed. "
Lol. Let's dissect that:
Schmidt concocted an insane, easily disproved conspiracy theory, based entirely on the FALSE premise that Smith was at basketball game (that he wasn't at) in a city (that he wasn't in), which just happens to be the same city in which Fani Willis lives (along with 6.5 million other people). And that false premise was nonsensically derived from texts showing Smith coordinating basketball seats in a different part of the country, at a different game, with people who did not include, nor have anything to do with, Fani Willis...
And YOUR defense is that some question (which you can't tell me), related to the basketball seat-coordination exchange, hasn't been resolved? What are you even talking about??? What question? What hasn't been resolved?
>>This is the fundamental question that went unanswered.
WHAT QUESTION?
>>Do some research instead of asking me.
I've done the research. You haven't. You're incoherent on this, and can't even explain to me your line of thinking.
>>Involvement in corporations is a common practice.
Government equity stakes, and decision power, in dozens of private companies? No, it's absolutely not common practice.
>>Remember the bank bailout and the $5.9 billion loan to Ford by Obama? Free markets?
I was against the automotive bailouts, which, as bad as they were in my view, were a far cry from what Trump is doing. But it's interesting that you're trying to defend Trump by holding up Obama as having the right idea. How can you say you're not a leftist when you're defending yourself with Obama's progressive logic?
>>Get the other countries to stop ripping us if and we will have free markets.
Spoken like a true, socialist, economic illiterate. Bernie Sanders would be proud. Congrats again.
>>Support Trump at all costs because democrats and his critics are our REAL enemies within much more than Iran and China.
You've let politics and the right-wing media break your brain. It's a real tragedy.
>>They are immoral and striving to destroy our culture.
Sorry, but you don't get to worship at the altar of Trump while preaching about morality and the preservation of our culture. At least, you don't get to do it without being deservedly mocked.
>>Do some more research or listen to O'Reilly.
You don't research anything, and O'Reilly would be embarrassed for you if he read this exchange.
>>Right again. I want Trump to burn down the Democratic /Socialist/Communist party.
He's burning down the Republican Party instead. Again, congrats.
Craig is basically admitting he doesn't know what he's talking about, and doesn't know how to form logical arguments, and therefore relies on ChatGPT. He then uses the chatGPT output to support a conclusion that was not stated or implied in the output, and yet tries to claim that because of that output, his conclusions are undeniably true. Can't SMH enough here....
What do you think of the horrifyingly botched attempted execution of Christa Pike? Many death penalty opponents have used the incident as yet another reason to abolish capital punishment altogether.
Personally, I think the DP can be justified in the abstract for the most horrendous crimes. I shed no tears for, say, Ted Bundy, or Timothy McVeigh. Yet, I have seen too many discrepancies in its application over the years, to think it's being used justly in practice.
But I also get really annoyed, to say the least, when anti- DP activists go out of their way to minimize the crimes of people on death row. Pike defenders have focused on how she was only 18 when she murdered Colleen Slemmer in 1995, and how she's "not the same person now". Yet, they usually omit that she was actually convicted of attempted murder of another inmate in 2001, and attempted to escape in 2012.
I am personally able to say, I oppose the death penalty as it is currently being practiced, without seeing death row inmates as merely helpless victims of the state. But too many people fall into the trap of woobifying the condemned, who are mostly terrible people. And I really hate how the actual victims, of the criminals, so often get forgotten in these debates.
If anxiety, anger, denial and wishful thinking around election time is going off-the-charts, then political groups have done their jobs with negative campaigns scaring the hell out of their sides target base.
If you will give me an email, I will forward the CHATgpt answers to my questions since I did have follow up questions to the initial one. The "essentially absurd " comment is mine since the fundamental Schmitt question to Smith went unanswered. Confusing the two teams is hardly worthy of Alex D.'s assessment or your ridicule.
Please tell me the socialism policies Trump promotes. Social Security? Medicare? Medicaid? Higher taxes? If Trump is a populist, I will go for that. What IS true is that Trump critics are not pro America. What solutions do Trump critics have that make sense? The green new deal, windmills instead of fossil fuels, open boarders, no voter ID, a Muslim takeover, abortion to nine months and after delivery, defund police, empty the prisons ,and nonsense ad nauseum are just a few reasons to support Trump at all costs. Who are you promoting? Well, we don't know when Christ Jesus will return, but you seem to think there is someone better than Trump among us. Who is it? Right. Maybe you are just another complainer with no solutions. How boring.
>>If you will give me an email, I will forward the CHATgpt answers to my questions since I did have follow up questions to the initial one.
I'm not sure what you mean, or why you want my email. I plugged in the question you sent me, and the CHATgpt output (which I copied and pasted for you) aligned with what Alex said.
>>The "essentially absurd " comment is mine
I know, but since CHATgpt produced an answer that aligned with Alex's framing, there was no reason for you to have called it "essentially absurd."
>>since the fundamental Schmitt question to Smith went unanswered.
What was the fundamental question that went unanswered?
>>Confusing the two teams is hardly worthy of Alex D.'s assessment or your ridicule.
Lol. Craig, you act as if he's just some dude who confused two teams in casual conversation.
NO. He's a U.S. senator who created an entire, completely nonsensical federal-government conspiracy theory out of it, that he sent out to media-outlets ahead of time, which were complete with hilarious visual aids (during a Senate hearing no less), the false premise of which he used to publicly trash someone's character and accused them of committing perjury. Then he kept angrily doubling down on it, while he was being corrected. It could only have been more embarrassing for him if his pants had fallen down around his ankles while he was doing it.
>>Please tell me the socialism policies Trump promotes.
Taking government stakes in dozens of private companies, massive tariffs, corporate welfare, price controls, $5,000 “dividend” checks, export bans, etc.
>>What IS true is that Trump critics are not pro America.
That might be the stupidest thing you've ever written on this website. Congrats.
>>What solutions do Trump critics have that make sense?
Don't take government stakes in private companies; embrace free market capitalism instead. End the idiotic trade war, and embrace free trade. Knock off the corporate welfare. Knock off the price controls. Knock off the income redistribution. Don't ban exports.
Those are conservative solutions to the problems Trump has created with his socialist policies.
>>are just a few reasons to support Trump at all costs.
Support him at all costs? What you're describing is a cult. Again, congrats.
>>Who are you promoting?
No one. I'm not in public relations.
>>Well, we don't know when Christ Jesus will return,
You apparently think Trump IS Christ.
>>but you seem to think there is someone better than Trump among us.
Are you kidding? I think there is A TON of people that are better than Trump among us.
>>Who is it?
I think most Americans are better than Trump, but if you're talking about specific political leaders, every Republican who's ever competed against him in a GOP primary (with maybe one or two exceptions) is better.
>>Right. Maybe you are just another complainer with no solutions. How boring.
Lol. When Trump sets something good on fire, the obvious solution is to put out the fire. You just want Trump to be able to burn down whatever he wants while you cheer him on. Sorry, but I'm not going to join your cult.
To CHATgpt..."What do Senator Schmitt say that was wrong?". If you think I am a liberal, you merely need to go research my previous posts. Actually, I am from North Carolina and to the right of Jesse Helms. Pro Trump and was a campaign volunteer.
Here's what CHATgpt shows me when I ask that question:
----
Schmitt appeared to make several factual mistakes:
He said Jack Smith had attended an Atlanta Hawks NBA game in Atlanta on February 3, 2024. Smith denied this. The evidence Schmitt presented appears to have referred to an Iowa Hawkeyes women’s basketball game, not the Atlanta Hawks. Smith recalled attending Iowa’s game against Maryland in College Park, Maryland, that day.
The confusion seems to have been between “Hawks” and “Hawkeyes.” Sen. Amy Klobuchar pointed this out during the hearing, noting that Iowa's team is the Hawkeyes.
Schmitt then suggested Smith had perjured himself and connected the supposed Atlanta trip to Fulton County DA Fani Willis. Because the underlying premise about the Atlanta Hawks game was wrong, that accusation was not supported by the information presented at the hearing.
Afterward, Schmitt did not concede the mistake, saying his job was to ask questions and that whether Smith committed perjury would ultimately be for a prosecutor to determine.
There are also older examples of Schmitt making statements that fact-checkers found inaccurate or misleading.
---
So... What, exactly, did Alex write that you believed CHATgpt discounted as "essentially absurd"? Because the output I received from CHATgpt aligned with what Alex said.
As for your ideological leanings, you support Trump no matter what he does, regardless if he's pushing conservative policies or socialist policies (he's done several of both, several in between, and several purely for self-enrichment). In other words, you're not a conservative. You're a "whatever Trump wants" guy. Emotionally, you're a leftist because you believe your feelings are more important than facts.
I would rather be RIGHT than a conservative OR a moron liberal. However, if I am wrong, then so is CHATgpt who I went to to find out what happened. It said the point made by Alex D. was essentially absurd.
I wonder if Alex D. has ever seen a candidate for the Supreme Court be so confounded before a Senate confermation hearing that she could not even begin to define a woman. The same goes for other democrat guest witnesses that come before committees that cannot answer Senator Hawley's question, "Can a man get pregnant?".
Senator Schmitt 's getting the Iowa Hawkeyes team confused with the Atlanta Hawks team did not undermine his basic question and hardly affected any of his future political ambitions.
Unlike you, Alex is a conservative. As he's stated several times in his questions, he finds a lot of progressive sensibilities to be embarrassing.
As for Schmitt: He, a U.S. senator, accused someone of perjury, called that person nasty names, and implied that that person illegally colluded with a county DA on a criminal case... based entirely on the completely false (and idiotically reasoned) accusation that that person had attended a basketball game in the same city the DA lives in (along with 6.5 million other people). And if that wasn't enough, he did it with a nonsensical visual aid held above his smug face.
What "basic question" (or basic competency) was not undermined by that Schmitt-show?
John: I know like me you are a fiscal conservative, so this question is probably right in your wheelhouse. The situation in France seems like a harbinger of things to come in the United States. Decades of deficit spending have finally caught up to them (they last had a budget surplus in 1974), and France is having to cut basic services in education. This has led to violent protests, encouraged by French leftist politicians. The same ingredients seem to exist over on this side of the pond: Low social trust, low trust in the government, yet high expectations for cradle-to-grave government services. When the math ain’t mathin’ anymore, you get rioting in the streets. Is this about to happen in the U.S?
You don't know the meaning of the word"worshipping ". Maybe that word fits your opinion of your thoughts. If you are so great, why are depriving us of your political service? If Trump is making mistakes, where is your podium so that he and the rest of us can see the light?
The thing is that you are just another envious carper of Trump with a small voice who I happened upon because Goldberg was begging for viewers on O'Reilly. I think Trump with his MANY highly intelligent and informed advisors rate a few clicks above your jaundiced opinions.
>>If you are so great, why are depriving us of your political service?
As in running for office? Lol. I'd be a non-starter in either party. They both vilify honest conservatives, and have effectively purged all of them from their ranks.
>>If Trump is making mistakes, where is your podium so that he and the rest of us can see the light?
I do what I can through my writing and broadcasting (and, of course, voting and even the occasional donation), but again: Neither party is interested in honest, principled conservatism. Hopefully it will make a rebound once Trump's gone from the scene, and the personality-cult fizzles out, but who knows?
>>The thing is that you are just another envious carper of Trump
Now that's funny. The "envy" claim always tells me a lot about the person making it.
>> with a small voice who I happened upon because Goldberg was begging for viewers on O'Reilly.
Lol. Dude, if all we cared about was big voice, we'd just tell you exactly what you want to hear, and rake in the big bucks (like those other guys). I'd rather be honest and intellectually consistent with my readers and listeners.
>>I think Trump with his MANY highly intelligent and informed advisors rate a few clicks above your jaundiced opinions.
Oh, I don't doubt that you actually believe that. Lol.
This time I really am not going to waste my time. You are never going to like Trump, and I am never going to fall for your nonsense.
It's very simple, Craig...
When Trump does something I think is correct, I support him on it. When he does something I think his bad, I criticize it.
He's an elected leader who works for us, not the other way around. Worshiping and unconditionally supporting or defending a politician is bad for the country.
OK. I read it. Gag me with a spoon.
I am not defending Schmitt. CHATgpt says Schmitt was concerned about Smith wanting to meet with people connected to the Atlanta prosecution. That was apparently the line of questioning. Forget about the basketball game error and the extent Schmitt took it. That is meaningless. And according to CHATgpt, that line of questioning was important.
No. I did not hear the entire exchange, but I can recognize when critcs are blowing an unimportant fact out of proportion. The "some question" is exactly that connection. Not about basketball games. Good grief! What lengths some people will go to in order to distract from what is important is amazing. Jack Smith is a dishonest lawyer, and you are defending him.
My research is CHATgpt's research. I don't sit around watching CSPAN every day.
I am not defending or worshipping (your nonsense at play again) on helping corporations. Maybe it is good that government helps corporations to keep people employed or maybe you can find another nit to pick trying to criticize Trump. I merely say that other Presidents did the same kind of help. It is all intervention.
It is amazing how you can get off the point. Defending Trump??? Holding up Obama??? I am merely stating the facts.
OK. If other countries did not tariff us and we did not tariff them, that would be a free trade economy. So says CHATgpt.
Your last few paragraphs have to do more than strive to find cute ways to insult me. Insults and name calling signal that one has lost the debate. I do not worship Trump. But I can easily see that his critics are devoid of any constructive criticism- just merely criticism.
Burning down the republican party is a stretch. O'Reilly, Victor Davis Hanson, Mark Levin, and more astute well educated republicans agree with me almost 100%. Only democrats are in lock step with one another.
>>OK. I read it. Gag me with a spoon.
I realize that facts make you nauseous.
>>I am not defending Schmitt.
You've literally been defending him throughout this entire exchange.
>>CHATgpt says Schmitt was concerned about Smith wanting to meet with people connected to the Atlanta prosecution.
Lol. Schmitt asked if Smith had done that, and Smith said no. Question answered.
But then, Schmitt used that response to do an "aha!" moment, presented his insane conspiracy-theory nonsense (based on the nothing more than a wrong basketball game), called Smith a bunch of names, and accused him of perjury. Schmitt made a complete idiot out of himself. If he had any honor at all, he'd apologize to Smith. He hasn't.
>> That was apparently the line of questioning.
Apparently? You haven't even watched the video, have you?
>>Forget about the basketball game error and the extent Schmitt took it. That is meaningless.
Lol. Why? Because you love Trump, and Schmitt loves Trump? And thus, everyone should pretend Schmitt, a U.S. senator, didn't make a complete ass out of himself in front of the world?
>>And according to CHATgpt, that line of questioning was important.
Important to what? Important to demonstrating that Schmitt didn't bother to actually verify the ridiculous claims and accusations he made?
>>No. I did not hear the entire exchange, but I can recognize when critcs are blowing an unimportant fact out of proportion.
Beautiful. You've been telling me to do my research, when you haven't even bothered to watch the video you've been commenting on this entire time. Just beautiful.
>>The "some question" is exactly that connection. Not about basketball games. Good grief!
Stop digging, Craig, and try actually watching the video so you have some kind of clue of what you're talking about.
>>What lengths some people will go to in order to distract from what is important is amazing.
You can't even tell me what you think Schmitt said or asked that was important, because you haven't watched the exchange.
>>Jack Smith is a dishonest lawyer
How is he dishonest? Explain to me your argument for what makes him dishonest. Give me some examples. Simply upsetting Trump doesn't make someone dishonest.
>>and you are defending him.
How have I defended him? What defense does he require? Schmitt falsely accused him of something. I pointed out that it was a false accusation. That's called defending the truth.
>>My research is CHATgpt's research.
You have yet to provide an example of CHATgpt stating anything contradictory to what Alex and I have said.
>>I don't sit around watching CSPAN every day.
You don't have to. The video is all over YouTube. Have at it.
>>I am not defending or worshipping (your nonsense at play again) on helping corporations. Maybe it is good that government helps corporations to keep people employed or maybe you can find another nit to pick trying to criticize Trump.
You're literally defending socialism right now, out of love for Trump.
>>I merely say that other Presidents did the same kind of help.
No. What Trump is doing, and the volume with which he's doing it, goes well beyond past presidencies.
>>Defending Trump??? Holding up Obama??? I am merely stating the facts.
Dude, you're rationalizing what Trump did by pointing to something Obama did (which was far less interventionist).
>>Your last few paragraphs have to do more than strive to find cute ways to insult me. Insults and name calling signal that one has lost the debate.
Uh Craig... You've been insulting and calling me names since you first subscribed to this website.
>>I do not worship Trump.
"support Trump at all costs."
"What IS true is that Trump critics are not pro America."
>>But I can easily see that his critics are devoid of any constructive criticism- just merely criticism.
Lol. That's because you don't believe ANY criticism of Trump is valid or constructive, because you worship and love the dude.
>>O'Reilly, Victor Davis Hanson, Mark Levin, and more astute well educated republicans agree with me almost 100%.
Lol. No they don't.
Good grief man. Get a life. No way I am going to read your tiresome responses.
Translation: "I can't defend any of the ridiculous statements I make. I just enjoy worshipping Trump."
CHATgpt said,"There is an additional wrinkle: Schmitt subsequently said he stood by his BROADER questioning, arguing that his texts concerned Smith wanting to meet with people connected to the Atlanta prosecution. So the basketball-game error DOESN'T necessarily RESOLVE the SEPARATE question of what the messages ACTUALLY showed. "
This is the fundamental question that went unanswered. Do some research instead of asking me.
Involvement in corporations is a common practice. Remember the bank bailout and the $5.9 billion loan to Ford by Obama? Free markets? Get the other countries to stop ripping us if and we will have free markets.
Right. Support Trump at all costs because democrats and his critics are our REAL enemies within much more than Iran and China. They are immoral and striving to destroy our culture. Do some more research or listen to O'Reilly.
Right again. I want Trump to burn down the Democratic /Socialist/Communist party.
>>CHATgpt said,"There is an additional wrinkle: Schmitt subsequently said he stood by his BROADER questioning, arguing that his texts concerned Smith wanting to meet with people connected to the Atlanta prosecution.
Lol! Who cares what Schmitt later said, in his embarrassing efforts to mitigate his earlier, embarrassing crap-show. Schmitt made a complete ass out of himself in that hearing — for all to see. And your argument is effectively: "No he didn't, because CHATgpt says that Schmitt says he didn't make a complete ass out of himself."
Do you realize how ridiculous you sound with that, Craig? You don't have to embarrass yourself the way he did, just because he's on Team MAGA. Have some self-respect.
>>So the basketball-game error DOESN'T necessarily RESOLVE the SEPARATE question of what the messages ACTUALLY showed. "
Lol. Let's dissect that:
Schmidt concocted an insane, easily disproved conspiracy theory, based entirely on the FALSE premise that Smith was at basketball game (that he wasn't at) in a city (that he wasn't in), which just happens to be the same city in which Fani Willis lives (along with 6.5 million other people). And that false premise was nonsensically derived from texts showing Smith coordinating basketball seats in a different part of the country, at a different game, with people who did not include, nor have anything to do with, Fani Willis...
And YOUR defense is that some question (which you can't tell me), related to the basketball seat-coordination exchange, hasn't been resolved? What are you even talking about??? What question? What hasn't been resolved?
>>This is the fundamental question that went unanswered.
WHAT QUESTION?
>>Do some research instead of asking me.
I've done the research. You haven't. You're incoherent on this, and can't even explain to me your line of thinking.
>>Involvement in corporations is a common practice.
Government equity stakes, and decision power, in dozens of private companies? No, it's absolutely not common practice.
>>Remember the bank bailout and the $5.9 billion loan to Ford by Obama? Free markets?
I was against the automotive bailouts, which, as bad as they were in my view, were a far cry from what Trump is doing. But it's interesting that you're trying to defend Trump by holding up Obama as having the right idea. How can you say you're not a leftist when you're defending yourself with Obama's progressive logic?
>>Get the other countries to stop ripping us if and we will have free markets.
Spoken like a true, socialist, economic illiterate. Bernie Sanders would be proud. Congrats again.
>>Support Trump at all costs because democrats and his critics are our REAL enemies within much more than Iran and China.
You've let politics and the right-wing media break your brain. It's a real tragedy.
>>They are immoral and striving to destroy our culture.
Sorry, but you don't get to worship at the altar of Trump while preaching about morality and the preservation of our culture. At least, you don't get to do it without being deservedly mocked.
>>Do some more research or listen to O'Reilly.
You don't research anything, and O'Reilly would be embarrassed for you if he read this exchange.
>>Right again. I want Trump to burn down the Democratic /Socialist/Communist party.
He's burning down the Republican Party instead. Again, congrats.
Craig is basically admitting he doesn't know what he's talking about, and doesn't know how to form logical arguments, and therefore relies on ChatGPT. He then uses the chatGPT output to support a conclusion that was not stated or implied in the output, and yet tries to claim that because of that output, his conclusions are undeniably true. Can't SMH enough here....
Bingo. And this has sadly become a growing trend in the MAGA-verse.
What do you think of the horrifyingly botched attempted execution of Christa Pike? Many death penalty opponents have used the incident as yet another reason to abolish capital punishment altogether.
Personally, I think the DP can be justified in the abstract for the most horrendous crimes. I shed no tears for, say, Ted Bundy, or Timothy McVeigh. Yet, I have seen too many discrepancies in its application over the years, to think it's being used justly in practice.
But I also get really annoyed, to say the least, when anti- DP activists go out of their way to minimize the crimes of people on death row. Pike defenders have focused on how she was only 18 when she murdered Colleen Slemmer in 1995, and how she's "not the same person now". Yet, they usually omit that she was actually convicted of attempted murder of another inmate in 2001, and attempted to escape in 2012.
I am personally able to say, I oppose the death penalty as it is currently being practiced, without seeing death row inmates as merely helpless victims of the state. But too many people fall into the trap of woobifying the condemned, who are mostly terrible people. And I really hate how the actual victims, of the criminals, so often get forgotten in these debates.
If anxiety, anger, denial and wishful thinking around election time is going off-the-charts, then political groups have done their jobs with negative campaigns scaring the hell out of their sides target base.
If you will give me an email, I will forward the CHATgpt answers to my questions since I did have follow up questions to the initial one. The "essentially absurd " comment is mine since the fundamental Schmitt question to Smith went unanswered. Confusing the two teams is hardly worthy of Alex D.'s assessment or your ridicule.
Please tell me the socialism policies Trump promotes. Social Security? Medicare? Medicaid? Higher taxes? If Trump is a populist, I will go for that. What IS true is that Trump critics are not pro America. What solutions do Trump critics have that make sense? The green new deal, windmills instead of fossil fuels, open boarders, no voter ID, a Muslim takeover, abortion to nine months and after delivery, defund police, empty the prisons ,and nonsense ad nauseum are just a few reasons to support Trump at all costs. Who are you promoting? Well, we don't know when Christ Jesus will return, but you seem to think there is someone better than Trump among us. Who is it? Right. Maybe you are just another complainer with no solutions. How boring.
>>If you will give me an email, I will forward the CHATgpt answers to my questions since I did have follow up questions to the initial one.
I'm not sure what you mean, or why you want my email. I plugged in the question you sent me, and the CHATgpt output (which I copied and pasted for you) aligned with what Alex said.
>>The "essentially absurd " comment is mine
I know, but since CHATgpt produced an answer that aligned with Alex's framing, there was no reason for you to have called it "essentially absurd."
>>since the fundamental Schmitt question to Smith went unanswered.
What was the fundamental question that went unanswered?
>>Confusing the two teams is hardly worthy of Alex D.'s assessment or your ridicule.
Lol. Craig, you act as if he's just some dude who confused two teams in casual conversation.
NO. He's a U.S. senator who created an entire, completely nonsensical federal-government conspiracy theory out of it, that he sent out to media-outlets ahead of time, which were complete with hilarious visual aids (during a Senate hearing no less), the false premise of which he used to publicly trash someone's character and accused them of committing perjury. Then he kept angrily doubling down on it, while he was being corrected. It could only have been more embarrassing for him if his pants had fallen down around his ankles while he was doing it.
>>Please tell me the socialism policies Trump promotes.
Taking government stakes in dozens of private companies, massive tariffs, corporate welfare, price controls, $5,000 “dividend” checks, export bans, etc.
>>What IS true is that Trump critics are not pro America.
That might be the stupidest thing you've ever written on this website. Congrats.
>>What solutions do Trump critics have that make sense?
Don't take government stakes in private companies; embrace free market capitalism instead. End the idiotic trade war, and embrace free trade. Knock off the corporate welfare. Knock off the price controls. Knock off the income redistribution. Don't ban exports.
Those are conservative solutions to the problems Trump has created with his socialist policies.
>>are just a few reasons to support Trump at all costs.
Support him at all costs? What you're describing is a cult. Again, congrats.
>>Who are you promoting?
No one. I'm not in public relations.
>>Well, we don't know when Christ Jesus will return,
You apparently think Trump IS Christ.
>>but you seem to think there is someone better than Trump among us.
Are you kidding? I think there is A TON of people that are better than Trump among us.
>>Who is it?
I think most Americans are better than Trump, but if you're talking about specific political leaders, every Republican who's ever competed against him in a GOP primary (with maybe one or two exceptions) is better.
>>Right. Maybe you are just another complainer with no solutions. How boring.
Lol. When Trump sets something good on fire, the obvious solution is to put out the fire. You just want Trump to be able to burn down whatever he wants while you cheer him on. Sorry, but I'm not going to join your cult.
To CHATgpt..."What do Senator Schmitt say that was wrong?". If you think I am a liberal, you merely need to go research my previous posts. Actually, I am from North Carolina and to the right of Jesse Helms. Pro Trump and was a campaign volunteer.
Here's what CHATgpt shows me when I ask that question:
----
Schmitt appeared to make several factual mistakes:
He said Jack Smith had attended an Atlanta Hawks NBA game in Atlanta on February 3, 2024. Smith denied this. The evidence Schmitt presented appears to have referred to an Iowa Hawkeyes women’s basketball game, not the Atlanta Hawks. Smith recalled attending Iowa’s game against Maryland in College Park, Maryland, that day.
The confusion seems to have been between “Hawks” and “Hawkeyes.” Sen. Amy Klobuchar pointed this out during the hearing, noting that Iowa's team is the Hawkeyes.
Schmitt then suggested Smith had perjured himself and connected the supposed Atlanta trip to Fulton County DA Fani Willis. Because the underlying premise about the Atlanta Hawks game was wrong, that accusation was not supported by the information presented at the hearing.
Afterward, Schmitt did not concede the mistake, saying his job was to ask questions and that whether Smith committed perjury would ultimately be for a prosecutor to determine.
There are also older examples of Schmitt making statements that fact-checkers found inaccurate or misleading.
---
So... What, exactly, did Alex write that you believed CHATgpt discounted as "essentially absurd"? Because the output I received from CHATgpt aligned with what Alex said.
As for your ideological leanings, you support Trump no matter what he does, regardless if he's pushing conservative policies or socialist policies (he's done several of both, several in between, and several purely for self-enrichment). In other words, you're not a conservative. You're a "whatever Trump wants" guy. Emotionally, you're a leftist because you believe your feelings are more important than facts.
I would rather be RIGHT than a conservative OR a moron liberal. However, if I am wrong, then so is CHATgpt who I went to to find out what happened. It said the point made by Alex D. was essentially absurd.
>>I would rather be RIGHT than a conservative OR a moron liberal.
You're neither right, nor are you a conservative. Like many on the left, you think your feelings are more important than facts.
>>then so is CHATgpt
Please share what you fed CHATgpt, and what it outputted. I'd like to verify it, through CHATgpt, on my end.
I wonder if Alex D. has ever seen a candidate for the Supreme Court be so confounded before a Senate confermation hearing that she could not even begin to define a woman. The same goes for other democrat guest witnesses that come before committees that cannot answer Senator Hawley's question, "Can a man get pregnant?".
Senator Schmitt 's getting the Iowa Hawkeyes team confused with the Atlanta Hawks team did not undermine his basic question and hardly affected any of his future political ambitions.
Unlike you, Alex is a conservative. As he's stated several times in his questions, he finds a lot of progressive sensibilities to be embarrassing.
As for Schmitt: He, a U.S. senator, accused someone of perjury, called that person nasty names, and implied that that person illegally colluded with a county DA on a criminal case... based entirely on the completely false (and idiotically reasoned) accusation that that person had attended a basketball game in the same city the DA lives in (along with 6.5 million other people). And if that wasn't enough, he did it with a nonsensical visual aid held above his smug face.
What "basic question" (or basic competency) was not undermined by that Schmitt-show?