If Trump is responsible for the company he keeps...

[Jim in CT]

can we hold President Biden to the same standard? Or does that standard only apply to non-liberals?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bid...house-f-police

[Pete F.]

Well after what happened in Uvalde and Colorado maybe defunding the police and arming drag queens might be the solution.

Seriously, two unarmed individuals did more to stop a gunman than 376 cops in Uvalde. And neither of those 2 people attacked, detained, or punished innocent people.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Fox News tells Jim to jump, it’s just a question of how high.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Fox News tells Jim to jump, it’s just a question of how high.

the low-IQ effete Maoists tell you to react with a hissy fit, it’s only a question of how idiotic.

What are you afraid would happen, exactly, if you attempted to address the point of the post? If trump
is villified for agreeing to sit with a guy he didn’t know, and who turned out to be a white supremacist…why is this ok? The bidens know who this “guy” is, that’s why they invited him.

A guy who says explicitly that drag shows are good for little kids. how many drag shows did you take your kids to when they were in elementary school Bob? If the answer is “zero”, how come? Were you a bad father? or do even you concede that little kids don’t belong within 100 miles of that weird nonsense?

[Got Stripers]

The only thing idiotic is you believe an x president is sitting down for lunch with people he doesn’t know, but if Trump (pathological liar) and Faux News tells you it’s so it is true

[Pete F.]

Story time: A senator’s daughter attempted suicide. Recent accounts indicate she came out as bisexual. The senator didn’t fly home to be with her. The senator is known for his penchant for lying, his cowardice, and xeno/homo phobias.
We can assume that this teenager’s life has not been easy. Conflicted, scared, ignored. She lives in a home where Christianity rules. She was never exposed to drag queen story hour, drag shows, and certainly-her television viewing was monitored.
Perhaps she attended church on Sundays. Perhaps she believes in a higher power. She was groomed to be a good girl and daughter. The daughter of a senator.
At a certain age, she knew she was different. She liked boys and girls-in that weird sort of way. She didn’t understand it all and was afraid to discuss it with her family because she knew it would displease them.
she had heard her father spew hatred, foment violence, against people that he didn’t consider “normal.” She had no place to turn to. It became overwhelming to the point that she felt it best to harm herself.

The moral of the story? She wasn’t groomed, she wasn’t exposed to those “evil” drag queens. She was born this way. The way “god” made her, proving once again, it isn’t a choice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Slow night huh Jim?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

The only thing idiotic is you believe an x president is sitting down for lunch with people he doesn’t know, but if Trump (pathological liar) and Faux News tells you it’s so it is true

Trump knew kanye west. on the spot, west asked Trump if the other guy could join them.

Biden invited a drag show queen guy who has said specifically we need to defund the police and that drag shows are good for kids. Then there’s the senior nuclear energy guy who’s a ridiculous transvestite and also a kleptomaniac to boot.

And these things don’t especially bother me. It’s just fun pointing out the glaring hypocrisy, and watching dim lefties try to reconcile it.

The mid course there’s al sharpton, the lying bigot whose ring every democrat presidential
candidate must kiss.

But trump had lunch with a bad guy! no democrat has ever gotten within ten feet of a bad guy!

Sure Bob. Sure.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Slow night huh Jim?

spence logs on, spence dodges the point, spence lobs vague insult, spence scurries off.

Repeat.

[wdmso]

Only in Jims world and the Maga universe

people with absolute seriousness suggest

That A drag queen who expressed defund the police

is just like Trump hanging out with a white supremacist and anti semitic..



PS Jim Trumps people knew exactly who Nick fuentes was or did twitter try to suppress that information also

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

the low-IQ effete Maoists tell you to react with a hissy fit, it’s only a question of how idiotic.

What are you afraid would happen, exactly, if you attempted to address the point of the post? If trump
is villified for agreeing to sit with a guy he didn’t know, and who turned out to be a white supremacist…why is this ok? The bidens know who this “guy” is, that’s why they invited him.

A guy who says explicitly that drag shows are good for little kids. how many drag shows did you take your kids to when they were in elementary school Bob? If the answer is “zero”, how come? Were you a bad father? or do even you concede that little kids don’t belong within 100 miles of that weird nonsense?

your a Q follower 100% your way to deep in to the porn and Pedophilia imaginary sex-trafficking ring and drag queens

in an attempt to discredit anyone whom you disagree just like your new bromance with Musk

Elon Musk uses QAnon tactic in criticizing former Twitter safety chiefallying himself with far-right crusaders against a purported epidemic of child sex abuse and implying that the company’s former head of trust and safety had a permissive view of sexual activity by minors.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Only in Jims world and the Maga universe

people with absolute seriousness suggest

That A drag queen who expressed defund the police

is just like Trump hanging out with a white supremacist and anti semitic..



PS Jim Trumps people knew exactly who Nick fuentes was or did twitter try to suppress that information also

You're right, no democrat would EVER associate with anyone who formed negative opinions about people based on the color of their skin. ONLY Republicans do that.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You're right, no democrat would EVER associate with anyone who formed negative opinions about people based on the color of their skin. ONLY Republicans do that.

classic deflection Jim the Al sharpton defense really? you really need a US History lesson


I doubt Al sharpton opinions are solely based based on the color of their skin but based on his treatment AKA by white supremacist and others on him and other blacks because of the color of their skin...

But I get it keep excusing racism and defending your Heros like Trump And other conservatives with your revisionist History and excuses .. you and others insist are in the past


Conservatives love to blame Al Sharpton.. because OMG how dare a Black man criticize White people ! it's really that simple

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

classic deflection Jim the Al sharpton defense really? you really need a US History lesson


I doubt Al sharpton opinions are solely based based on the color of their skin but based on his treatment AKA by white supremacist and others on him and other blacks because of the color of their skin...

But I get it keep excusing racism and defending your Heros like Trump And other conservatives with your revisionist History and excuses .. you and others insist are in the past


Conservatives love to blame Al Sharpton.. because OMG how dare a Black man criticize White people ! it's really that simple

you say i need a history lesson, then you say al
sharpton doesn’t rely on race.

Gotcha. Thanks for the history lesson, professor.

[wdmso]

I found a group you should love

America First Legal

It was founded last year by Stephen Miller. And it’s Casting itself as “the long-awaited answer to the ACLU,” AFL has weaponized the grievance politics embodied by Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement through dozens of federal lawsuits,

Many of these lawsuits are centered on making sure that White people aren’t discriminated against
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

But but Sharpton .. Jim why do you support a party who supports hate in all its forms but then they claim they don’t then do this

Texas attorney general’s office sought state data on transgender Texans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

But but Sharpton .. Jim why do you support a party who supports hate in all its forms but then they claim they don’t then do this

Texas attorney general’s office sought state data on transgender Texans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

But but Sharpton .. Jim why do you support a party who supports hate in all its forms but then they claim they don’t then do this

Texas attorney general’s office sought state data on transgender Texans
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

your response to every single challenge, is to dismiss it as what about ism.

Wayne, has any conservative ever offered a legitimate challenge to any liberal, ever?

instead of stammering and stuttering like a moron (“but, but “ isnt a rebuttal) please tell us why it’s unethical for Trump to associate with a racist but not worth mentioning when Biden does it?

now you’re saying that seeking data on transgender folk is evidence of hate? liberals never, ever ask for data on transgenders?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

your response to every single challenge, is to dismiss it as what about ism.

Wayne, has any conservative ever offered a legitimate challenge to any liberal, ever?

instead of stammering and stuttering like a moron (“but, but “ isnt a rebuttal) please tell us why it’s unethical for Trump to associate with a racist but not worth mentioning when Biden does it?

now you’re saying that seeking data on transgender folk is evidence of hate? liberals never, ever ask for data on transgenders?

now you’re saying that seeking data on transgender folk is evidence of hate?


What do you call it Jim I can’t wait !

Your the reason the GOP is allowed to hate . You support it via silence and excuses….
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by wdmso

now you’re saying that seeking data on transgender folk is evidence of hate?


What do you call it Jim I can’t wait !

Your the reason the GOP is allowed to hate . You support it via silence and excuses….
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim calls it what Faux News tells him to call it.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

now you’re saying that seeking data on transgender folk is evidence of hate?


What do you call it Jim I can’t wait !

Your the reason the GOP is allowed to hate . You support it via silence and excuses….
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how about research? have you ever heard that you need date to do research? how do you do research of any kind, without data.

Every single state had data on people
who tested positive for covid. Does the state therefore hate all those people?

jesus god almighty, why can’t you post what he wants the data for? i work with data all day, every day, does that mean innate the people whose data i’m looking at?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

how about research? have you ever heard that you need date to do research? how do you do research of any kind, without data.

Every single state had data on people
who tested positive for covid. Does the state therefore hate all those people?

jesus god almighty, why can’t you post what he wants the data for? i work with data all day, every day, does that mean innate the people whose data i’m looking at?

Because they won’t say what they want the data for or admit that they asked for it and received it.

Paxton’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

The records obtained by The Post, which document communications among DPS employees, are titled “AG Request Sex Change Data” and “AG data request.” They indicate that Paxton’s office sought the records a month after the state Supreme Court ruled that Paxton and Abbott had overreached in their efforts to investigate families with transgender children for child abuse.

Paxton’s office bypassed the normal channels — DPS’ government relations and general counsel’s offices — and went straight to the driver license division staff in making the request, according to a state employee familiar with it, who said the staff was told that Paxton’s office wanted “numbers” and later would want “a list” of names, as well as “the number of people who had had a legal sex change.”
During the following two months, the employee said, the DPS staff searched its records for changes in the “sex” category of not only driver’s licenses but also state ID cards available from birth, learner’s permits issued to those age 15 and up, commercial licenses, state election certificates, and occupational licenses. The employee spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation for describing internal state discussions.

DPS staff members compiled a list of 16,466 gender changes between June 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022, public records show. In the emails, DPS staff members repeatedly referred to the request as coming from the attorney general’s office as they discussed attempting to narrow the data to include only licenses that had been altered to reflect a court-ordered change in someone’s gender.

DPS staff members did spot checks on the data, examining records that included names of specific individuals, according to records and the state employee familiar with the inquiry. But it was hard to weed out driver’s licenses that had been changed in error, or multiple times, or for reasons other than gender changes.

“It will be very difficult to determine which records had a valid update without a manual review of all supporting documents,” an assistant manager in the DPS driver’s license division wrote in an email to colleagues on July 22.

On Aug. 4, the division chief emailed staff members, “We have expended enough effort on this attempt to provide data. After this run, have them package the data that they have with the high level explanations and close it out.” On Aug. 18, a senior manager emailed to say a data engineer had “provided the data request by the AG’s office (attached).”

Last month, The Post made a request to Paxton’s office for all records the attorney general’s office had directed other state offices to compile related to driver’s licenses in which the sex of the driver was changed, as well as related emails between Paxton’s office and other state agencies.

Officials indicated that no such records existed.

“Why would the Office of the Attorney General have gathered this information?” Assistant Attorney General June Harden wrote in an email to The Post, later adding, “Why do you believe this is the case?”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Because they won’t say what they want the data for or admit that they asked for it and received it.

Paxton’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

The records obtained by The Post, which document communications among DPS employees, are titled “AG Request Sex Change Data” and “AG data request.” They indicate that Paxton’s office sought the records a month after the state Supreme Court ruled that Paxton and Abbott had overreached in their efforts to investigate families with transgender children for child abuse.

Paxton’s office bypassed the normal channels — DPS’ government relations and general counsel’s offices — and went straight to the driver license division staff in making the request, according to a state employee familiar with it, who said the staff was told that Paxton’s office wanted “numbers” and later would want “a list” of names, as well as “the number of people who had had a legal sex change.”
During the following two months, the employee said, the DPS staff searched its records for changes in the “sex” category of not only driver’s licenses but also state ID cards available from birth, learner’s permits issued to those age 15 and up, commercial licenses, state election certificates, and occupational licenses. The employee spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation for describing internal state discussions.

DPS staff members compiled a list of 16,466 gender changes between June 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022, public records show. In the emails, DPS staff members repeatedly referred to the request as coming from the attorney general’s office as they discussed attempting to narrow the data to include only licenses that had been altered to reflect a court-ordered change in someone’s gender.

DPS staff members did spot checks on the data, examining records that included names of specific individuals, according to records and the state employee familiar with the inquiry. But it was hard to weed out driver’s licenses that had been changed in error, or multiple times, or for reasons other than gender changes.

“It will be very difficult to determine which records had a valid update without a manual review of all supporting documents,” an assistant manager in the DPS driver’s license division wrote in an email to colleagues on July 22.

On Aug. 4, the division chief emailed staff members, “We have expended enough effort on this attempt to provide data. After this run, have them package the data that they have with the high level explanations and close it out.” On Aug. 18, a senior manager emailed to say a data engineer had “provided the data request by the AG’s office (attached).”

Last month, The Post made a request to Paxton’s office for all records the attorney general’s office had directed other state offices to compile related to driver’s licenses in which the sex of the driver was changed, as well as related emails between Paxton’s office and other state agencies.

Officials indicated that no such records existed.

“Why would the Office of the Attorney General have gathered this information?” Assistant Attorney General June Harden wrote in an email to The Post, later adding, “Why do you believe this is the case?”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and if the state uses that data to violate the constitutional
rights of those people in any way, THEN you have a point. Until then, you’re making stuff up and fear mongering, because the actual facts don’t suit you.

I’m sure the state of TX plans on executing all those people, Pete.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

how about research? have you ever heard that you need date to do research? how do you do research of any kind, without data.

Every single state had data on people
who tested positive for covid. Does the state therefore hate all those people?

jesus god almighty, why can’t you post what he wants the data for? i work with data all day, every day, does that mean innate the people whose data i’m looking at?

Denial Jim its not a good look

nor does your conspiracies "Every single state had data on people
who tested positive for covid."

Wow you're so deep in it .. positives are reported Jim to the state not names and address that's your fantasy


but your pal paxton filed a lawsuit with a few other red state AGs
Texas AG Paxton to Newsmax: FedEx, UPS Gun Policy 'Suspicious

"The fact that you have FedEx and UPS adopting this unusual policy, this very far-reaching policy in relation to one type of manufacturing — guns — at the same time, is a little suspicious and seems unlikely that they just came up with this idea on their own
The policy, he added, could be an attempt by the Biden administration to limit the second amendment.

"They obviously are very hostile to some of our constitutional rights, the First Amendment being one of them, the Second Amendment the other one," he said. "So, they're doing what they call workarounds.
They are very uncomfortable with freedom as it was put out by our founders and the Second Amendment is one of those freedoms that they feel very hostile towards.


So they imagine the Government is Tracking americans and are outraged..

But they want a list of Transgender People as you claim just for the data

WOW talk about hippocrates

[wdmso]

if the state uses that data to violate the constitutional
rights of those people in any way, THEN you have a point. Until then, you’re making stuff up and fear mongering,

wow jim same logic used to defend those on Jan 6th ?

the Job of any AG is to protect the rights of its citizens. not to let their rights be violated by others 1st before they take action

that seems to be what Paxton would say he is doing with his Fedx investigation

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

and if the state uses that data to violate the constitutional
rights of those people in any way, THEN you have a point. Until then, you’re making stuff up and fear mongering, because the actual facts don’t suit you.

I’m sure the state of TX plans on executing all those people, Pete.

The actual facts are that the Texas AGs office sought this information.
Perhaps you can enlighten us as to what Texas law was broken and needed to be enforced or just how this fell into the purview of the AG?

Why would Paxton’s office deny that they sought this information?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

the Job of any AG is to protect the rights of its citizens. not to let their rights be violated by others 1st before they take action

that seems to be what Paxton would say he is doing with his Fedx investigation

How were anyone's rights violated by requesting this data? Please be specific.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The actual facts are that the Texas AGs office sought this information.
Perhaps you can enlighten us as to what Texas law was broken and needed to be enforced or just how this fell into the purview of the AG?

Why would Paxton’s office deny that they sought this information?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"The actual facts are that the Texas AGs office sought this information."

And another actual fact, is that this in and of itself, is no big deal. Where's the evidence the data will be used to harm anyone?

"Perhaps you can enlighten us as to what Texas law was broken and needed to be enforced"

I would, except there's no reason to believe that a law must be broken for data to be requested. All kinds of data are requested all the time, that doesn't mean a law was broken, does it?

You're trying to criticize someone, for something they haven't done yet.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

How were anyone's rights violated by requesting this data? Please be specific.

The DPS ended up not providing the list but wouldn’t tell the Post which official from Paxton’s office requested the data. His office requested it a month after the state supreme court ruled that he couldn’t investigate families for “child abuse” for providing gender-affirming healthcare to their trans children.

“Paxton’s office bypassed the normal channels — DPS’s government relations and general counsel’s offices — and went straight to the driver license division staff in making the request,” the Post wrote.

When the Post requested other emails from Paxton’s office about his request from DPS, Paxton’s office said no such records existed and Assistant Attorney General June Harden said, “Why would the Office of the Attorney General have gathered this information?” and “Why do you believe this is the case?” implying that they were denying that the office had ever asked for the data.

However, DPS emails repeatedly mention the request as having come from Paxton’s office, even though the DPS didn’t provide the publication any emails sent to them directly from Paxton’s office.

The story is concerning amid Paxton and Gov. Greg Abbott’s (R) larger campaign against trans individuals in the state. Trans advocates worried that Paxton would use the information to further persecute the already vulnerable trans community.

Shelly Skeen, a Dallas-based senior attorney at Lambda Legal, called Paxton’s DPS inquiry “a gross violation of privacy [meant to] target one group of people to fire up their base while transgender people are just trying to live their lives.”

Skeen said that some Texas courts seal or restrict access to gender changes for privacy reasons and to help trans people avoid harassment and violence.

In February, Abbott ordered the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) to investigate for child abuse any parents who allow their trans children to access gender-affirming medical care prescribed by their doctors. Abbott’s order was based on a non-binding opinion issued by the state’s Attorney General Ken Paxton earlier in the month calling gender-affirming health care a form of child abuse.

Paxton’s opinions and Abbott’s order both went against the best practices of pediatrics outlined by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, and the American Psychological Association. These organizations consider gender-affirming medical care as necessary in many cases, noting it reduces mental anguish and suicide risk among trans youth.

Soon after issuing his order, several DFPS employees quit and some state attorneys refused to enforce it. The Texas Supreme Court ruled that neither Abbott nor Paxton had the authority to issue the order. Several families with trans children also filed a lawsuit against Abbott. The presiding district judge in the lawsuit issued a temporary restraining order, effectively stopping DFPS’s investigations while the court considers the order’s legality.

DFPS employees were told that they had to investigate any trans-related cases, whether they thought there was a reason to or not. Furthermore, DFPS employees were instructed “not to discuss these cases in emails, text messages, or any other form of writing that could provide a record of the investigation or ‘be pulled by media if requested,’” the brief added.

This order essentially directed the DFPS to hide any paper trail of their persecution of trans-supportive families. As a result, the press, other government agencies, and even the families being investigated couldn’t examine the department’s work.

Abbott issued his order without following the requirements for creating new departmental rules, as outlined in the state’s Administrative Procedure Act, 16 DFPS employees wrote in a court amicus brief opposing Paxton’s order. If allowed to go into effect, the order would “irreparably harm morale and effectiveness at DFPS, which are already in crisis,” the brief added.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"The actual facts are that the Texas AGs office sought this information."

And another actual fact, is that this in and of itself, is no big deal. Where's the evidence the data will be used to harm anyone?

"Perhaps you can enlighten us as to what Texas law was broken and needed to be enforced"

I would, except there's no reason to believe that a law must be broken for data to be requested. All kinds of data are requested all the time, that doesn't mean a law was broken, does it?

You're trying to criticize someone, for something they haven't done yet.

The actual fact is they denied that they sought and received this information.

This shows consciousness of guilt & a cover up.

You think it’s best to wait?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device