Barr testifies before the House judiciary

[Loren Pechtel]

LP already addressed that.

LP has not even presented his own evidence, much less yours. Not that anyone expects anything different from either of you.

As usual I'm being asked for evidence that has been previously provided. If it went in one eye and out the other that's not my fault.

 

[barbos]

That is some serious bullshit right there. You have made a specific claim, as did Barr, and as did Loren, about having better statistics.

Nope, that's not what either of us did

Your statistics is not better or worse, it is simply misleading bullshit. That's what all three of us said. Then we pointed out the correct way of presenting the data/statistics. And then we pointed out that this problem have been
discussed many times in the past with all the data cited and presented. Just because you chose to ignore it does not mean it did not happen. Death rate in police custody is essentially the same for blacks and whites. it's just blacks more likely to get into said custody.

Barr is an asshole, does not mean he is always wrong.

 

[Elixir]

My takeaway: Barr is absolutely poised to stand before the nation on November 4 and claim that there is strong evidence of massive voter fraud, that the full power of the DOJ will be brought to bear, that he is prepared to.........
This jowly sycophant has no shame, no moral standards, and if anything is the equal of his boss.

100%.
Unless Barr sees a way to save his own ass at Trump's expense, he will do that in any Biden win scenario, regardless of the margin of victory. It is unlikely that he will see any such exit possibility, given Trump's vindictive nature and the fact that he knows the full extent of Barr's criminal complicity.

 

[KeepTalking]

LP already addressed that.

LP has not even presented his own evidence, much less yours. Not that anyone expects anything different from either of you.

As usual I'm being asked for evidence that has been previously provided. If it went in one eye and out the other that's not my fault.

Then point to where you previously posted it, because it sure as hell wasn't in this thread. Do you imagine that I have participated in every thread you have participated in? You don't get to come into this thread and say, "Oh, I already answered this before, I just won't tell you when or where, or even give you the same answer, just trust me that I answered it and you are wrong." At least not if you want anyone to believe you.

 

[KeepTalking]

That is some serious bullshit right there. You have made a specific claim, as did Barr, and as did Loren, about having better statistics.

Nope, that's not what either of us did

True, that is not exactly what you did, as I was being charitable. Here is what you actually did:

It have been looked at - no racism was found there, otherwise the usual suspects were using that statistics instead of ridiculous one.

That is some garbled fucking nonsense right there.

Your statistics is not better or worse, it is simply misleading bullshit.

Oh is it now? Can you tell me what my statistic even is? Please use direct quotes from this thread.

That's what all three of us said. Then we pointed out the correct way of presenting the data/statistics. And then we pointed out that this problem have been
discussed many times in the past with all the data cited and presented. Just because you chose to ignore it does not mean it did not happen. Death rate in police custody is essentially the same for blacks and whites. it's just blacks more likely to get into said custody.

I have seen it claimed quite often, but I have not seen a statistic to support your claim. As noted, even if you were to provide a statistic, it doesn't mean I am just going to accept it as the unvarnished truth. We will then need to have a discussion over whether your statistic is actually as meaningful as you think it is.

Barr is an asshole, does not mean he is always wrong.

I never said he is always wrong, but I see no reason to trust a statistic that he has not provided.

 

[laughing dog]

Let me be more explicit KeepTalking. They have no idea what is evidence based on their continued dropping of BS rather than evidence. Obviously they believe saying/writing BS is evidence.

It is evidence to suggest that they have no evidence, otherwise they'd produce it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

As usual I'm being asked for evidence that has been previously provided. If it went in one eye and out the other that's not my fault.

Then point to where you previously posted it, because it sure as hell wasn't in this thread. Do you imagine that I have participated in every thread you have participated in? You don't get to come into this thread and say, "Oh, I already answered this before, I just won't tell you when or where, or even give you the same answer, just trust me that I answered it and you are wrong." At least not if you want anyone to believe you.

You have been here a decade. It has become a standard tactic on here to demand the same points be proven repeatedly. I'm not going to waste my time on it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I have seen it claimed quite often, but I have not seen a statistic to support your claim. As noted, even if you were to provide a statistic, it doesn't mean I am just going to accept it as the unvarnished truth. We will then need to have a discussion over whether your statistic is actually as meaningful as you think it is.

We have already pointed out where to look: Police shootings vs crimes by race.

Standard rebuttal: The police are racist, they look harder at blacks and so catch more. Most crime is really committed by whites who aren't caught.

The flaw with this: The clearance rate on murder is high enough that at least with murder there's no question that rebuttal is false.

At this point it goes in one eye and out the other, the next time the issue comes up you (generic) assert there's no evidence.


What's really going on is we have a clear example of the faithful not being able to comprehend a blasphemous argument. Faith doesn't require a deity, in this case it's the church of racism.

 

[barbos]

As usual I'm being asked for evidence that has been previously provided. If it went in one eye and out the other that's not my fault.

Then point to where you previously posted it, because it sure as hell wasn't in this thread. Do you imagine that I have participated in every thread you have participated in? You don't get to come into this thread and say, "Oh, I already answered this before, I just won't tell you when or where, or even give you the same answer, just trust me that I answered it and you are wrong." At least not if you want anyone to believe you.

You have been here a decade. It has become a standard tactic on here to demand the same points be proven repeatedly. I'm not going to waste my time on it.

Yes, and you have been guilty of that too

 

[KeepTalking]

As usual I'm being asked for evidence that has been previously provided. If it went in one eye and out the other that's not my fault.

Then point to where you previously posted it, because it sure as hell wasn't in this thread. Do you imagine that I have participated in every thread you have participated in? You don't get to come into this thread and say, "Oh, I already answered this before, I just won't tell you when or where, or even give you the same answer, just trust me that I answered it and you are wrong." At least not if you want anyone to believe you.

You have been here a decade. It has become a standard tactic on here to demand the same points be proven repeatedly. I'm not going to waste my time on it.

I've been here longer than that, if by "here" you mean the various incarnations of this forum, I have been here close to 3 decades now.

In the time I have been here, I can recall bey few cases where you bothered to substantiate anything you have claimed. If you don't want to waste your time supporting the point you are making in this thread, then I see no reason to waste my time giving your point a second thought. If you think you are being asked for the same data you have provided over and over again, maybe you should save a link to that data, and shove it in our faces whenever we do that. I am sure as shit going to shove it in your face when you fail to support your point with that data.

 

[KeepTalking]

I have seen it claimed quite often, but I have not seen a statistic to support your claim. As noted, even if you were to provide a statistic, it doesn't mean I am just going to accept it as the unvarnished truth. We will then need to have a discussion over whether your statistic is actually as meaningful as you think it is.

We have already pointed out where to look: Police shootings vs crimes by race.

I'm not doing your homework for you. If you think that is where the data that supports your point can be find, then by all means go there and bring it back.

Standard rebuttal: The police are racist, they look harder at blacks and so catch more. Most crime is really committed by whites who aren't caught.

This indicates that you know your data is not the silver bullet you claim it is. It would seem you don't want to produce your data because you don't think you can defend the inadequacies of that data when it is challenged.

The flaw with this: The clearance rate on murder is high enough that at least with murder there's no question that rebuttal is false.

The flaw with that is that it doesn't seem to be a sensible statement. Can you elucidate on what you think the above means?

At this point it goes in one eye and out the other, the next time the issue comes up you (generic) assert there's no evidence.

If you could show I have done that on this issue before, you might have a point. So you might want to pony up the thread where we have already covered this to put me in my place. Otherwise, I will continue to believe that you got nothing.

What's really going on is we have a clear example of the faithful not being able to comprehend a blasphemous argument. Faith doesn't require a deity, in this case it's the church of racism.

I certainly do not have any faith that the usual suspects will ever provide any evidence backing up their claims in this thread, or any other thread. Whatever other faith and blasphemy you are going on about certainly does not pertain to me. To quote the late great Neil Peart, "You can call me faithless".

 

[KeepTalking]

You have been here a decade. It has become a standard tactic on here to demand the same points be proven repeatedly. I'm not going to waste my time on it.

Yes, and you have been guilty of that too

All the more reason one should be prepared to produce those links that have supposedly been offered up time and time again.

 

[Worldtraveller]

LP already addressed that.

LP has not even presented his own evidence, much less yours. Not that anyone expects anything different from either of you.

As usual I'm being asked for evidence that has been previously provided. If it went in one eye and out the other that's not my fault.

Since I don't follow every thread and every post on TFT, can you at least provide a link to the post where you presented the "data"?