Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

No, it is correct. It is also used in chemistry for double/triple bonded isomers.

Take for instance, cis-fatty-acids and trans-fatty-acids. They have the same chemical formula, but depending on which side of the double bond the other functional groups are on, determines if they are cis or trans.

http://www.chemguide.co.uk/basicorg/isomerism/geometric.html

cis == same side
trans == opposite side

[Descan]

I don't care if he accepts it, it's quite literally the meaning of the prefix, and predates the use in chemistry; it became used in chemistry *because* it already meant "on the same side of." That's why it's used for chemical bonds that are on the same side of the plane. Cisgender is literally just "identifies as same gender as assigned at birth," it's no more an insult than to say someone is straight, gay, black, white, bald, a scientist, orange... It's a description. :V E: (Thanks wierd. <3)

To say calling someone cis is the same as calling someone the n-word or faggot... It's baffling. Really wants to be oppressed, does he, that he'll dive into that little hole, eh?

[Neonivek]

I guess I should laugh... The mass majority creating derogatory terms for everyone, giving themselves the "Positive" names. So now they get a word that isn't "Really special good person" and all of a sudden it is a great insult!

"We are White, the color of purity, the purity of our blood and of our minds"
"We are straight, good, firm, and strong"

I mean I guess Cis-Gendered was changed to something like "Good Person" it might just pass. I mean it can't be a neutral term, that is a horrible word that brings up a long history of White oppression.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Stop trying to start a fight in the thread. This lack of conversational discipline is why we keep running through AmeriPol threads. We have a gender and sexuality thread. Contain your outrage there.

[smjjames]

I can only hope there's shadow diplomacy, where all countries have agreed to just pretend to go along with Trump, and roll back every single thing he did the moment he leaves office.
I don't think Trump is a Russian plant though. I think he was planted by Hitler. He's old enough for that at least.

Well, other countries (our allies at least) seem to be treating it as purely a Trump phemonenon than truly a new American paradigm.

He did promise to take a wrecking ball to international relations.

Putin has offered political asylum to the exhead of the FBI.

I'm guessing it fits his role as 'international IRL troll'

Yeah, an all too obvious troll.

And let's move on from the cis argument thing :p

[ChairmanPoo]

No, don't move on. I was looking forward to the next thread lock.

[Neonivek]

Anyhow Trump is a Rich White Straight Cis-Gendered Male...

I am not sure any of the allegations put against him will really stick.

I mean, he is a Rich White Straight Cis-Gendered Male President, he is allowed to use his presidency for making money.

Even if he loses the case he will get a slap on the hand, maybe a fine, assuming of course the case isn't held in infinity.

And if he is fined, he has many crooked businesses that ensure he doesn't actually have to pay it. For example he could steal from children (something he has actually done)

---

Meanwhile Woman speaks = Hysterical (Actually happened!)

Which is a bigger deal than it sounds.

[ChairmanPoo]

yessss let the hate flow through you...

[Neonivek]

yessss let the hate flow through you...

I dunno... I am just kind of bothered by Trump's Teflon personality. He should be one of the most despicable people in the US even before the Presidency (outside you know... Murderers and stuff)

While Women are put down for acting normally because the US hasn't accepted women in commanding roles even today... and I am not even referring to Hillary.

And just a few days ago (and by that I mean yesterday) I was smacked in the head with how far the US is from having genuine women presidents.

All the while Austerity is soo dang potent... People put WAAAAY too much importance on money. Only two presidents in the entire history of the USA weren't rich.

We don't need a victim card, but goodness do people need to stop victimizing people.

[sluissa]

Just a reminder, presidents can't be charged with crimes for anything that happens while they're in office, nor can they be charged with a crime that occurred before they were elected while they are in office.

At this point the ONLY thing that could happen is impeachment and removal from office. If we find out something illegal happened before he was elected, that could be brought up after he's no longer president, it's the office that protects him at the moment and the fact that the only people able to do anything about him are majority on the same baseball team as him.

Once again, that's assuming something occurred that would fit impeachment rules which are strict, but worded just loosely enough to give plenty of room for consideration of things that have happened without actually being 'yep, no doubt, he did something that this describes.'

[misko27]

Though that doesn't mean the political winds can't change.

Although the way things have set up, they are less and less likely to. Saw an op-ed by a National Review (so a conservative) guest-writer on Politico (I'll dig it up if anyone wants it) arguing that Republicans are becoming more stuck-to-and-with Trump (and him to them), not less. They tethered themselves to Donald Trump in order to enact their agenda and lean an apolitical President in their direction on policy (and protect them from their base), while Trump, endlessly wracked by scandal and intrigue, relies ever more heavily on Republicans to be his defenders. It's almost a mutual relationship; certainly not healthy, but the idea that Trump would come in and make big beautiful bipartisan (b)infrastructure bills and such that would rally Congress around him is pretty much dead, and given how much Republicans have supported Trump through already, it'll take a genuinely (although hopefully not literally) nuclear scandal to force them to divest (otherwise it forces an unpleasant question: "Why did we agree to this?"). And since Trump can't stop worrying about the investigation, he'll remain stuck with them, and them to him.

On an unrelated note, for some reason, I am reminded of the fact that a surprising number of politicians guest-write on Politico. I remember Mitch McConnell writing an op-ed about Neil Gorsuch, followed by Chuck Schumer a few days later with the opposite argument.

[Neonivek]

Just a reminder, presidents can't be charged with crimes for anything that happens while they're in office

I thought that only applies to things he does presidentially.

so if he, for example, murdered someone in cold blood...

[nenjin]

Seriously though, who the fuck is actually for chilling relations with Cuba again, other than geriatric refugees whose oppressor hasn't been politically relevant for years now. Who is Trump trying to make happy with this? Or is he just playing Russian roulette with each of our diplomatic ties?

Sometimes I think all this dumb shit is a misguided attempt to build a "legacy." Only it'll be a legacy smeared in shit because the man doesn't think any further than having his name on something.

[Frumple]

Just a reminder, presidents can't be charged with crimes for anything that happens while they're in office

I thought that only applies to things he does presidentially.

so if he, for example, murdered someone in cold blood...

Iiii'llll say it again. We. Don't. Actually. Know. That.

To stop directing a statement directly a neo or slu, a quick overview, to summarize stuff that's very, very easy to find. There are exactly three cases specifically addressing presidential immunity that have come before SCOTUS, as near as I can tell. Mississippi v. Johnson. Where it was ruled only one kind of presidential action is exempt from being sued. It was many things, but what it wasn't was a criminal case. Then there was Nixon v. Fitzgerald. Which explicitly ruled that the president was not immune to criminal charges, only liability for civil damages, and again, only when in pursuit of discretionary presidential actions. The latest was Clinton v. Jones. In which the SCOTUS was very explicit that civil lawsuits filed for acts previous to office and ones not accrued by action made during function of office, that did not defensibly impact the president's ability to perform the duties of office, still have weight.

The summation is that presidential power protects you from civil suits brought about because of exactly one sort of presidential action (discretionary). And that's it. All. Nothing else.

Civil suits from before presidency, good. Ones brought against actions having nothing to do with the execution of presidential duties (and goddamn, has trump been trying to set himself up for that one), in the clear. Anything having to do with criminal charges, for any reason and by anything the president does in the pursuit of anything? We don't know. It hasn't been ruled on. It hasn't been tested.

If the times are sufficiently fun, we get to find out somewhere in the next few years.

E: Okay, wow. I'm just going to spoiler this because I seriously can't be arsed to format this thing, but let me share some of my quick notes from some early morning checking into a previous observation. Also note: Trump? Reported as >25 million in BlackRock. BlackRock CEO? Was (still is?) on presidential business advisory council.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Nam, tracked
source
Vietjet
3.58b CFM International: Connection, CFMI->GEA->GE->BlackRock
1b GEA: Connection, GEA->GE->BlackRock
180m Honeywall:

Phu Cuong Group
2b GE: Connection -> BlackRock

Tin Tanh Group
Only reported, 3b Roberts Group (Is under Morgan Stanley): Morgan Stanley->BlackRock

FPT
United Parcel Service:

PetroVietname
600m Unmentioned:

VNG
? Nasdaq:

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/us-companies-sign-billions-in-deals-with-vietnam-20170531-01352
Catapiller + Phu Thai Cat
Undisclosed, unknown, management tech for >100 generators:
650 Hilton Worldwide: BlackRock

See, before? I had noticed a connection, but, y'know, expected that I was just seeing a one-off thing or somethin'. Now? Now, every single fucking thing I've checked about that nam deal has been connected to at least BlackRock -- and by extension trump and the trump presidency. I kinda' want to finish checking as much of this shit as I can find, and look into the other stuff that's been mentioned in the news, but holy shit this is looking increasingly skeevy as all goddamn.
E2: Okay, let me just add another spoiler, update of the last one with, like. Another 10 minutes of checking in:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Nam, tracked
http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Deals/Vietnam-investing-billions-in-US-equipment-and-services
Vietjet
3.58b CFM International: Connection, CFMI->GEA->GE->BlackRock
1b GEA: Connection, GEA->GE->BlackRock
180m Honeywall: BlackRock

Phu Cuong Group
2b GE: Connection -> BlackRock

Tin Tanh Group
Only reported, 3b Roberts Group (Is under Morgan Stanley): Morgan Stanley->BlackRock

FPT
United Parcel Service: BlackGoddamnRock

PetroVietname
600m Unmentioned:

VNG
? Nasdaq: BlackRock

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/us-companies-sign-billions-in-deals-with-vietnam-20170531-01352
Catapiller + Phu Thai Cat
Undisclosed, unknown, management tech for >100 generators: Catapiller: Blackrock
650 Hilton Worldwide: BlackRock

Every. Every. Single. Goddamn. Company. I can find mention of that nam deal going to. Has major investments in it by blackrock. What the living hell.

[smjjames]

The fact that Trump has conflicts of interests WAY up the wazoo isn't surprising. What seems surprising is more people aren't making a fuss over this one.

Seriously though, who the fuck is actually for chilling relations with Cuba again, other than geriatric refugees whose oppressor hasn't been politically relevant for years now. Who is Trump trying to make happy with this? Or is he just playing Russian roulette with each of our diplomatic ties?

Sometimes I think all this dumb shit is a misguided attempt to build a "legacy." Only it'll be a legacy smeared in shit because the man doesn't think any further than having his name on something.

Plus the politicians who are descendants of said refugees and/or have said refugees as part of their consistuency. Plus probably a lot of Republicans who still think the Cold War is still going on. [ur=http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/15/marco-rubio-donald-trump-cuba-plan-239597]Though word is that Marco Rubio is the one driving the whole thing[/url].

Seems more of a 'Lets undo everything Obama did!!!1!!1!!!11!1' than anything else to me, since you know, the previous strategy wasn't working.