ChiGoose

LFMAO Trump did a socialism Intel Agrees to Sell U.S. a 10% Stake in Its Business Government starting to take ownership of private companies. One would think the MAGA crowd is gonna be upset with this. Unless, of course, they just assume anything Dear Leader does is good.

I don’t understand what they were thinking with the redesign. Cracker Barrel was an iconic brand and it stood apart from others in the market with a kitschy appeal. The rebrand makes them seem bland. What draws you to them over the competition when they all look basically the same? That being said, I have no idea why the redesign is being called “woke.” It seems to follow in the pivot to that sleeker modern style that we’ve already seen from brands like Taco Bell.

If the DC deployment has solved crime in DC, then why would they need to start arming the guard now? National Guard members on DC streets for Trump’s crackdown will soon be armed, Pentagon says It doesn’t seem to make sense unless fighting crime wasn’t the purpose here…

They're eating the cracker! They're eating the barrel!

They really don’t think things through, do they?

We don’t have hard numbers at this time, but you can make an estimate from what is known. Reporting from previous deployments estimate the cost at $530 per soldier per day. This is line with previous statements from the DC National Guard estimating the cost of deploying 5,000 troops per day at $2.65 million. While there weren’t 5,000 DC National Guard troops deployed, hundreds have been deployed. Additionally, hundreds of soldiers from the national guards of several states have been sent in (which are probably more expensive given travel and housing requirements). I’ve seen estimates as high at ~2,000 national guard troops activated, but even if you want to say it’s half that, it would be half a million dollars per day, or $180 million per year to sustain this deployment. And that doesn’t factor in the costs of other federal agents (ICE, HSI, FBI, etc) who have been reassigned to assist. So you’re raising you hand saying you’ll help pay for hundreds of millions of dollars per year to support permanent national guard deployment in DC?

Totally fair about the actual cost. Until we get hard numbers, it’s going to be an estimate. But the logistics and material behind taking people from plainclothes day jobs, getting them equipped, organizing and deploying them can’t be cheap. Do they get stipends or extra pay when they are activated? Even if it’s half of that estimate, it’s still prohibitively expensive for a long term solution. NG is supposed to be for short term deployments, like disaster response. More about piling up sandbags and providing logistical support than patrolling and crime enforcement. A couple million dollar price tag for immediate help in the wake of a hurricane seems more justifiable than the tens/hundreds of millions for permanent deployment would cost

Man, you’re just spiraling at this point, huh? Sure, I have ideas on how to combat crime but they aren’t relevant to whether or not the DC deployment is effective or even for the stated purposes. Even though you are out here defending the deployment, you still can’t answer basic questions about it so you need to grasp for any distraction. ”hurr durr. He lives in Chicago. Hurr durr.” Pathetic.

Well now you’re gonna get the poor guy excited For the low, low price of $350 million+ annually per city, we can solve crime across the nation

Aww, poor guy is triggered We’re talking about what’s happening right now, kiddo. You’re attempts of whataboutism are as pathetic as your inability to answer basic questions about the plan you so ardently support.

If this is such a great solution, why would DC do anything to change it? It’s costing taxpayers over $1 million per day, so if the plan is to wait until DC takes over, why would they decide to spend $365 million per year when you and I get to pay for them to have it for free?

What’s your plan, keep the deployment permanent? How much is that going to cost taxpayers?

If you read through the thread, they point out that they don’t care about those people. The purpose isn’t to fight crime, it’s to fight “crime.”

My wife had four miscarriages before getting the vaccine. After that, one miscarriage and one successful pregnancy. According to MAGA logic, the vaccine reduced her miscarriage rate by 75%!!!

Louisiana is deploying their national guard to DC even though many cities in Louisiana have higher crime rates than DC. If the troop deployment is about crime, why is Louisiana sending its troops to DC instead of New Orleans, Baton Rouge, or Shreveport? If the troop deployment is about crime, why aren't residents of Louisiana rising up and demanding the troops be deployed in their state instead of being sent halfway across the country?

You're so close to getting it. You can do it!

Typical MAGA talking point: utterly false. "But in neighborhoods that experience some of the city’s highest rates of gun violence, residents say they haven’t seen the same presence. Monday afternoon the St. Elizabeths campus in Southeast, two shootings happened within 90 minutes — just a block apart on Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Neighbors declined to speak on camera but told us they haven’t noticed any increased federal patrols or police since the President announced plans to bolster law enforcement in the District. Moving just North near 2200 Minnesota Ave., Advisory Neighborhood Tom Donahue echoed that sentiment. “There is no presence,” Donahue said. “Our murders are up in our ANC by three.” “What we are seeing them focus on are areas that don’t really have a lot of crime,” one of the Ward 8 ANCs Andrea Davis added." "“We’ve actually seen an increased MPD presence in our neighborhood over the last several weeks, before any discussion of the federal takeover,” Dorn said. " Source: Residents in DC's high-crime areas say federal police surge has left them out If the purpose of deploying the troops is to free up local police, how come the local police increased their presence in high-crime areas only before the deployment was announced and have not increased their presence since the deployment?

Operation Warpspeed was great. He did a really good job with that. It saved a lot of lives. If the purpose of deploying troops to DC was to prevent crime, why didn't the deploy to the city with the highest crime rate? If the purpose of deploying troops to DC was to prevent crime, why didn't they focus deployment to the areas of DC with the highest crime? If the purpose of deploying troops to DC was to prevent crime, why did Jeanne Pirro, the new US Attorney for DC say it was not to prevent crime? If the purpose of deploying troops to DC was to prevent crime, what exactly are the troops supposed to do since they do not have authority to arrest people? Are they supposed to just patrol the entire city forever? I think the TDS is coming from inside the house, buddy.

This may come as a shock to you, but I don't actually control Chicago. Also, wouldn't you expect someone who lives in a high crime area to have more knowledge about crime? Why would you expect someone who lives in a low-crime area to understand crime? Do you ever think before you type? See? This guy gets it.

At least you’re being honest that the project is authoritarianism. The rest are either lying or actually stupid.

You gotta love it when they get triggered and rush in to prove you right.

This whole DC thing presents a good example of the intellectual bankruptcy of the MAGA movement. The claim is that the Feds are moving into DC because the crime is so bad. If one wanted to evaluate this plan, they would ask, "Is DC the most dangerous city in the US?" in order to determine if the action is justified. The answer is a clear no. Not only is DC not the most dangerous city, the violent crime rate has declined to a 30 year low. If one was willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, they could say "well, the Feds can't deploy in other cities like they can in DC. Maybe this can prove to be the a model for supporting local law enforcement and other cities will see this and ask for assistance." If that was the case, one would expect to see the Fed deployments to focus on the areas of DC with high crime rates, patrolling the streets in dangerous neighborhoods to deter crime, allowing the local police force to focus on bringing criminals to justice. The deployment would be focused on getting criminals into custody. But the deployment has mostly ignored the dangerous areas in favor of wealthy and high profile areas like Georgetown and the Federal Mall. And they are arresting people without criminal records. Those they do arrest often face trumped up charges. A guy who throws a sandwich at a cop is arrested and charged with several crimes (Say what you will about a cop being hurt by bread, you don't throw things at cop if you don't want to be arrested), but then the feds later bring in a camera crew to record themselves breaking into his home to charge him with additional crimes, something they could have done with paperwork. They wanted the theatrics. So if they aren't going into the most dangerous cities, and they aren't focusing on people with criminal records, and they aren't patrolling high crime areas, and they are using their actions for theatrics, what the hell are they doing there? You can break the MAGA understanding of this into three buckets: The Ignorant: Most people don't follow news closely. They see the Feds are coming in to combat crime and assume that is the truth The Stupid: People who follow politics closely, know the Feds are focusing more on high visibility spaces instead of the high crime areas and somehow believe this is effective The Authoritarian: People who know this isn't about stopping crime in the traditional sense, but punishing those who they view as equal to criminals simply for disagreeing or opposing their ideology. When they say they are fighting crime, they mean fighting libs. You cannot support this action as fighting crime unless you believe not being MAGA is the equivalent to a crime.

"[Their] rhetoric is explicitly meant to divide citizens into two classes: those of the chosen nation, who are lawful by nature, and those who are not, who are inherently lawless."

Greg Olsen is solid as a commentator. Walking through the facemask penalty was better than we usually get from the booth

Well, if all of the Bills starters and most of the backups get knocked out for the season, I’m going to be a bit concerned