I wasn't defending anyone, I was pointing out what I consider an annoying mistake: using a term differently from how it's used and then trying to justify it with personal anecdotes. — Benkei

Thats not what I did. I used a term that certain people have a different way of using, and when it was pointed out to me I acknowledged it and explained what I meant to clarify myself. How you described it, I would call “spin”. Trying to make something sound less savoury than it actually is. Thats dishonest.
Also, after your initial one line post you followed up with direct reference to the judgement I was making. The point being, you spent more time and words on the judgement i was making than the actual use of the term. So you spent more time on something you just claimed you weren’t doing and only a single line on what you claimed you were doing. Im awfully tempted to call that dishonest as well, but Im such a swell guy I try to use the principal of charity where I can so I will chalk it up to you just being a bit confused.
Anyway, you were trying to address something that annoyed you, I was trying to address a specific phenomenon I observed in various interactions between NOS and others in response to @Wolfman. Looks to me like we’ve done that so you are welcome to the last word but Ive had enough.

Reading some of the stuff going on in the Joe Biden thread right now, I'm tempted to become a convert to TDS-realism.

Im not sure what you mean by that. Im going to go have a look now though :wink:

To be fair, one of the worst things about Trump is precisely his ability to capture - like a black hole - what little political energy people have. He's an energy-sink of political discourse. Everything else that matters - that matters even more in many cases - becomes sidelined because people become so apoplectic over Trump that systemic issues, the policy monstrousness of his opponents (i.e Biden), failures of leadership at other levels of government - all fade away or get sucked into this narrowed, monopolized vision of politics where it all ends and begins with Trump.

I see lol
Something in the name perhaps.
I wouldnt classify that as TDS actually, since I would say TDS only applies to OTHERWISE rational people. In the case of Frank A, I actually will go so far as to say he suffers from a real medical condition, likely an emotional disorder. (With the caveat that I have a limited data set from which to make my judgement of course).
I actually feel regret for how I dealt with him initially. That guys got something going on.

See, I can critise what you say by staying on point instead of crying "dishonest" every other sentence. Do you like playing the victim?

You used a term incorrectly, I pointed that out. You whine that's a single sentence reply. I expound. You suggest I was reacting because of TDS or something. I ask what gave you that idea. You then whine and bitch about dishonesty. It's that your idea of an argument?

What's the spin exactly, when I say "You don't get to decide what words mean."? It's not as if you didn't have a chance to reply, was it?

This is a great op-Ed by the WSJ editorial board detailing Schiff’s hypocrisy. The man who tried to impeach the president for stonewalling, crying coverup, is now stonewalling. What is Schiff hiding?

Our sources say that process is now complete for 43 interviews, yet Mr. Schiff is refusing to make them public. The Chairman is also blocking declassification of the other 10. In a letter sent more than a year ago to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Mr. Schiff claimed ownership of the transcripts and insisted that “under no circumstances” could they be shared with “any persons associated with the White House or [President Trump].” This makes declassification impossible, as it bars the White House from its necessary role of checking the transcripts for privileged or other sensitive information.

Mr. Schiff isn’t explaining his new opposition to transparency, though it seems likely he wants to shield promoters of the collusion theory from scrutiny. Among the transcripts he’s blocking are interviews with former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice and former Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power. Their authority was used to “unmask” the names of Trump campaign officials who talked with foreigners who were wiretapped by U.S. intelligence.

We’re told that another blocked interview is with former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates—who in early 2017 used a wild reading of the Logan Act that helped lead to the ouster of President Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn.

Mr. Schiff is also sitting on interview transcripts with Donald Trump Jr., son-in-law Jared Kushner and former Trump campaign advisers Corey Lewandowski, Sam Clovis and Steve Bannon. Is he worried that the transcripts will highlight how little substance there was to his collusion claims? The interviews would also allow the public to compare the early testimony of former FBI and intelligence officials (James Clapper, Andrew McCabe) against what we now know really happened.

Mr. Schiff spent years shouting cover-up only to be exposed for making things up. Now that the evidence is ready for public release, he’s defying the unanimous vote of a bipartisan committee to make them public. What doesn’t Mr. Schiff want America to see?

Schiff’s Secret Transcripts

This is a great op-Ed by the WSJ editorial board detailing Schiff’s hypocrisy. The man who tried to impeach the president for stonewalling, crying coverup, is now stonewalling. What is Schiff hiding? — NOS4A2

Where were you complaining when Trump was stonewalling? Oh wait. Your were making excuses for it. Unitary executive theory!

What does Trump have to hide, hmmm?

I don't think anybody cares about Schiff.

I do. He’s a big player in these hoaxes.

It's water under the bridge. Move on.

Yeah but Schiff was consumed with impeachment when the first whispers of COVID 19 hit our capital.

Ok. Maybe people do care. :razz:

It's water under the bridge. Move on.

No, I think a dangerous and expensive injustice has been perpetrated, and I’d like to see these transcripts with my own eyes.

No, I think a dangerous and expensive injustice has been perpetrated, and I’d like to see these transcripts with my own eyes. — NOS4A2

Well just come to the US and apply for citizenship. Then see if by way of the Freedom of Information Act you can see the transcript with your own eyes.

I think Trump just recently banned you @NOS4A2 :wink:

That much is true.

https://www.libraryofsocialscience.com/ideologies/resources/marvin-ingle-blood-sacrifice-totem/

Heh, Trump re-tweeted a tweet by an account called "Trump & Biden are Rapey".

Trump considers it a compliment? Wouldn't surprise me: "I rape the best women. Nobody rapes women like I do."

He’s a big player in these hoaxes. — NOS4A2

'These hoaxes' being the whole 'deep state conspiracy', purportedly launched by the Democratic National Committee, in collusion with corrupt elements in the FBI and CIA to bring down the democratically-elected President of the United States.

It's the Alt-right counter-narrative, in which Robert Mueller and the FBI are the corrupt elements, and Trump the unimpeachable Stable Genius, harrassed and harried by foes on all side, a world in which Putin and Kim Jong Un are the real allies, and the FBI and CIA are the enemies of the people.

Meanwhile, at The Atlantic, a worthwhile article on Trump Derangement Syndrome which was discussed here recently. This one concerns Trump's now abated enthusiasm for hydroxychloroquine as the Miracle Cure for COVID-19.

We may recall a few short weeks ago that Trump was praising this drug as a 'game changer' over the objections of his scientific and medical advisers. But any criticism of Trump's enthusiasm was portrayed in the Alternative Universe as being an example of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS):

In Townhall, Wayne Allyn Root asserted that the way rank-and-file Democrats... have responded to Trump’s statements on hydroxychloroquine is “suicidal,” while the reaction of at least two governors is “reckless, dangerous, ignorant and delusional.” Why would they respond that way? TDS is the only answer, he declared, adding that “Democrats would rather let Americans die than give Trump a chance to take credit. Some might call that murder, or, certainly, manslaughter.”

At The Hill, Liz Peek shared the judgment that “all” Democrats suffer from TDS. “It’s almost as though Trump’s critics don’t want hydroxychloroquine to work,” she wrote. “It is almost as though they hope this pandemic rolls endlessly forward, depressing the economy and undermining President Trump’s chances of being reelected.”

Representative Ted Budd, a North Carolina Repubican, published an op-ed titled “Trump Derangement Syndrome Becomes a Threat to Public Health,” which cited skepticism of hydroxychloroquine as a prime example.

“Has Trump derangement syndrome killed more people than COVID-19?” a blogger asked, adding, “Many hospitals are denying [hydroxychloroquine] and instead maintaining the standard protocol for acute respiratory distress syndrome, which seems to be a death sentence for COVID patients.”

Even today, Trump has been tweeting about the fact that the 'fake news media's' only interest in reporting COVID-19 deaths is to undermine him.

Interesting.

That's not true. The impeachment proceedings were started on 18 December, well before Covid-19 was known.

You're way off, my friend. The president was impeached on December 18th; the impeachment proceedings (or inquiry) began on September 24th. The WH began receiving intel reports of Covid-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China in late November.

You're right about the distinction between impeachment and impeachment proceedings. Of course it had been going on for some time with the house judiciary committee.

With the WH knowing about it in November, I must be missing something. I can't find in your link that the WH (and does that include Schiff as a result?) knew late November. The first mention of it in Dutch news was in January.

Even so, let's assume Schiff knew some new virus was active in Wuhan on the 18th of December, it was contained to China and the severity was unknown as was the method of spreading as well. The reported cases on January 22 for China was 557 (earliest date I could quickly find). So to say Schiff thought impeachment was more important than the coronavirus is rather misleading, as the coronavirus wasn't a thing on 18 December.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/04/u-s-intel-warned-of-coronavirus-threat-in-november-report.html

This article is one of many from a few weeks ago discussing intelligence reports to the White House in late November 2019. Rep. Schiff, as Chairman of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, was also privy to the same intelligence reports as the White House. Of course, Administration officials have denied this but various press organizations stand by their reporting (because - I've no doubt in my mind - some of the 'unnamed sources' are both White House officials and House (& maybe even Senate) Intelligence Committee staffers.)

So to say Schiff thought impeachment was more important than the coronavirus is rather misleading ... — Benkei

Yes. The intel would have been highly classified at that time so he could not have "acted" on it or "gone public" with it without violating federal law. And any official U.S. government response to a national security threat of any kind in real-time is solely the duty of Executive Branch and the White House. Impeachment was Schiff's duty, a foreign epidemic outbreak was the president's duty; it's patently misleading to claim Schiff prioritized one over the other since only one of these crises was (and is) a responsibilty for the Legistlative Branch.

... the coronavirus wasn't a thing on 18 December.

It was a CLASSIFIED "thing" and not a public "thing" the day tRump was impeached (and apparently for weeks leading up to it).

OK thanks

I don’t use the term TDS because there is no such diagnosis. I prefer anti-Trumpism because it better reflects the ideological aspect of their dogma and fanaticism without making light of mental illness. Though it looks like derangement, I would argue it’s more religious in nature.

I prefer anti-Trumpism — NOS4A2

If I’m remembering right, you often use the phrase “anti-Trump hysteria,” which is no less of a logical fallacy, designed to invalidate any criticism of Trump in the weak minded Trump supporter, than using the term TDS is.

I wouldn’t expect you to be able tell me why or how I’m wrong, given that you take to backbiting and lying about others.