Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 65

Thread: Tax Fraud

  1. #41
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    9,696
    I've been a registered Independent for over 30 years because I voted for the candidate rather than the party, and then real Republicans stepped back and let a bunch of White Nationalist, hypocritical bullies take over. I wish all conscientious conservatives would join together and take their party back from the knuckle-dragging goons who have co-opted it, personally. Until they do, I'll be voting a straight Democratic ticket, unless a good Independent candidate surfaces down-ballot.

  2. #42
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    9,696
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    Even if you’re right, I agree with the guy who said “innocent until proven guilty is a pretty good hill to die on.”
    The American Bar Association, National Council of Churches, and a boatload of Kavanaugh's friends and classmates have come out against him. Regardless of whether he took part in the boorish/criminal behavior Ford accused him of, he's shown himself rabidly partisan, unstable, and likely incapable of judicial temperance. Surely Republicans can choose another of the Federalist-approved candidates they have waiting in the wings.

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    5,888
    In the past I have voted for a republican if they were the best choice. We have had some great moderate republican governors. This time we have a strong democratic candidate and a total moron for the republican choice. Both are new since the current one is termed out.

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,556
    Quote Originally Posted by JaneV2.0 View Post
    The American Bar Association, National Council of Churches, and a boatload of Kavanaugh's friends and classmates have come out against him. Regardless of whether he took part in the boorish/criminal behavior Ford accused him of, he's shown himself rabidly partisan, unstable, and likely incapable of judicial temperance. Surely Republicans can choose another of the Federalist-approved candidates they have waiting in the wings.
    Regardless of the size and connections of the lynch mob and regardless of how the various parties performed on television, the principle still holds. A few lost seats seems like a small price to pay for that.

  5. #45
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    9,696
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    Regardless of the size and connections of the lynch mob and regardless of how the various parties performed on television, the principle still holds. A few lost seats seems like a small price to pay for that.
    "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal construct. "Unfit for the office" is quite another thing.
    Note my caveat: "regardless of whether he took part in the boorish/criminal behavior Ford accused him of..."

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,556
    Quote Originally Posted by JaneV2.0 View Post
    "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal construct. "Unfit for the office" is quite another thing.
    Note my caveat: "regardless of whether he took part in the boorish/criminal behavior Ford accused him of..."
    I get the job interview via show trial analogy. If you lack evidence you can always pound the table and threaten the hiring committee. If we’re now reduced to saying based on a few minutes on television that he reacted too angrily to some pretty nasty allegations, I would say that some pretty irascible individuals have served on the court with distinction in the past. I don’t think that should be a disqualifier. I would be concerned that accusations like this become common practice in the future, even at the level of proof that applies to confirmation hearings.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    5,888
    When you have 650 lawyers many from Harvard and Yale saying he does not have the temperament to serve on the highest court in the land that is really significant. I don;t think that has ever happened before. It is one thing to have a conservative versus having a total lunatic. We all knew the judge would be conservative so no big deal. There have to be thousands of good people willing to serve yet Trump has picked a total nut job like himself. He picked him so K can pardon him when the time comes. That is what it comes down too.

  8. #48
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    5,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Teacher Terry View Post
    It is one thing to have a conservative versus having a total lunatic. We all knew the judge would be conservative so no big deal. There have to be thousands of good people willing to serve yet Trump has picked a total nut job like himself.
    Branding is an art, and terribly important when advancing any narrative. Well done!
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  9. #49
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,072
    It’s not that he acted angrily that’s the problem. The oroblem is that he committed perjury right amd left. Someone who doesnt value telling the truth under oath is simoly unqualified to be a judge at any level.

  10. #50
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    9,696
    Quote Originally Posted by LDAHL View Post
    I get the job interview via show trial analogy. If you lack evidence you can always pound the table and threaten the hiring committee. If we’re now reduced to saying based on a few minutes on television that he reacted too angrily to some pretty nasty allegations, I would say that some pretty irascible individuals have served on the court with distinction in the past. I don’t think that should be a disqualifier. I would be concerned that accusations like this become common practice in the future, even at the level of proof that applies to confirmation hearings.
    jp1 reminded me that--mercurial temperament and partisan outrage aside--he's proven himself willing to lie repeatedly (and reportedly suborn perjury from friends) under oath. He's really a fourth-rate kinda guy.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •