View Full Version : Why NOT to vote Republican
Pages :
1
[
2]
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Our 19th Century split would have been peaceful as well if the north hadn't invaded the south.
https://www.nps.gov/people/george-s-james.htm
https://www.nps.gov/people/george-s-james.htm
Yes, Fort Sumter was an unfinished fort when Federal troops occupied it just weeks after South Carolina seceded. It probably had to do with Charleston Harbor being an important commerce point for the state and could be effectively shut down by cannon fire from Sumter.
Why do you think Democratic Senators have been asking that question during confirmation hearings for the past 30 years? It's because they all know it didn't meet constitutional muster. What you should be asking is why the liberal justices, knowing Roe was damaged, didn't concur with the majority.
I think you should put a little more effort into your 'fathoming'.
That is your opinion. For over 50 years, and other times trying to overturn Roe, did not meet muster. It is the right trying to enforce their "christian" beliefs on others. There NEEDS to be a separation from church and state. This whole thing is total B.S. The trump justices LIED during questioning. They should be taken off the court IMO. Even some of the republicans who questioned them are SHOCKED that they went against their responses that they would not overturn. It is a travesty!
That is your opinion.
It was Ruth Bader Ginsburg's opinion too. She believed it should have been decided under the equal protection clause rather than as a privacy right as it would be a little less shaky. The current Supreme Court have now given the legislature a means to make it right if they're actually interested in doing so. I would think you'd celebrate that.
It is the right trying to enforce their "christian" beliefs on others. I know that plays well on cable news and daytime talk shows but I think the right is more interested in insisting that constitutional rights actually be referenced in the constitution and not allowing the court to be used as a grantor of rights when it's the responsibility of Congress to do so through time tested processes.
frugal-one
7-9-22, 10:37pm
If anyone is/was my hero it was RBG and SHE is the one who got Roe through, as well as, many other needed laws. And, yes it is christian beliefs, more specifically Catholic beliefs…that are being forced through. I think more supreme court justices should be put in place since trump abandoned Garland and pushed the handmaiden through in a few weeks. Kavanaugh (spell?) was questionable too. It would make for a more equitable division of beliefs. Or just get rid of the lying bast…ds!
Why do you think Democratic Senators have been asking that question during confirmation hearings for the past 30 years? It's because they all know it didn't meet constitutional muster. What you should be asking is why the liberal justices, knowing Roe was damaged, didn't concur with the majority.
So you're good with perjury as long as it's not perjury about a damn blowjob. Got it. Thanks for clarifying your priorities.
If anyone is/was my hero it was RBG and SHE is the one who got Roe through, as well as, many other needed laws. And, yes it is christian beliefs, more specifically Catholic beliefs…that are being forced through. I think more supreme court justices should be put in place since trump abandoned Garland and pushed the handmaiden through in a few weeks. Kavanaugh (spell?) was questionable too. It would make for a more equitable division of beliefs. Or just get rid of the lying bast…ds!
Now you’re just making stuff up. RBG was famously critical of the legal reasoning behind Roe. It’s a matter of record. She was appointed to the SCOTUS many years after the decision, so even if she had been willing to put her name to that hot mess of emanations and penumbrae, she wouldn’t have been in a position to “get it through”.
frugal-one
7-10-22, 10:57am
I stand corrected. RBG was a proponent of women’s rights and here are her words about Roe:
“My criticism of Roe is that it seemed to have stopped the momentum on the side of change,” Ginsburg said. She would’ve preferred that abortion rights be secured more gradually, in a process that included state legislatures and the courts, she added. Ginsburg also was troubled that the focus on Roe was on a right to privacy, rather than women’s rights.
“Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”
gimmethesimplelife
7-10-22, 11:04am
I don’t think it’s in this country’s best interest to split and don’t believe it will happen.I can respect your take, TT. I just wonder how many Uvaldes, Derek Chauvins, Supreme Court decision overturns, and January 6ths can this nation endure, especially in this stressful, unstable Putin as madman/inflation as enemy environment? But if there were a way to avoid splitting, the above issues would need to be addressed down to their DNA.
Rob
So you're good with perjury as long as it's not perjury about a damn blowjob.
Expressing an opinion which is subject to change is not perjury.
Teacher Terry
7-10-22, 12:49pm
Expressing an opinion which is subject to change is not perjury.
They didn’t change their minds in such a short time. They deliberately lied to get confirmation. It’s really disgusting but no one has integrity anymore.
They didn’t change their minds in such a short time. They deliberately lied to get confirmation. It’s really disgusting but no one has integrity anymore.
I think it had more to do with a case brought before the court which required a ruling based upon actual constitutional principles and being forced to abandon suspect rulings in defense of proper jurisprudence.
When you read the actual quotes, it seems that nominees (regardless of which president is doing the nominating) have learned to couch answers to specific partisan questions in the most ambiguous way possible. Look at the most recent appointee’s refusal to define what a woman is. I think it’s possibly the only reasonable response to opinion-shopping politicians.
frugal-one
7-10-22, 2:48pm
When Kavanaugh was asked about abortion in his confirmation hearing….
“It’s settled as precedent of the Supreme Court,” Kavanaugh said. “One of the important things to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times.”
p
When Kavanaugh was asked about abortion in his confirmation hearing….
“It’s settled as precedent of the Supreme Court,” Kavanaugh said. “One of the important things to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times.”
p
Kavanaugh's lack of character might have been reaffirmed many times if Trump's FBI had bothered to check out the thousands of tips they got to that effect.
frugal-one
7-29-22, 9:53am
More news showing republican lack of concern for veterans voting down things they previously were in favor of (ie burn pits).
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/blindsided-veterans-erupt-fury-senate-republicans-suddenly-tank-pact-a-rcna40516
Moronic trump back in the news with Saudi-backed golf on his course and disparaging the PGA.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/politics/trump-liv-golf-tournament-saudi-arabia/index.html
I am sure if I looked I would find more disgusting republican news.
More news showing republican lack of concern for veterans voting down things they previously were in favor of (ie burn pits).
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/blindsided-veterans-erupt-fury-senate-republicans-suddenly-tank-pact-a-rcna40516
Moronic trump back in the news with Saudi-backed golf on his course and disparaging the PGA.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/politics/trump-liv-golf-tournament-saudi-arabia/index.html
I am sure if I looked I would find more disgusting republican news.
That vote was pure vindictiveness. They were upset because of the possible upcoming reconciliation. Ditto with their derailing of the Chips Bill. And a birth control bill, among others.
And, in other news, more January 6th texts are missing: "Text messages on the phones of former President Trump’s acting Homeland Security Secretary Chard Wolf and acting Deputy Secretary Ken Cuccinelli were lost in a “reset” of government phones, The Washington Post reports." (Tickle the Wire) Convenient.
iris lilies
7-29-22, 10:28am
They didn’t change their minds in such a short time. They deliberately lied to get confirmation. It’s really disgusting but no one has integrity anymore.
i’m going to ask you, do you really want supreme court nominees deciding their ruling before doing the important work of hearing cases evaluating evidence and processes, and deliberating with peers? I mean if we’re going to do that then why bother to have them even deliberate?
I do not want that. And Supreme Court justices are capable of changing their mind even if actually on the Supreme Court.
We all change our mind on issues and that is a GOOD thing. Remember how that guy Barack Obama and the presidential nominee Hillary Clinton changed their minds about gay marriage? If I voted them in based on their original idea of gay marriage, do I call them liars later when they change their mind?
frugal-one
7-29-22, 11:47am
IL.. They lied. It was a VERY short time. The rulings were already decided previously. Look at #264 above.
frugal-one
7-29-22, 11:49am
I am going to vote today. You can bet it will not be for the lying republicans. And, yes, they are lying “bleeps” in my state.
littlebittybobby
7-29-22, 12:01pm
Okay---let's get one thing clarified---I, will be voting for ALL Republican candidates, except for several Libertarians. I will NOT be voting for ANY candidate who is affiliated with that Democratic Party. Hope that helps you some. 4639
I am going to vote today. You can bet it will not be for the lying republicans. And, yes, they are lying “bleeps” in my state.
So you won’t be voting in the Republican primary? That’s probably best for all concerned.
frugal-one
7-29-22, 2:24pm
So you won’t be voting in the Republican primary? That’s probably best for all concerned.
As stated above, I voted today….primary… not just republican. Can’t believe you’re voting for traitor Ron Johnson. Your head is in the sand. Seems mostly old people that I know are voting republican. They only watch fox news and believe the fodder they are being fed.
frugal-one
7-29-22, 2:25pm
Okay---let's get one thing clarified---I, will be voting for ALL Republican candidates, except for several Libertarians. I will NOT be voting for ANY candidate who is affiliated with that Democratic Party. Hope that helps you some. 4639
ridiculous for all reasons stated above. Quit watching Fox news.
As stated above, I voted today….primary… not just republican. Can’t believe you’re voting for traitor Ron Johnson. Your head is in the sand. Seems mostly old people that I know are voting republican. They only watch fox news and believe the fodder they are being fed.
What’s this fixation people have with Fox News? I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that half their viewership was hatewatchers from the number of times they bring it up. It seems to be a required element of the cartoonish stereotype construction process.
littlebittybobby
7-29-22, 4:26pm
Okay---I'm just sitting here, wondering how I can quit something I'm NOT doing? I just never watch Fox News. Einstein didn't watch Fox, so why should I? Ha--gotcha. See? But yeah---Mr Dahl may be right---this accusation of "watching Fox News" may be projection by the accuser, of their own behaviors. I have noticed libs make a LOT of assumptions, upon which to justify their beliefs. Plus, do a LOT of name-calling and lashing out at people who don't accept their ideology. See? Hope that helps you some.4643
iris lilies
7-29-22, 5:05pm
This is always frugal-one’s advice, stop listening to Fox News. I got that several times from her and it’s hilarious because for most of the years of my adult life I haven’t even had a mechanism to watch Fox News because we didn’t have cable TV. Now in Hermann we have cable TV but I just don’t watch it. I don’t watch anything on the television set Other than occasional binges of HGTV And I always regret that.
These days all media are biased in support of their preferred demographic. I think anyone with an interest in politics needs to consume a little from each if they really want to be well informed. Anyone who constantly berates one, or even worse the consumers of one, is probably too partisan to be worthy of my concern, I'll reserve that for those who get their news from late night comedy shows.
frugal-one
7-29-22, 9:55pm
Who of right mind, would strictly get their news from a comedy show? Ever hear of parody, Alan?
littlebobby... trump was the massive name caller, if you remember ... and a few of his current minions have followed suit.
I cannot rationalize people voting republican with all that has happened. I have voted republican in the past when there was such a thing. I don't believe the current party is of that ilk. Enough said.
Who of right mind, would strictly get their news from a comedy show? Ever hear of parody, Alan?
Your posts remind me of a poster back in the GWB days who got all her political news from Jon Stewart. These days she probably gets it from Rachel Maddow. Same/Same, oddly enough.
frugal-one
7-29-22, 10:28pm
Have you ever watched Rachel Maddow? Your comment above...."I think anyone with an interest in politics needs to consume a little from each if they really want to be well informed." Perhaps you should take your own advice. I watch different news outlets but do learn a lot from the Maddow show.
ETA... Jon Stewart is a comedian, Rachel Maddow is not.
Have you ever watched Rachel Maddow? Your comment above...."I think anyone with an interest in politics needs to consume a little from each if they really want to be well informed." Perhaps you should take your own advice. I watch different news outlets but do learn a lot from the Maddow show.
I've seen bits and pieces of her show. I used to listen to her a lot on Air America but that didn't last long enough to become a proper parody of conservative talk radio, which is the only way it could possibly appeal to a mass audience since liberals apparently didn't like it either, at least not enough to support its existence.
To be honest, I've never really enjoyed TV or radio political pundits, they're all so absolutely partisan and have too much time to go on and on about whoever is the current enemy that they become tiresome quickly. I did like Rush Limbaugh, mostly because he was a master of satire, and I found it amusing that liberals couldn't grasp that.
I did like Rush Limbaugh, mostly because he was a master of satire, and I found it amusing that liberals couldn't grasp that.
Do you think republicans grasped that? And if so what is your evidence of that beyond your ‘oh so sophisticated sense of satire’?
early morning
7-30-22, 1:53am
Well, I'm an uber liberal, and my brother - an otherwise intelligent man- is very conservative. I found Rush the Lush totally hysterical, while my Db took him oh-so-very-seriously. So to jp - many of the Republicans I know indeed did NOT think he had a "satirical" bent. Alan is very special in that, it seems! ;)
When I think of conservative satire I think of Stephen Colbert, not rush Limbaugh. When I think of rush Limbaugh I just think what a ****ing asshole.
Apparently the people who wrote the two Wikipedia pages feel the same as me. The first sentence of the page about The Colbert Report points out that it is satire. The page about rush Limbaugh calls him conservative and never mentions satire.
If I had to guess I would guess this is just another example of republicans making up weird definitions of words to fit their desired outcome. Like how everything about the democrats is ‘socialism’ even if the particular thing has nothing to do with socialism. Or the stupid bitch the other day that tried to claim that the 10 year old rape victim from Ohio hadn’t had an abortion.
Colbert was pretty funny 15-20 years ago, but after his 137th fawning interview with Democratic politicians, it became pretty clear his priority was pushing an agenda over humor.
I do like to tune into Rachel Maddow on election nights. Especially when she gives her impression of a frustrated pundit.
But by and large my favorite comedians seem to be the ones the woke crowd want to destroy.
Stephanie Miller maintains that Republican humor is meanness with no punchline. Matt Gaetz's recent rant is a perfect example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFO15cI-hls
iris lilies
7-30-22, 10:41am
I've seen bits and pieces of her show. I used to listen to her a lot on Air America but that didn't last long enough to become a proper parody of conservative talk radio, which is the only way it could possibly appeal to a mass audience since liberals apparently didn't like it either, at least not enough to support its existence.
To be honest, I've never really enjoyed TV or radio political pundits, they're all so absolutely partisan and have too much time to go on and on about whoever is the current enemy that they become tiresome quickly. I did like Rush Limbaugh, mostly because he was a master of satire, and I found it amusing that liberals couldn't grasp that.
Rush had talent on loan from God. He did his show with half his brain tied behind his back just to make it fair.
Rush had talent on loan from God. He did his show with half his brain tied behind his back just to make it fair.
Ha, Exactly!
I used to listen to Rush on long drives in the middle of now where with limited ratio stations. I'll give it him for being an entertainer and can understand his appeal, but humor is not a word I would use. I could listen to Rush for a little bit, but cannot deal with Hannity. They are/were very good at inspiring anger.
catherine
7-30-22, 11:36am
Stephanie Miller maintains that Republican humor is meanness with no punchline. Matt Gaetz's recent rant is a perfect example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFO15cI-hls
Wow, Gaetz's rant is certainly mean and nasty.
I have observed that on Facebook, where I have both liberal and conservative friends that post, my conservative friends are much, much more likely to post inane, mean political memes.
for example
4644
Yes, calling women he disagreed with "feminazis" took a lot of talent.
I found Rush Limbaugh's characterization of 13-year old Chelsea Clinton as a dog pretty much typical of what passed for humor with him. I found him utterly repellant, and was appalled (but not surprised) that Trump awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
"Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat. Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?” And he puts up a picture of Chelsea Clinton. Chelsea Clinton is 13 years old. (Snopes)
Speaking of Gaetz, one of his targets made the most of the situation:
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/teen-activist-body-shamed-rep-175421552.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr
Speaking of Gaetz, one of his targets made the most of the situation:
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/teen-activist-body-shamed-rep-175421552.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr
Good for her!
I found Rush Limbaugh's characterization of 13-year old Chelsea Clinton as a dog pretty much typical of what passed for humor with him. I found him utterly repellant, and was appalled (but not surprised) that Trump awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
"Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat. Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?” And he puts up a picture of Chelsea Clinton. Chelsea Clinton is 13 years old. (Snopes)
The Andrew Dice Clays of political discourse are all over the place. (I originally was going to say the Chris Farleys of political discourse--meaning pundits like Limbaugh are only good for making fun of people in place of having real conversation about the issues), but that would have been way too harsh to compare good-hearted Chris Farley to the mean-spirited Rush Limbaugh. I think the crude, mysoginistic comparison to Andrew Dice Clay is a much better one.
A co-worker of mine related that her husband took her to an Andrew Dice Clay performance. I reserved judgment, but wasn't surprised when she later divorced him.
Insult humor is one thing, but meanness and punching down is tiresome and unfunny.
A co-worker of mine related that her husband took her to an Andrew Dice Clay performance. I reserved judgment, but wasn't surprised when she later divorced him.
Andrew Dice Clay's comedy album is literally the only record album I confiscated from my kids when my they were growing up.
frugal-one
7-30-22, 5:00pm
I've seen bits and pieces of her show. I used to listen to her a lot on Air America but that didn't last long enough to become a proper parody of conservative talk radio, which is the only way it could possibly appeal to a mass audience since liberals apparently didn't like it either, at least not enough to support its existence.
To be honest, I've never really enjoyed TV or radio political pundits, they're all so absolutely partisan and have too much time to go on and on about whoever is the current enemy that they become tiresome quickly. I did like Rush Limbaugh, mostly because he was a master of satire, and I found it amusing that liberals couldn't grasp that.
You don't know the definition of parody. Stephen Colbert does parody... Maddow does not.
frugal-one
7-30-22, 5:04pm
Rush had talent on loan from God. He did his show with half his brain tied behind his back just to make it fair.
You are right. He did it with half a brain. That is all he had.
Maddow does not.
Not intentionally, anyway.
frugal-one
7-30-22, 6:10pm
Not intentionally, anyway.
Obviously, you have not watched her show.
I've said before that I would be proud to have had a daughter of Rachel Maddow's caliber.
She has said "I'm undoubtedly a liberal, which means that I'm in almost total agreement with the Eisenhower-era Republican Party platform."
You don't know the definition of parody. Stephen Colbert does parody... Maddow does not.
I was simply pointing out that if Air America had been parody, it may have survived since regular liberal themed programming couldn't generate enough interest to continue. 10 or 12 hours of continuous grievance and republican bashing each day needs to at least be entertaining.
Not intentionally, anyway.
The same could be said of Limbaugh. Who exactly was he parodying other than himself.
Obviously, you have not watched her show.
I never miss her on election nights. She switches from smug elation to pinched frustration seamlessly. Sort of like that Iraqi spokesman insisting the allied forces were being utterly destroyed. I also enjoyed her early and enthusiastic commitment to various Russian conspiracy theories. The “walls closed in” at least 500 times over two years. She was the Wile E Coyote of Collusion, even claiming Russian agents were involved in Trump’s Covid response.
And the constant reminders that she went to Oxford always struck me as comically insecure.
The same could be said of Limbaugh. Who exactly was he parodying other than himself.
I was never a big Rush fan, basically because I have so little patience for outrage as argument. Still I wonder what he could have done with “greedflation”, the “Inflation Reduction Act” or the “Misinformation Governance Board”.
iris lilies
7-31-22, 8:56am
Wow, Gaetz's rant is certainly mean and nasty.
I have observed that on Facebook, where I have both liberal and conservative friends that post, my conservative friends are much, much more likely to post inane, mean political memes.
for example
4644
I don’t think that is inane or mean FOR A MEME. That is what a meme often is – overstating a case in a pithy, pointed way.
I don’t think this one is especially funny or clever.
The best thing about Limbaugh is that he provided a convenient way for the rest of us to learn who among us was cool with racism. Sort of in the same way that trump helped us identify people who are cool with sexual assaulters. It’s just kind of a bonus for some people that they both like to punch down. Because what could be more awesome than watching a bully beat up someone smaller and weaker than they are?
frugal-one
7-31-22, 9:35am
I never miss her on election nights. She switches from smug elation to pinched frustration seamlessly. Sort of like that Iraqi spokesman insisting the allied forces were being utterly destroyed. I also enjoyed her early and enthusiastic commitment to various Russian conspiracy theories. The “walls closed in” at least 500 times over two years. She was the Wile E Coyote of Collusion, even claiming Russian agents were involved in Trump’s Covid response.
And the constant reminders that she went to Oxford always struck me as comically insecure.
I never have watched any commentators on election night. Who cares what they think? As far as where she was educated….. I NEVER heard her comment on it. If she did, it is no different than Ted Cruse bragging about his alma mater (Harvard/Princeton). Redundant.
frugal-one
7-31-22, 9:42am
I was simply pointing out that if Air America had been parody, it may have survived since regular liberal themed programming couldn't generate enough interest to continue. 10 or 12 hours of continuous grievance and republican bashing each day needs to at least be entertaining.
I find nothing entertaining about the current “republican” party. You are reaching WAY back to reference Air America… not relevant to today.
Air America, unfortunately, didn't have rich donors who carried it for years before it caught on, like--say--Fox News. Fortunately, most of its on-air talent broadcast on Progressive Voices and/or Sirius.
Air America, unfortunately, didn't have rich donors who carried it for years before it caught on, like--say--Fox News. Fortunately, most of its on-air
talent broadcast on Progressive Voices and/or Sirius.
As far as I know, the only “rich donor” Fox had at it’s inception was it’s parent corporation, and they expected a return on their investment. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
And what a wildly successful investment it has been. Who would have guessed that less than 30 years later it would have helped to so thoroughly corrupt the Republican Party to the point that a president from that party would attempt a deadly serious attempt to overthrow the government, and then more than 50% of the party’s voters and politicians would still process support for that traitor. And perhaps even more appalling, that most of the voters from that party who weren’t in favor of overthrowing the government would shrug it off with a ‘who gives a shit’ I’ll keep voting for them even if it means voting for one of the traitors who was an active participant. Like Ron Johnson.
And what a wildly successful investment it has been. Who would have guessed that less than 30 years later it would have helped to so thoroughly corrupt the Republican Party to the point that a president from that party would attempt a deadly serious attempt to overthrow the government, and then more than 50% of the party’s voters and politicians would still process support for that traitor. And perhaps even more appalling, that most of the voters from that party who weren’t in favor of overthrowing the government would shrug it off with a ‘who gives a shit’ I’ll keep voting for them even if it means voting for one of the traitors who was an active participant. Like Ron Johnson.
Well they have been able to build an audience and survive without handouts. They’ve also done pretty well against competitors trying to outfox them from the right like OAN, as well as competitors seeking to become the antifox from the left like MSNBC or CNN.
I think that of the cable news networks (all of whose influence is greatly exaggerated), they do the best job of segregating news (especially business news) from opinion, which may be why you see Fox in so many waiting rooms.
I could see how someone of a certain political persuasion would seek to assign them totemic significance.
ApatheticNoMore
7-31-22, 4:51pm
I hear a great deal of people have given up Fox for OAN and the like due to Trump. So yea that's where many are actually getting their news.
Fox in waiting rooms? Tell me you’ve never been to coastal California without telling me you’ve never been to coastal California. Lol.
I hear a great deal of people have given up Fox for OAN and the like due to Trump. So yea that's where many are actually getting their news.
Couldn’t be that many, based on viewership. Although I have heard hardcore Trumpers have been abandoning Fox for not being Trumpy enough. And OAN took a major revenue hit when DirectTV dropped them. But even mighty first place Fox only gets 2-3 million viewers in prime time. I doubt cable news is the influence people believe it to be. More like an echo chamber people turn to for bias confirmation.
Fox in waiting rooms? Tell me you’ve never been to coastal California without telling me you’ve never been to coastal California. Lol.
Maybe that’s another quality of life reason so many people are fleeing California.
Maybe that’s another quality of life reason so many people are fleeing California.
You may be on to something. Perhaps I should start a movement among democrats in the Central Valley to change the waiting room tv stations to see if we could drive more republicans to Idaho and wherever else they have fled to.
You may be on to something. Perhaps I should start a movement among democrats in the Central Valley to change the waiting room tv stations to see if we could drive more republicans to Idaho and wherever else they have fled to.
At least in the places where the TVs haven’t been stolen yet.
At least in the places where the TVs haven’t been stolen yet.
You do have a point. I don’t know about burglary stats but the highest gun death county in California is not LA or San Francisco or Oakland by a long shot. It’s blood red kern county (Bakersfield at the south end of the Central Valley).
You do have a point. I don’t know about burglary stats but the highest gun death county in California is not LA or San Francisco or Oakland by a long shot. It’s blood red kern county (Bakersfield at the south end of the Central Valley).
Sounds like they could benefit from a tough prosecutor. I hear Chesa Boudin is available.
They would probably prefer a more trump style prosecutor. Two hour trials for drug offenses and the death penalty for all convicted drug dealers.
They would probably prefer a more trump style prosecutor. Two hour trials for drug offenses and the death penalty for all convicted drug dealers.
I know the type. The sort of guys who could count on financial support from various Democratic organizations.
Are those the same types that expect the republicans party to pay their legal bills related to their attempt to overthrow the government?
iris lilies
8-1-22, 11:41pm
For the second time in 33 years I’m not voting in an election. Tomorrow I’m in St. Louis and my voting place is Herman. I looked at the ballot last week to see if I should go in and vote at the courthouse and I just couldn’t see anyone I want to vote for. And then today Donald J Trump came out and said that I should vote for Eric. So, I guess it’s good that I am not voting because I would be confused as to which Eric I’m supposed to be voting for.
IL… You actually would take a recommendation from trump??? Thought you were over him. And yes, I know there are 2 Erics and moron trump did not delineate. I can’t imagine NOT voting this time around. You don’t vote, you have no right to bitch later!
Orban's advisor resignation says it all. Yet "republicans" gave him a standing ovation for his nazi rhetoric at CPAC. Why not to vote republican... the list keeps growing.
“The speech you delivered is a purely Nazi diatribe worthy of Joseph Goebbels," wrote Zsuzsa Hegedus, Mr Orban’s adviser, in her resignation letter, according to the Hungarian hvg.hu news website.
There are many stories on the web ... I just grabbed this one but there are many others. Hateful.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fresh-furore-over-nazi-speech-205608778.html
What the hell is their strange fascination with authoritarian dictators, anyway? They scare the hell out of me, as they should anyone who loves freedom.
What the hell is their strange fascination with authoritarian dictators, anyway? They scare the hell out of me, as they should anyone who loves freedom.
They are channeling their 1938 German personalities. The only difference is that our economy is doing fine. Unlike 1938 germany.
They are channeling their 1938 German personalities. The only difference is that our economy is doing fine. Unlike 1938 germany.
In my alternate universe, a lot of these chuckleheads are reincarnated Nazis, back for a rematch.
We must be eternally vigilant; less they try something like creating a Disinformation Governance Board.
We must be eternally vigilant; less they try something like creating a Disinformation Governance Board.
Karl rove could certainly have created such an entity:
“People like you are still living in what we call the reality-based community. You believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you are studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors, and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.“
Karl rove could certainly have created such an entity:
“People like you are still living in what we call the reality-based community. You believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you are studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors, and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.“
Rove denies saying this, but The National says he did.
https://pitchfork.com/news/karl-rove-reviews-the-nationals-rove-referencing-walk-it-back/
I'll believe The National.
Enjoy!
Karl Rove, Lee Atwater, Roy Cohn--a trio of deplorables.
gimmethesimplelife
8-6-22, 8:58pm
Here's a good reason not to vote Republican. Kari Lake, former Fox News 10 Phoenix evening co-anchor and now Arizona GOP primary winner. She has flip flopped several times on abortion and seems to blatantly say whatever is in favor at that split second to get votes. Hard pass. Rob
Everyday another good reason. Today’s reason, they hate diabetics.
Juan Williams recently coined an op ed for The Hill titled, Seniors Get Nothing for Voting GOP, about certain GOP policy effecting seniors. Some of it seemed like a stretch to me, but he did get onto how some GOP leaders are still on the bandwagon to reduce Social security, Medicare, and other health benefits.
https://thehill.com/opinion/3592048-juan-williams-seniors-get-nothing-by-voting-for-the-gop/
Juan Williams recently coined an op ed for The Hill titled, Seniors Get Nothing for Voting GOP, about certain GOP policy effecting seniors. Some of it seemed like a stretch to me, but he did get onto how some GOP leaders are still on the bandwagon to reduce Social security, Medicare, and other health benefits.
https://thehill.com/opinion/3592048-juan-williams-seniors-get-nothing-by-voting-for-the-gop/
Yeah, Ron Johnson is a piece of work as are the Republicans running for governor in WI. Watched PBS interviews and was flabbergasted by their comments. Hard to understand the mentality that would consider electing them for office???
Just heard… FBI raided MaraLago..
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/08/08/us/trump-fbi-raid
Just heard… FBI raided MaraLago..
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/08/08/us/trump-fbi-raid
The Stable Genius likened the FBI's raiding his place (legally) to the totally illegal Watergate break in.
I understand the warrant concerned mishandling classified information. I’d like it to come to something and keep him out of the next round of primaries. If it doesn’t (and maybe if it does) it will be an “energize the base” thing that could backfire on his enemies. The DCCC may regret that financial support to his followers.
I understand the warrant concerned mishandling classified information. I’d like it to come to something and keep him out of the next round of primaries. If it doesn’t (and maybe if it does) it will be an “energize the base” thing that could backfire on his enemies. The DCCC may regret that financial support to his followers.
You could be right. The voting base of the Republican Party don’t seem to be fans of law and order. Hillary Clinton seems to have right about them. But from what I hear even the few remaining fringe moderates in the Republican Party are cool with voting for traitors who participated in the attempt to overthrow the government. Because apparently a lack of ethics is considered a feature in a Republican candidate.
I understand the warrant concerned mishandling classified information. I’d like it to come to something and keep him out of the next round of primaries.
It looks to me like that's the goal. As many legal scholars and political gadflys have pointed out, conducting a raid on a former president's home seems to be missing several steps in a reasonable process to settle a dispute about what records may or may not have been removed from the White House.
A Clinton lawyer (Marc Elias) has suggested it's probably because of the following:
https://scontent.fluk1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/295713695_2601517899985374_2924142603863806600_n.p ng?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=ae9488&_nc_ohc=-O23Zb9O7F4AX_BYgt2&tn=o8lxsydBNXziJm-X&_nc_ht=scontent.fluk1-1.fna&oh=03_AVJv7CfXupDfq0bhkh8GwZqpocOELqphxS-5Vk2YHjr8Jw&oe=631A2BE9
It's interesting that the above statute also applied to Hillary Clinton's use of a personal server for official business and her deliberate destruction of cell phones and wiping of hard drives, but neither the DOJ or any other government agency felt the need to go this far. That suggests to me that they're not interested in enforcing a law, they're interested in achieving a political result.
All I can say is thank goodness that the republican platform of hating certain groups and controlling women isn't popular with a majority of voters. Nixon is probably looking up from hell right now with incredible jealousy that he was president 45 years too soon. Today's republican party would have saved his sorry ass.
It does seem like a good idea to keep a criminal out of the primaries.
I want someone to subpoena the Russian translator's testimony and notes. Trump--as laid out in the Mueller Report and Malcolm Nance's The Plot to Destroy Democracy: How Putin and His Spies Are Undermining America and Dismantling the West. As Eric Trump noted in 2014 (thehill.cm) "We have all the funding we need out of Russia." I certainly wouldn't put it past him to sell whatever classified intelligence he could get his hands on.
gimmethesimplelife
8-9-22, 10:11pm
Should this raid of DJT's Florida property yield imprisonable evidence, I can be counted on to.cook up something Haitian and serve my.immediate neighbors - my family would be.proud but that's not important. What is important is that it's the right thing to do. Rob
iris lilies
8-9-22, 10:14pm
Should this raid of DJT's Florida property yield imprisonable evidence, I can be counted on to.cook up something Haitian and serve my.immediate neighbors - my family would be.proud but that's not important. What is important is that it's the right thing to do. Rob
Cooking Haitian food is the right thing to do? Who knew!!!?
Surely you have a DJT imprisonment outfit picked out, one that represents a better class than what you are.
Surely you have a DJT imprisonment outfit picked out, one that represents a better class than what you are.
I think he still has the impeachment party celebratory outfit, and maybe a nice accessory watch he struggled with as friends/neighbors might think he was putting on airs. I'm not sure though, he hasn't mentioned them in a few months.
gimmethesimplelife
8-9-22, 10:43pm
Cooking Haitian food is the right thing to do? Who knew!!!?
Surely you have a DJT imprisonment outfit picked out, one that represents a better class than what you are.Wow. Am I really that predictable? I do have a DJT impeachment outfit picked out, featuring made in Italy dress shoes from the Nogales Gooodwill at $2,75. I have a decent watch of my own now, no need to burrow. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
8-9-22, 10:46pm
Cooking Haitian food is the right thing to do? Who knew!!!?
Surely you have a DJT imprisonment outfit picked out, one that represents a better class than what you are.Think what you want about me, but one thing remains true: I can be counted on to remain loyal to my people and my roots. Kind of rare in some circles today, no?
Rob
iris lilies
8-10-22, 12:15am
Think what you want about me, but one thing remains true: I can be counted on to remain loyal to my people and my roots. Kind of rare in some circles today, no?
Rob
I have no idea.
iris lilies
8-10-22, 12:16am
Wow. Am I really that predictable?
yes.
frugal-one
8-10-22, 10:00am
Cooking Haitian food is the right thing to do? Who knew!!!?
Surely you have a DJT imprisonment outfit picked out, one that represents a better class than what you are.
What does this mean?
gimmethesimplelife
8-10-22, 10:05am
[/B]
What does this mean?To be fair, IL has a point. I do have this Austrian habit of dressing over my station in life at moments of great joy such as a Trump conviction/incarceration. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
8-10-22, 10:08am
Should have been a DJT imprisonment outfit a few posts above. Rob
iris lilies
8-10-22, 10:12am
[/B]
What does this mean?
I was referring to Rob‘s oft-stated sentiments about his class and his station. It is not unusual for him to talk about dressing better than his station.
You’ll have to ask him what that means since I have no fkng clue. The multi millionaires I know dress in jeans and T-shirts.
Rob, if you get to have your party and cook Haitian food for your neighbors, I will be there in spirit, celebrating with you!!!
gimmethesimplelife
8-10-22, 10:23am
Rob, if you get to have your party and cook Haitian food for your neighbors, I will be there in spirit, celebrating with you!!!Thank You! I very much appreciate this. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
8-10-22, 10:31am
To give some clarification as it's been awhile - the cooking of Haitian food is a rebuke of DJT's comment regarding Haiti being an (expletive)hole country. Rob
iris lilies
8-10-22, 10:36am
To give some clarification as it's been awhile - the cooking of Haitian food is a rebuke of DJT's comment regarding Haiti being an (expletive)hole country. Rob
Oh! I *DID* need that clarification! Like frugal-one says, I just do not keep up. I am hopeless!!!
frugal-one
8-10-22, 11:45am
Oh! I *DID* need that clarification! Like frugal-one says, I just do not keep up. I am hopeless!!!
To actually say that to Rob is disgusting. Glad he took it in a positive light.
iris lilies
8-10-22, 12:45pm
To actually say that to Rob is disgusting. Glad he took it in a positive light.
what, commenting on Haitian food served as celebration? I didn’t say it was a bad thing. I implied it was an odd thing.
iris lilies
8-10-22, 1:13pm
To actually say that to Rob is disgusting. Glad he took it in a positive light.
Rob speaks often about one’s “station” and class in life, and I remember it because I think it’s quite odd.
here in post 56
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?16502-What-would-you-do-here/page6&highlight=station
here in post 18
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?12011-So-grateful-for-today-s-Supreme-Court-Decision/page2&highlight=station
here in post 17
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?15933-Having-a-bit-of-an-identity-crisis-work-related/page2&highlight=station Which also includes his often repeated thoughts about showing disrespect to the motherland by climbing out of his class. Or some such thing.. I don’t quite follow the logic. I’m sure it’s there though!
But especially here in posts 21 and 36 and the entire thread
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?17864-Testimony-against-Trump-looking-damning/page3&highlight=station
These are just a few instances of Rob’s peculiar take on “station” in life (apparently boat shoes figure prominently) and if I took my time I could find others.
Teacher Terry
8-10-22, 1:58pm
In IL’s defense I find the talk about your station in life very odd and actually demeaning.
In IL’s defense I find the talk about your station in life very odd and actually demeaning.
It’s slave talk.
frugal-one
8-10-22, 5:29pm
Rob speaks often about one’s “station” and class in life, and I remember it because I think it’s quite odd.
here in post 56
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?16502-What-would-you-do-here/page6&highlight=station
here in post 18
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?12011-So-grateful-for-today-s-Supreme-Court-Decision/page2&highlight=station
here in post 17
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?15933-Having-a-bit-of-an-identity-crisis-work-related/page2&highlight=station Which also includes his often repeated thoughts about showing disrespect to the motherland by climbing out of his class. Or some such thing.. I don’t quite follow the logic. I’m sure it’s there though!
But especially here in posts 21 and 36 and the entire thread
http://www.simplelivingforum.net/showthread.php?17864-Testimony-against-Trump-looking-damning/page3&highlight=station
These are just a few instances of Rob’s peculiar take on “station” in life (apparently boat shoes figure prominently) and if I took my time I could find others.
Rob can say whatever he wants about himself... that does not mean you should. IMO you are disparaging him. As stated previously, glad he took it in a positive light.
frugal-one
8-10-22, 5:31pm
what, commenting on Haitian food served as celebration? I didn’t say it was a bad thing. I implied it was an odd thing.
You know that was not the thing I thought disgusting. You are being obtuse.
gimmethesimplelife
8-10-22, 11:33pm
Rob can say whatever he wants about himself... that does not mean you should. IMO you are disparaging him. As stated previously, glad he took it in a positive light.Thank You. I really appreciate your stance. I'd prefer not to play the role of forum pinata - can we collectively get back to the topic?
I did not mean to cause a diversion from the topic. Apparently I did. Once again can we collectively get back to the topic? Rob
Thank You. I really appreciate your stance. I'd prefer not to play the role of forum pinata - can we collectively get back to the topic?
I did not mean to cause a diversion from the topic. Apparently I did. Once again can we collectively get back to the topic? Rob
Since threads tend to diverge from the original topic I went back and locked at what the ‘topic’ was for this thread. Judging from the first ten-twenty posts it seems to be democrats wondering why republican politicians aren’t interested in helping people and Republican voters trying to justify why Republican politicians are not supporting legislation that is strongly popular with voters. Most recently that would be things like veteran burn pit healthcare legislation, Medicare drug price negotiations. And also Republican voters trying to claim that severe abortion restrictions are popular. Admittedly that last one came before blood red Kansas voters resoundingly said ‘eff you politicians, we’re perfectly capable of figuring out when we need abortions’ so that one is already dated.
frugal-one
8-11-22, 1:53am
Trump took Fifth Amendment more than 440 times in refusing to answer New York attorney general’s questions yesterday. trump previously stated the mob takes the fifth … And yet, some are telling him to get on the bandwagon for 2024 run for president???? Insanity!
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/10/trump-says-he-refused-to-answer-ny-attorney-generals-questions-in-probe-of-his-business.html
It's interesting that Eric Trump admitted to the world that when Daddy was president he weaponized federal law enforcement against his enemies.
It's interesting that Eric Trump admitted to the world that when Daddy was president he weaponized federal law enforcement against his enemies.
That combativeness/vindictiveness seems to be a hallmark of authoritarian types, like Ron DeSantis, Vladimir Putin, Richard Nixon, etc.
iris lilies
8-11-22, 12:04pm
That combativeness/vindictiveness seems to be a hallmark of authoritarian types, like Ron DeSantis, Vladimir Putin, Richard Nixon, etc.
I listened to Dana Millbank interviewed on NPR (natch) where he outlined Republican “combativeness “ as starting with Newt Gingrich in the mid-1990s when the Republicans swept Congress.
Mr. Millbank has a new book you all would love called “the deconstructionists: The 25 year crack up of the
Republican Party “
As for FBI/DOJ intimidation techniques used in banana republics, like others have stated I truly hope they have something on DJ Trump to make all this hullabaloo.
I see whoever is in the White House will be using this kind of strong arm tactics, regardless of the party.
remember when Obama‘s IRS troop targeted nonprofits who were on the political right? I do. Using the IRS has been a long time weapon of several administrations, And probably we don’t even know all the times it’s been used. so that’s another tactic that we can look forward to being used more often. Ugh.
Overreach of government is wrong no matter what side it’s on.
I listened to Dana Millbank interviewed on NPR (natch) where he outlined Republican “combativeness “ as starting with Newt Gingrich in the mid-1990s when the Republicans swept Congress.
Mr. Millbank has a new book you all would love called “the deconstructionists: The 25 year crack up of the
Republican Party “
As for FBI/DOJ intimidation techniques used in banana republics, like others have stated I truly hope they have something on DJ Trump to make all this hullabaloo.
I see whoever is in the White House will be using this kind of strong arm tactics, regardless of the party.
remember when Obama‘s IRS troop targeted nonprofits who were on the political right? I do. Using the IRS has been a long time weapon of several administrations, And probably we don’t even know all the times it’s been used. so that’s another tactic that we can look forward to being used more often. Ugh.
Overreach of government is wrong no matter what side it’s on.
You’re right about that. I don’t think either party has terribly clean hands when it comes to weaponizing our security and revenue collection apparatus. Showy raids. Misused FISA warrants. All those “domestic terrorists” at PTA meetings. Strategic leaks and less than diligent efforts to find the leakers. The politicization of prosecutorial discretion.
There’s a lot of room for pots to call kettles black.
I remember when negotiation and compromise were common in politics, but it's rather a distant memory.
Considering that the head of the fbi was appointed by trump it’s pretty laughable the republicans screeching that this was a political hit job. But republicans aren’t big on logic and rationality so I can see how they come to that stupid conclusion.
Law and order for the rabble, immunity for the elite.
Considering that the head of the fbi was appointed by trump it’s pretty laughable the republicans screeching that this was a political hit job. But republicans aren’t big on logic and rationality so I can see how they come to that stupid conclusion.
Raiding a residence isn’t the FBI’s call. So logic and rationality would seem to indicate that who appointed the Director isn’t especially relevant.
Expecting loyalty from an upper level bureaucrat also strikes me as naive.
frugal-one
8-11-22, 4:28pm
So the question is…. trump said his residence was illegally searched. Garland just came on tv stating the warrant would become public unless trump objects within 24 hours (3 pm tomorrow). Will trump object?
iris lilies
8-11-22, 5:04pm
So the question is…. trump said his residence was illegally searched. Garland just came on tv stating the warrant would become public unless trump objects within 24 hours (3 pm tomorrow). Will trump object?
It is unprecedented according to an NPR interviewee that contents of a search warrant are revealed by DOJ law enforcement. They just do not do that.
Trump could have himself revealed its contents over the last few days.
DOJ had better have something solid and BIG here or else they are propelling Trump into a White
House run and victory given this high drama raid caper. Dangerous game they are playing.
And we are supposed to believe that Joe Biden did not know about this in advance? I don’t know what to think about that, but a front runner idea would be “who is running that place anyway? “
When would you issue a search warrant and when would you just subpoena the documents?
What kind of sentence did Sandy Berger get when they caught him with those documents down his pants? I’m pretty sure you lose your clearances after something like that. I would like Trump to be caught with something bad enough to torpedo any future candidacy and start purging the populists so the GOP can become conservative again.
With all the reports of Trump flushing documents down the toilet and actually eating part of one, they would have been remiss not to have looked into his hijinks.
frugal-one
8-11-22, 5:36pm
When would you issue a search warrant and when would you just subpoena the documents?
What kind of sentence did Sandy Berger get when they caught him with those documents down his pants? I’m pretty sure you lose your clearances after something like that. I would like Trump to be caught with something bad enough to torpedo any future candidacy and start purging the populists so the GOP can become conservative again.
Looks like the subpoena was this spring ....
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-received-subpoena-for-classified-records-this-spring-cooperated-by-turning-over-documents-source
Hopefully, trump will be eliminated in future bids for any public office.... and some semblance of both parties being able to work together again. This polarization is not to the benefit of the country. Hopefully, it is not too late.
Since when did Trump et al show any respect for subpoenas?
"I would like Trump to be caught with something bad enough to torpedo any future candidacy and start purging the populists so the GOP can become conservative again."
Oh, but haven't you heard? The MAGA crowd is now gearing up for a civil war. Sigh.
I heard about some important Kim Jung-un letters on eBay by some user name, Donnie45. Something about rocket technology (joking).
I sounds like Merrick Garland is taking "the buck stops here" sign off for the search warrant, so maybe it will take the heat off of Wray and the other FBI people who have had threats of violence from the extremists. One news report I saw said Garland would not reveal the warrant details if Trump would ask him not to. Interesting play.
"I would like Trump to be caught with something bad enough to torpedo any future candidacy and start purging the populists so the GOP can become conservative again."
Oh, but haven't you heard? The MAGA crowd is now gearing up for a civil war. Sigh.
I think that belief is limited to the biggest fringewits on the left and right.
frugal-one
8-11-22, 8:03pm
I think that belief is limited to the biggest fringewits on the left and right.
Sounds like just the right.
I guess one of those fringewits was in Cincinnati today. Weird how republicans are all ‘law and order! Law and order!’ Until suddenly they aren’t.
I guess one of those fringewits was in Cincinnati today. Weird how republicans are all ‘law and order! Law and order!’ Until suddenly they aren’t.
In all fairness, I don't think Republican is an accurate description. Maybe white nationalists who are inspired by Trump. Or just whackos. I seem to recall from some political philosophy that if you go far enough to the right and left, they tend to meet somewhere.
frugal-one
8-11-22, 8:59pm
or maga republicans?
I'm sure I'm biased, but where are the Violent Democratic fringewits in your scenario? I don't see any lefties shooting up supermarkets or FBI offices or threatening civil war.
It's probably a matter of semantics. The John Wayne conservatives like to label the rioters in Portland left or extreme left, but they were more accurately anti-fascists or something outside of the traditional definition of leftists. Whackos of various shades.
It's probably a matter of semantics. The conservatives like to label the rioters in Portland left or extreme left, but they were more accurately anti-fascists or something outside of the traditional definition of leftists. Whackos.
I joke that I'd join Antifa if I could find an application somewhere--who on earth wouldn't be anti-fascist?. Outside the Proud Boys and other right-wing provocateurs, there were a few brawlers at the demonstrations who were arrested--very few among thousands and thousands of people. And people who think they spotted an Antifa flag at those rallies were seeing the anarchist flag. Not the same thing at all.
And remember, those demonstrators were protesting the wanton killing of minorities--which seems to me to be a valid reason to demonstrate--unlike the mob in Charlottesville chanting "Jews will not replace us."
Yes, I suspect there have a been a lot of republicans who are also antifascists, but don't know it. Or maybe not.
iris lilies
8-11-22, 11:55pm
I'm sure I'm biased, but where are the Violent Democratic fringewits in your scenario? I don't see any lefties shooting up supermarkets or FBI offices or threatening civil war.
The people who were burning buildings and shooting cops dead in St. louis not long ago were not Trump supporters.
They are thugs, but leftie thugs, regardless of what they are protesting.
yes, you are biased.
ApatheticNoMore
8-12-22, 1:34am
It's not at all biased to note that those protestors have no political representation while trump was literally in the white house. At this point trump has stolen nuclear secrets it seems, so yea he has a bunch of fascist supporters, but he's a whole lot more than just that.
The people who were burning buildings and shooting cops dead in St. louis not long ago were not Trump supporters.
They are thugs, but leftie thugs, regardless of what they are protesting.
yes, you are biased.
I'm OK with hanging the thugs on both sides of the aisle.
. At this point trump has stolen nuclear secrets it seems,
I guess he was channeling his inner Julius Rosenberg. Perhaps he will achieve the same fate.
iris lilies
8-12-22, 8:18am
I'm OK with hanging the thugs on both sides of the aisle.
Most reasonable people are, well, they are ok with due process and lawful consequences.
Playing definition games with what is justified social disruption and what is not is just stupid.
Most reasonable people are, well, they are ok with due process and lawful consequences.
Playing definition games with what is justified social disruption and what is not is just stupid.
I'm generally OK with being called stupid, but not before I've had my coffee. :(
True fringewittery requires a sort of closed mental system. They are violent, but we are peaceful (the violence attributed to us is really the doing of provocateurs). They hatch violent plots, but we are entrapped by FBI informants. They want to install an authoritarian regime, we merely want to get things done. They deface buildings, we just need to get our message across. They are racist, we are merely race-conscious. They are uniquely and historically evil, we are pure and so justified in any necessary action we must take.
To a fringewit, the truth is clear and simple and any contradiction can be dismissed as the lies of the opposition. There are only two possible sides in the Great Struggle. You are either with us or beyond the pale.
Fortunately, this thinking is limited to a tiny minority.
littlebittybobby
8-12-22, 11:06am
Tell you what---I'm voting for whomever the Whig Party supports. See---Millard Filllmore was a one-termer who did not campaign, and the last Whig to be Presydent. How do you like that? We are getting to be like a Latin country, with partisan fanaticism and idolizing our party leaders, something I find disturbing. Inflation runs rampant; pretty soon, you'll have to take a wheelbarrow full of cash to the store for a loaf o' bread. Next thing you know, NATO will have to intercede, and straighten things out. Hope that helps you some.4704
iris lilies
8-12-22, 11:35am
I'm generally OK with being called stupid, but not before I've had my coffee. :(
Jane oh jane,YOU are not stupid!
perhaps your opinion is, rather, in need of changing!
When you have people like Kevin McCarthy, Newt Gingrich, and Ron DeSantis screaming hatred for the rule of law by accusing the FBI of attacking political enemies it's not so much a fringe sort of aspect of the Republican party, it's more the entire shag carpet of the republican party that holds these views.
Jane oh jane,YOU are not stupid!
perhaps your opinion is, rather, in need of changing!
Your optimism is inspiring! :D
iris lilies
8-12-22, 1:40pm
Your optimism is inspiring! :D
i’m just cranky about the BLM civil protesters who are really rioters who
burn buildings and killed a cop downtown.
The cop killer was just convicted two weeks ago. Surprisingly, our do-nothing city prosecutor had one of her prosecutors show up in court to prosecute and that is not a given for murderers here. One of them went free when city prosecution simply failed to show up.
I wish our city prosecutor I would be DeSantised, but that would be a different post.
I thought cop-killing was mostly a right-wing thing, as in January 6th and this latest nail-gun wielding whack job.
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article196423174.html
From the article:
White supremacist and other far-right extremist groups have killed 51 police officers since 1990, according to a report published by the Anti-Defamation League last week. Left-wing extremist groups, including black nationalists, killed 11 during the same period.
I believe that we should have citizen review boards to keep officers honest, rather than just summarily executing them. :)
When you have people like Kevin McCarthy, Newt Gingrich, and Ron DeSantis screaming hatred for the rule of law by accusing the FBI of attacking political enemies it's not so much a fringe sort of aspect of the Republican party, it's more the entire shag carpet of the republican party that holds these views.
I think you have more in common with those people than you realize.
iris lilies
8-12-22, 2:11pm
I thought cop-killing was mostly a right-wing thing, as in January 6th and this latest nail-gun wielding whack job.
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article196423174.html
From the article:
White supremacist and other far-right extremist groups have killed 51 police officers since 1990, according to a report published by the Anti-Defamation League last week. Left-wing extremist groups, including black nationalists, killed 11 during the same period.
I believe that we should have citizen review boards to keep officers honest, rather than just summarily executing them. :)
I can’t read this because I have to subscribe. Do they list each incident? Do they list David Dorn in 2020 in St. Louis?
There might be “more “killings by right wingers” because the mainstream media likes to assign that label to nut jobs, and those nut jobs as labeled tend to be white people and there are a lot more white people than Black people in this country. I would want to look at specific incidents, tho to draw conclusions. And of course we cannot assign political leanings based on skin color either so that would be a problem.
I think you have more in common with those people than you realize.
That’s some serious projection you got going on there. Your Republican member card is definitely not at risk of being revoked.
frugal-one
8-12-22, 2:38pm
I'm OK with hanging the thugs on both sides of the aisle.
Ditto
I can’t read this because I have to subscribe. Do they list each incident? Do they list David Dorn in 2020 in St. Louis?
There might be “more “killings by right wingers” because the mainstream media likes to assign that label to nut jobs, and those nut jobs as labeled tend to be white people and there are a lot more white people than Black people in this country. I would want to look at specific incidents, tho to draw conclusions. And of course we cannot assign political leanings based on skin color either so that would be a problem.
The article doesn't list specific cases, it discusses the phenomenon in general. Apparently Cannon was a garden-variety looter--one of those who infiltrate demonstrations to cause trouble, like the Proud boys on the other side.
frugal-one
8-12-22, 2:45pm
True fringewittery requires a sort of closed mental system. They are violent, but we are peaceful (the violence attributed to us is really the doing of provocateurs). They hatch violent plots, but we are entrapped by FBI informants. They want to install an authoritarian regime, we merely want to get things done. They deface buildings, we just need to get our message across. They are racist, we are merely race-conscious. They are uniquely and historically evil, we are pure and so justified in any necessary action we must take.
To a fringewit, the truth is clear and simple and any contradiction can be dismissed as the lies of the opposition. There are only two possible sides in the Great Struggle. You are either with us or beyond the pale.
Fortunately, this thinking is limited to a tiny minority.
We and they. Which are you? It seems to me the people who vote for mega republicans (ie Ron Johnson and their ilk) are the ones who are following the provocateur DJT. The ones who were part of Jan 6th and have been put on trial were not peaceful. They were not entrapped?
That’s some serious projection you got going on there.
Says our very own king of projection, derision and half truths, LOL.
frugal-one
8-12-22, 2:53pm
I think you have more in common with those people than you realize.
Haha.. look who is talking.
We and they. Which are you? It seems to me the people who vote for mega republicans (ie Ron Johnson and their ilk) are the ones who are following the provocateur DJT. The ones who were part of Jan 6th and have been put on trial were not peaceful. They were not entrapped?
I think what I said applies to both sides of the same wingnut: both the Trump cultists and the jihadis who’ve assigned him the role of the Great Satan. They feed off each other and make each other possible, and can’t conceive of how it could be any other way. Some of them provide financial support to the other side just to keep the nonsense going.
I believe there are reasonable third and fourth and fifth ways of thinking, which makes me the enemy to both sides of the same debased coin. It might be because I vote for a Trump guy one side declares anathema because I don’t want the loonies on the left running the country. It might be because I think Trump is unfit for the office of dog catcher.
I can live with that. I just can’t see inhabiting your peculiar mythos.
frugal-one
8-12-22, 8:05pm
I think what I said applies to both sides of the same wingnut: both the Trump cultists and the jihadis who’ve assigned him the role of the Great Satan. They feed off each other and make each other possible, and can’t conceive of how it could be any other way. Some of them provide financial support to the other side just to keep the nonsense going.
I believe there are reasonable third and fourth and fifth ways of thinking, which makes me the enemy to both sides of the same debased coin. It might be because I vote for a Trump guy one side declares anathema because I don’t want the loonies on the left running the country. It might be because I think Trump is unfit for the office of dog catcher.
I can live with that. I just can’t see inhabiting your peculiar mythos.
You speak out of both sides of your mouth. There is no fourth or fifth ways of thinking if you vote for a "trump guy." You support him or you don't.
You speak out of both sides of your mouth. There is no fourth or fifth ways of thinking if you vote for a "trump guy." You support him or you don't.
There’s also no ‘both sides’ when only one side walked out of the White House with ****ing defense secrets that he has likely been trying to sell to the highest bidder. The levels some folks will go to justify the abhorrent behavior of the leaders of their political party would be laughable if it weren’t so pathetically sad.
There’s also no ‘both sides’ when only one side walked out of the White House with ****ing defense secrets that he has likely been trying to sell to the highest bidder.
Sure there's 'both sides', there's always two sides to every dispute and we're not yet in a place where either one can objectively be determined correct. We still don't know exactly what the FBI was looking for or whether or not they found it. All the classified info talk is not likely to go anywhere since the Supreme Court ruled nearly 40 years ago that Presidents have the ability to classify/declassify information regardless of whatever Congress or any other branch of government may think of it. I think the DOJ will have a difficult time doing anything with this legally, although I'm not at all sure that was their goal.
It's gonna be a real shame if their actions make Trump a viable candidate for 2024. If they do, that's on you guys. And on the other side of that, if their goal is to ensure he's not a viable candidate, then that's real banana republic shit, and that's on you guys too.
Alan, you clearly haven’t been reading what the serious folks have to say about the ‘president can declassify whatever the hell he wants’ concept. But I’m not surprised.
I’m also surprised that you’d be a fan of ‘presidents are so effing far above the law that they can declassify any damn thing they want’. In my mind that would seem to go against the hypothetical ‘republicans are fans of the rule of law’ concept. But maybe I just don’t get the Republican concept of what rule of law means. I’d love to hear your explanation that clarifies. I won’t hold my breath that you or ldahl will offer a meaningful response.
I listened to a bit of talk radio on a long drive. The program commentator was saying that a man's home is his castle and that none of us can feel safe when the long arm of the government can raid even an former president's home on a whim. That there was no evidence of the FBI finding anything of significance and the descriptions of the documents were vague and not specific. They were playing the fear, anger, and evil government card pretty hard. It made little sense to me, but that's maybe the sort of talk a significant portion of people are buying. Pretty sure it was a Christian station.
I can see the conservatives turning things into a political play rather than a legal issue and gaining some ground.
I can see the conservatives turning things into a political play rather than a legal issue and gaining some ground.
Of course they will. Because that’s the only option they have. TFG likely is guilty of a variety of laws in relation to these documents and since republicans simply aren’t ever going to turn on him they have to come up with some sort of political explanation why they are no longer the ‘law and order’ party. It will be laughably parthetic to any rational person but it’s all they can do in this case because admitting that trump is a lying f$ck who broke the law and significantly compromised national security is simply not something they are capable of doing.
frugal-one
8-13-22, 7:55am
Sure there's 'both sides', there's always two sides to every dispute and we're not yet in a place where either one can objectively be determined correct. We still don't know exactly what the FBI was looking for or whether or not they found it. All the classified info talk is not likely to go anywhere since the Supreme Court ruled nearly 40 years ago that Presidents have the ability to classify/declassify information regardless of whatever Congress or any other branch of government may think of it. I think the DOJ will have a difficult time doing anything with this legally, although I'm not at all sure that was their goal.
It's gonna be a real shame if their actions make Trump a viable candidate for 2024. If they do, that's on you guys. And on the other side of that, if their goal is to ensure he's not a viable candidate, then that's real banana republic shit, and that's on you guys too.
Another who speaks out of both sides of their mouth. The onerous is truly on you..…who voted for the scumbag in the first place!!!
Also, where is the documentation that the list of classified items retrieved were, in fact, declassified?
You speak out of both sides of your mouth. There is no fourth or fifth ways of thinking if you vote for a "trump guy." You support him or you don't.
I rest my case.
iris lilies
8-13-22, 10:27am
Alan, you clearly haven’t been reading what the serious folks have to say about the ‘president can declassify whatever the hell he wants’ concept. But I’m not surprised.
I suspect that in all things like this I could spend a couple of hours reading the respected opinions about this issue of declassification, and I would come up with the end result being “it depends. “
I realize that trying to get an objective summary from you JP is not realistic, so I will not try. And that’s OK, here we communicate in two or three sentence soundbites that don’t adequately summarize these complex issues in any realistic way.
I haven’t decided if I want to go down the rabbit hole of spending time reading about the concept of the president being able to declassifiy documents. Mainly I would like to know what DJ T‘s motivation is in taking the documents and maybe we will learn that and maybe we won’t
ApatheticNoMore
8-13-22, 10:59am
I listened to a bit of talk radio on a long drive. The program commentator was saying that a man's home is his castle and that none of us can feel safe when the long arm of the government can raid even an former president's home on a whim. That there was no evidence of the FBI finding anything of significance and the descriptions of the documents were vague and not specific. They were playing the fear, anger, and evil government card pretty hard. It made little sense to me, but that's maybe the sort of talk a significant portion of people are buying.
It's one of these wow, have those people ever held a job things? They don't grasp confidentiality at all (and that's the types that can come with ordinary jobs, not having access to top secret government documents). I mean yes whistleblower protections exist for some things, illegality going on that one exposes, there are some rights. But you can't just steal any old documents from your current/former employer just because. I've worked in just about every industry that it was understood for, medical, legal, financial. And so this "one's home is one's castle" stuff comes across as laughable nonsense. I don't see how anyone can buy it.
frugal-one
8-13-22, 11:08am
I rest my case.
Yes. You support trump and his shenanigans. What you say and what you do are not congruent.
I suspect that in all things like this I could spend a couple of hours reading the respected opinions about this issue of declassification, and I would come up with the end result being “it depends. “
I realize that trying to get an objective summary from you JP is not realistic, so I will not try. And that’s OK, here we communicate in two or three sentence soundbites that don’t adequately summarize these complex issues in any realistic way.
I haven’t decided if I want to go down the rabbit hole of spending time reading about the concept of the president being able to declassifiy documents. Mainly I would like to know what DJ T‘s motivation is in taking the documents and maybe we will learn that and maybe we won’t
Sure, I'll give a three line summary. It's not the documents themselves that are classified, it's the specific individual facts in them. When something gets declassified the paragraph of the document that states that fact gets stamped "declassified, MM/DD/YY". All other documents that contain that specific fact get similarly stamped. A document that contains multiple classified facts that have been pulled together may well have multiple stamps on some of the facts declassifying those facts at different times. The president can't just claim randomly to have declassified something at some point in the past. There's a process and documentation required. Also, defense related secrets, most especially those related to nuclear weapons, cannot be declassified by the president alone.
frugal-one
8-13-22, 11:36am
Sure, I'll give a three line summary. It's not the documents themselves that are classified, it's the specific individual facts in them. When something gets declassified the paragraph of the document that states that fact gets stamped "declassified, MM/DD/YY". All other documents that contain that specific fact get similarly stamped. A document that contains multiple classified facts that have been pulled together may well have multiple stamps on some of the facts declassifying those facts at different times. The president can't just claim randomly to have declassified something at some point in the past. There's a process and documentation required. Also, defense related secrets, most especially those related to nuclear weapons, cannot be declassified by the president alone.
Show the documentation....otherwise another of trump's lies.
Yes. You support trump and his shenanigans. What you say and what you do are not congruent.
Only if I accept your bizarre one drop of blood standard. If I prefer, on balance, a Trump-endorsed candidate over the opposing democrat, I don’t see that that makes me a Trumpist. If I disapprove of some Trump actions but not others, I don’t see that that makes me a Trumpist.
It’s true that I am not a fanatically committed Orange Man Bad zealot. I see it as conceivable that I can view both Trump and many of his enemies as equally ridiculous while still making political judgments in an imperfect world. The world is more complicated that your Manichaean bubble.
Sure, I'll give a three line summary. It's not the documents themselves that are classified, it's the specific individual facts in them. When something gets declassified the paragraph of the document that states that fact gets stamped "declassified, MM/DD/YY". All other documents that contain that specific fact get similarly stamped. A document that contains multiple classified facts that have been pulled together may well have multiple stamps on some of the facts declassifying those facts at different times. The president can't just claim randomly to have declassified something at some point in the past. There's a process and documentation required. Also, defense related secrets, most especially those related to nuclear weapons, cannot be declassified by the president alone.
Pretty much every page of this document I have from Los Alamos contains stamps, dates, and such:
https://i.imgur.com/BRV66v1.png
Every page in a declassified document must be similarly stamped. Trump's hubris is over the top--he still seems to think he is king.
I bet there are a few of these rattling around in Putin's safe, as well.
I bet there are a few of these rattling around in Putin's safe, as well.
Who's to say if some of his guests happened to get pics on their cell phone? Some of the documents were oh so conveniently kept in a storage area next to the pool.
frugal-one
8-13-22, 3:04pm
Only if I accept your bizarre one drop of blood standard. If I prefer, on balance, a Trump-endorsed candidate over the opposing democrat, I don’t see that that makes me a Trumpist. If I disapprove of some Trump actions but not others, I don’t see that that makes me a Trumpist.
It’s true that I am not a fanatically committed Orange Man Bad zealot. I see it as conceivable that I can view both Trump and many of his enemies as equally ridiculous while still making political judgments in an imperfect world. The world is more complicated that your Manichaean bubble.
In this case you chose THE trump loyalist (and traitor) who tried to get fake electors to Pence. The purpose was to keep trump in power. How does this NOT make you a trumpist? You yourself stated, you like to see the world through rosy glasses. Enough already.
frugal-one
8-13-22, 3:07pm
Who's to say if some of his guests happened to get pics on their cell phone? Some of the documents were oh so conveniently kept in a storage area next to the pool.
unlocked
In this case you chose THE trump loyalist (and traitor) who tried to get fake electors to Pence. The purpose was to keep trump in power. How does this NOT make you a trumpist? You yourself stated, you like to see the world through rosy glasses. Enough already.
Rosy as in MAGA red? Turning a blind eye to encroaching authoritarianism is, at best, irresponsible.
flowerseverywhere
8-13-22, 7:05pm
What was he planning to do with boxes of government information?
We were in Palm beach and everyone here must realize it is not a secure facility at all. A main street goes right next to the fence. There is a large service/ delivery gate on that side that was wide open when we drove by. One side of the property is open to the bay.
When I went to a civilian area of the pentagon pre 9/11 they wanted my name, SS #, ID and our escort had to be with us at all times. Who knows who wandered in and out of Mar a Largo as guests, workers etc. Risky business.
What was he planning to do with boxes of government information?
We were in Palm beach and everyone here must realize it is not a secure facility at all. A main street goes right next to the fence. There is a large service/ delivery gate on that side that was wide open when we drove by. One side of the property is open to the bay.
When I went to a civilian area of the pentagon pre 9/11 they wanted my name, SS #, ID and our escort had to be with us at all times. Who knows who wandered in and out of Mar a Largo as guests, workers etc. Risky business.
A SCIF (Secure Compartmented Information Facility) can be as simple as a secure room with appropriate access controls. I'm guessing news reports of investigators earlier this year insisting upon a higher security lock on the storage room where documents were stored may have satisfied the basic requirements for storing confidential information.
flowerseverywhere
8-13-22, 8:28pm
A SCIF (Secure Compartmented Information Facility) can be as simple as a secure room with appropriate access controls. I'm guessing news reports of investigators earlier this year insisting upon a higher security lock on the storage room where documents were stored may have satisfied the basic requirements for storing confidential information.
Why did he have them in his home?
flowerseverywhere
8-13-22, 8:33pm
A SCIF (Secure Compartmented Information Facility) can be as simple as a secure room with appropriate access controls. I'm guessing news reports of investigators earlier this year insisting upon a higher security lock on the storage room where documents were stored may have satisfied the basic requirements for storing confidential information.
The GSA actually has strict requirements for a SCIF.
https://www.gsa.gov
Why did he have them in his home?
Lots of high ranking government officials have SCIF's in their residence. I'm guessing some portion of Mar a Lago was designated as a SCIF while he was in office.
The GSA actually has strict requirements for a SCIF.
https://www.gsa.gov
I know. I set up the required security measures for one after hurricane Katrina destroyed a previous one. They mostly deal with approved physical access control methods, secure communications and regulations having to do with visitors and reproduction devices.
Edited to add: Just out of curiosity I spent a few seconds googling and discovered that there is/was one at Mar-a-Lago. What Is a SCIF and Who Uses It? (nbcnews.com) (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/what-scif-who-uses-it-n743991)
Lots of high ranking government officials have SCIF's in their residence. I'm guessing some portion of Mar a Lago was designated as a SCIF while he was in office.
Interesting thought that I've not heard before. I'm thinking he could legitimately plead ignorance and say he didn't know what was in the boxes? It does beg to ask why he didn't just turn them over with the initial request months ago. My guess is that he was just being a contrary jerk.
Lots of high ranking government officials have SCIF's in their residence. I'm guessing some portion of Mar a Lago was designated as a SCIF while he was in office.
But why would an ex government official have these records in their home? It’s not like anyone from the biden administration would be discussing foreign policy with this buffoon. Not to mention that he stole the stuff and then refused to give it back. Rational people understand that he likely thought he could monetize it. If you can come up with a more logical reason for why he stole it and refused to give it back when asked nicely I’d love to hear it.
Lots of high ranking government officials have SCIF's in their residence. I'm guessing some portion of Mar a Lago was designated as a SCIF while he was in office.
Yeah sure. Perhaps the main dining room where he discussed with Shinzo Abe possible responses to a potential act of war by North Korea? While onlookers were snapping photos with their phones.
But why would an ex government official have these records in their home? It’s not like anyone from the biden administration would be discussing foreign policy with this buffoon. Not to mention that he stole the stuff and then refused to give it back. Rational people understand that he likely thought he could monetize it. If you can come up with a more logical reason for why he stole it and refused to give it back when asked nicely I’d love to hear it.
What makes you think he took them while leaving the White House? I'll bet even President Biden takes documents, or perhaps copies of original documents to his personal home on the weekends and maybe leaves some there. I'd be surprised if he doesn't have a SCIF in Delaware too.
Everyone seems to be approaching this from their preferred narrative without thinking through, or even considering other possibilities. That results in sloppy reasoning.
Yeah sure. Perhaps the main dining room where he discussed with Shinzo Abe possible responses to a potential act of war by North Korea? While onlookers were snapping photos with their phones.
Shit happens, I'm sure you remember Obama telling Medvedev on a hot mic to make sure Putin knows he'll have more flexibility after the election.
What makes you think he took them while leaving the White House? .
Because it was on the mainstream news as it happened?
Because it was on the mainstream news as it happened?
The mainstream news showed him taking boxes of documents out of the White House as he was moving out? I must have missed that.
Did the boxes have "Confidential" or "Top Secret" stamped in large red letters on the side so that the cameras could pick them out?
flowerseverywhere
8-14-22, 7:21am
What makes you think he took them while leaving the White House? I'll bet even President Biden takes documents, or perhaps copies of original documents to his personal home on the weekends and maybe leaves some there. I'd be surprised if he doesn't have a SCIF in Delaware too.
Everyone seems to be approaching this from their preferred narrative without thinking through, or even considering other possibilities. That results in sloppy reasoning.
Trump visited Mar a lagoon 134 times during his presidency. 26 boxes of documents were removed. A bankers box could hold three to five thousand pieces of paper with staples, file folders etc. 26x3000 is 78,000 pieces of paper. I have never seen any mention of Trump being A big reader. In fact, any manager depends on Trusted staff to summarize huge amounts of info. So your argument does not make sense to me.
Edited to add one argument by trump was Obama took millions of papers with him. National archives said all documents are in their possession as per the law. Presidential libraries are run and monitored by the archives for record compliance after they are built with private funds.
So your argument does not make sense to me.
I'm not making an argument, just thinking out loud. Everyone else seems to 'know' details that I can't possibly 'know', so I'm trying to provide food for thought while we await more information.
Olivia Troye, Republican homeland security and counterterrorism advisor to Vice President Pence, relates how appalled she was at the handling of government documents during her tenure. She described finding a sheaf of them in the women's bathroom. Then she outlined the proper procedure of securing them in marked, secure pouches when transporting them. She said nothing about flushing them down the toilet or eating them. Pretty sure that isn't protocol. Trump knew nothing about the proper administration of government, and nothing indicates he gave a damn.
Obama's live mic gaffe wasn't a state secret, or particularly harmful. I want to hear Trump's explanation for declaring that President Obama left office with thousands of classified documents--the National Archives disputes that, and it doesn't pass the laugh test. They're masters of projection, those MAGA bros.
Marcy Wheeler is a lawyer that has been blogging about trump and his alleged crimes, and other related stuff, for quite a while now. This is an interesting discussion of the likely crimes the DOJ is looking at in relation to the past week’s events, along with details about other individuals who have been convicted of those same crimes in the recent past, what it took to convict them, etc.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/08/14/18-usc-793e-in-the-time-of-shadow-brokers-and-donald-trump/
iris lilies
8-14-22, 11:37pm
Marcy Wheeler is a lawyer that has been blogging about trump and his alleged crimes, and other related stuff, for quite a while now. This is an interesting discussion of the likely crimes the DOJ is looking at in relation to the past week’s events, along with details about other individuals who have been convicted of those same crimes in the recent past, what it took to convict them, etc.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/08/14/18-usc-793e-in-the-time-of-shadow-brokers-and-donald-trump/
From this Marci Wheeler Post I take away that we may not need to know Donald Trump’s intent and taking these documents no worries in a charge necessarily tied to his intent. Just having them and treating them in a sloppily controlled way is a problem.
Wheeler is just another person spinning theories although she’s an educated person spinning theories, and perhaps educated theories..
frugal-one
8-15-22, 5:25am
[/B]]What makes you think he took them while leaving the White House? I'll bet even President Biden takes documents, or perhaps copies of original documents to his personal home on the weekends and maybe leaves some there. I'd be surprised if he doesn't have a SCIF in Delaware too. mount
Everyone seems to be approaching this from their preferred narrative without thinking through, or even considering other possibilities. That results in sloppy reasoning.
It doesn’t matter when trump took the records. Why did he have them, period?
Republicans are so completely hooked on defending the indefensible that that idiot Rand Paul thinks we need to repeal the espionage act if trump is guilty of it. Because you know, everyone has a first amendment right to steal and keep nuclear secrets. Or something.
gimmethesimplelife
8-16-22, 9:11pm
It's interesting that Eric Trump admitted to the world that when Daddy was president he weaponized federal law enforcement against his enemies.Let me get this straight (as the husband would say no pun intended). About taking the 5th - is this not meant to avoid self incrimination? Meaning if there is nothing to hide, there is no reason to take the 5th? My legal understanding - as you'all know by now - is all about everyday survival in an increasingly extremely unequal country.
Point? The implications of Trump's taking the 5th, especially so often (in one sitting?) are beyond my legal grasp. Those of you who DO understand, ummmmm......perhaps some gratitude for understanding non survival based law? I mean no snark here - such comprehension is beyond millions of Americans. It is certainly very new and perplexing/bewildering to me.
That all said, has Trump hurt himself here legally? I really have no idea. Others here are much better versed in non-survival law. *though could it not be argued that this entire situation involves political survival - survival of a different kind?
Rob
frugal-one
8-16-22, 9:13pm
So sick already of hearing about and discussions about the Hitler wannabe. Just wish he would disappear! Life was so much better with him out of the picture!
gimmethesimplelife
8-16-22, 9:14pm
That combativeness/vindictiveness seems to be a hallmark of authoritarian types, like Ron DeSantis, Vladimir Putin, Richard Nixon, etc.Also Thank God former Plillipine president Rodrigo Duterte, Victor Orban of Hungary, and what's his first name Erdogan of Turkey. There's more than just a few out there. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
8-16-22, 9:15pm
So sick already of hearing about the Hitler wannabe. Just wish he would disappear!I could not agree more, frugal-one. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
8-16-22, 9:23pm
I am truly hoping that the GOP has enough common sense not to nominate Trump. Ditto for the Dems not to nominate Biden. Faced with a choice of these two again, I'd be forced to write in Pedro Almodovar, a Spanish film director who made my favorite movie of all time. This would of course throw away my vote - but technically I DID vote so I have the right to complain. Let's hope for different candidates on BOTH sides!!!
Rob
iris lilies
8-16-22, 10:20pm
I am truly hoping that the GOP has enough common sense not to nominate Trump. Ditto for the Dems not to nominate Biden.
Rob
on this we can agree. So why don’t you use some of your activism time to campaign for a half way reasonable Democratic candidate. Would probably be at this point just about anyone who’s not a Biden. I don’t know if I would vote for the vice president against Trump. I do not know. I really really would have a hard time doing it. But I might. But please don’t put me in that position, get someone else on the ticket besides her.
What exactly is wrong with President Biden? Is it that the right has permanently besmirched him with their baseless claims of election fraud?
What exactly is wrong with President Biden? Is it that the right has permanently besmirched him with their baseless claims of election fraud?
He gets too much socialist legislation passed. I mean geez, what kind of ugly socialist would want to help veterans who were victims of burn pits, or deprive insulin manufacturers of obscene profits on the backs of diabetics. Or worst of all, increase the IRS’s ability to go after wealthy tax cheats. Oh the horror!
frugal-one
8-17-22, 8:29am
Biden will be in his 80s soon. It is time for younger blood. I will vote for anyone BUT trump. He was impeached twice and now has MANY criminal investigations going on against him. he is the definition of thug. Can’t understand why or how he should be nominated???
gimmethesimplelife
8-17-22, 9:34am
Biden will be in his 80s soon. It is time for younger blood. I will vote for anyone BUT trump. He was impeached twice and now has MANY criminal investigations going on against him. he is the definition of thug. Can’t understand why or how he should be nominated???One thing I do find amazing about Trump, much as I can't stand him.....he truly has more lives than a cat's supposed nine lives. I honestly don't know at this point if it's even possible to hold him accountable for anything. Rob
gimmethesimplelife
8-17-22, 9:47am
on this we can agree. So why don’t you use some of your activism time to campaign for a half way reasonable Democratic candidate. Would probably be at this point just about anyone who’s not a Biden. I don’t know if I would vote for the vice president against Trump. I do not know. I really really would have a hard time doing it. But I might. But please don’t put me in that position, get someone else on the ticket besides her.I am so all over the map concerning Kamala Harris. I'm glad to see a woman FINALLY rising closer to real power in the US. She can be likeable at times- so I see it. She has also committed more than a couple verbal embarrassments/word salads, all easily viewable on YouTube, which in my mind is why she has been sidelined and we don't hear much of her these days.
I rather doubt the Dems would nominate her as there is too much juicy word salad video of her out there. It's a shame for women too as I worry Ms. Harris's performance to date may have postponed a woman finally serving as US President. I'm hoping for less verbal snafus from her and solid results of some kind from.her before her four years as VP end. I would have chosen Elizabeth Warren, personally. Or even Buttigieg - not because he's openly gay but because he's young, fresh blood.
Rob
gimmethesimplelife
8-17-22, 9:54am
What exactly is wrong with President Biden? Is it that the right has permanently besmirched him with their baseless claims of election fraud?This isn't an easy question as Liberal but I'll tell it as I see it. To me personally he seems out if touch with the numerous crisises Americans are facing - though I do believe he's trying and I am glad he's not an embarrassment with foreign heads of state. I certainly see him as the much better choice over Trump ' but somehow after the Trump years I was hoping for more. He's no Obama and lacks the charisma of Bill Clinton and I personally believe at times he's in over his head -but also doing the best he can.
I'll close with this. I wish we could have Obama again. Rob
catherine
8-17-22, 10:08am
I agree with Jane that I think he's doing better than most people think he is. What has hindered him are the ridiculous jokes about his age, mental status, and life-long stuttering. This is where social media is a firebrand for coming to all the wrong conclusions. The caricature presented by detractors is not the man. But since the Era of Trump, anyone can be a victim of being turned into a digital version of a Garbage Pail Kid. (anyone else remember those?)
In terms of his actual policy, it took him time to get traction, to be sure, given the heavy hand he was dealt--COVID, the war in Ukraine, and all the precarious economic factors tied in with both of those things. Then there has been the daunting task of turning around the devastating actions against the environment by the previous administration (92 environmental policies revoked).
He has had finally been able to show some wins--a relatively stable economy at this point, despite COVID, a steady hand in the face of ominous geopolitical events, and of course, his passing of the Inflation Reduction Act.
He's not perfect, but he does not deserve the crap he's gotten. That being said, I also hope that we can get a younger person in. Never mind term limits--I can't imagine that any octogenarian is going to be able to fulfill the duties of the office of President. Maybe Merlin, since he lived backwards.
As presidents go I'm OK with Biden. He doesn't have the oratory or communication skills of Clinton or Obama, but he's done a reasonable job of furthering progressives issue, like placing minorities in high level positions. The new climate change legislation seemed like a little too much carrot and not enough stick to me, but considering the environment has mostly gotten lip service up until now, he gets bonus points for that. He at least gives the image of bicycling, rather than riding in a golf cart. My bar for presidents may not be that high.
I had an image of Pence/Cheney on a future ballot. I'm usually wrong on political predictions.
ApatheticNoMore
8-17-22, 7:54pm
I had an image of Pence/Cheney on a future ballot. I'm usually wrong on political predictions.
Didn't she lose by a massive margin? Who takes someone who loses by that much, and thinks they should run for President? Maybe she could run with the Forward party.
Who takes someone who loses by that much, and thinks they should run for President?
Someone who wants to act as a spoiler, much like H. Ross Perot's 1992 campaign which ultimately kept George H.W. Bush from winning a second term.
Didn't she lose by a massive margin? Who takes someone who loses by that much, and thinks they should run for President? Maybe she could run with the Forward party.
Because she lost a Congressional seat in Trump Country. I'm sure she has more popular appeal outside of Wyoming. I think many feel she's handled herself with integrity, and if she can get enough Replubicans and Independents who want to see someone who can get the GOP on a more reasonable track, she might have a chance.
ApatheticNoMore
8-17-22, 8:13pm
I think many feel she's handled herself with integrity, and if she can get enough Replubicans and Independents who want to see someone who can get the GOP on a more reasonable track, she might have a chance.
If there were more Republican voters that wanted that, she wouldn't have been the only one to take a stand (well and Romney maybe).
Didn't she lose by a massive margin? Who takes someone who loses by that much, and thinks they should run for President? Maybe she could run with the Forward party.
By my accounting from a next door neighbor state, Wyo. is is not just conservative but hard core conservative. I could picture Pence/Cheney bringing cross-overs from the dems who are fed up with Biden. He's not the most popular president. There are days when I dream that eventually the Republicans will face the reality of the big lie or Trump will face a felony, and then where will they be, or who.
Garbage Pail Kids cards--I loved those!
Yes, President Biden has done a great job choosing diverse cabinet members, and that's very, VERY important to me.
frugal-one
8-17-22, 9:26pm
Didn't she lose by a massive margin? Who takes someone who loses by that much, and thinks they should run for President? Maybe she could run with the Forward party.
I'd vote for Cheney. She, at least, has morals and integrity. The rest of the "republicans" are puppets of trump. Hard to respect those types of people and those who vote for them.
The thing that trump and all his supporters don't seem to understand is that bombast and shouts of "defund the FBI" do nothing to help trump when he, and the people who assisted him with his criming, actually have to show up in a damn court room. Just as he failed completely in his efforts to overturn the election by lawsuit, so too will he fail to defend himself using the same methods. He's an old **** that can try and run out the clock until he dies and goes to hell. Some of the other people around him have a lot more life left and a lot more to lose and will turn on him in an effort to save themselves.
I'd vote for Cheney. She, at least, has morals and integrity. The rest of the "republicans" are puppets of trump. Hard to respect those types of people and those who vote for them.
Has politics replaced religion in people's lives? If so, are some of us just defining others as modern heretics as a blatant show of our faith?
Serious question! I think there's something to this. How Social Justice Became a New Religion - The Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/social-justice-new-religion/671172/)
frugal-one
8-19-22, 7:54am
Has politics replaced religion in people's lives? If so, are some of us just defining others as modern heretics as a blatant show of our faith?
Serious question! I think there's something to this. How Social Justice Became a New Religion - The Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/social-justice-new-religion/671172/)
I’d say you are defining yourself. There is a difference between decency and religion. There should be a division between church and state!! Voting for Cheney is not a basis of religion but because she exemplifies what a republican should be. The current are “maga republicans” … sheep and puppets of trump…a traitor and Hitler wannabe. Hopefully, he will be prosecuted for his list of deceptive schenanigans..
Think the above article is crazy. The right are the ones playing the religious card….all the way to the supreme court.
Haven't we had a Catholic Supreme Court for a while now? I hope inquisitions don't make a comeback...
Has politics replaced religion in people's lives? If so, are some of us just defining others as modern heretics as a blatant show of our faith?
Serious question! I think there's something to this. How Social Justice Became a New Religion - The Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/social-justice-new-religion/671172/)
Yes, I do think the "religious" have found other outlets for establishing moral codes, particularly when they can be part of the tribunal of determining what's "good" and what's "evil" and then broadcast those views and find support on social media, which defers direct confrontation. On the one hand, I hate seeing woke "social justice" lumped in with the social justice of Martin Luther King Jr, Dorothy Day, Oscar Romero, and many other church-based social activitists. The vitriol and self-absorption of many of the strident liberals and conservatives defies any level of the true efficacy and personal sacrifice of the non-violent protests we are used to from people like King and Mandela.
OTOH, the churches have often failed to pay the "cost of discipleship" as Bonhoeffer called it. Martin Luther King said "Most churches are social clubs with a thin veneer of religiosity." They have served as exclusionary enclaves for people who think alike, and often look alike. Those churches actually foment just as much division as the most woke crowd.
I'm not sure if the terrible political spectacles we're seeing are an effect of church fall-out, or social media, or general tribal fear played out in tweets and memes.
Haven't we had a Catholic Supreme Court for a while now? I hope inquisitions don't make a comeback...
I believe the Know Nothing Party had a platform plank addressing your concern.
Has politics replaced religion in people's lives? If so, are some of us just defining others as modern heretics as a blatant show of our faith?
Serious question! I think there's something to this. How Social Justice Became a New Religion - The Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/social-justice-new-religion/671172/)
I think there is something to this as well. People trying to fill spiritual holes with politics. Look at the way the pro and anti Trump cults nurturing one another in a symbiosis of reciprocal hate. All the cell phone puritans hunting heretics in the name of “decency”.
As traditional religion ebbs, they paint dark visions of an imaginary theocracy. None is so blind…
frugal-one
8-20-22, 2:04pm
cell phone puritans.. verbal garbage? Are you trying to communicate Luddites or ????
ApatheticNoMore
8-20-22, 2:40pm
Nooone cares if abortion is banned because of increasing or decreasing faith, we just don't want it banned. Don't know how it can be any clearer.
Nooone cares if abortion is banned because of increasing or decreasing faith, we just don't want it banned. Don't know how it can be any clearer.
Really. I couldn't care less about anyone else's faith until it starts impinging on my life, which it inevitably does when its intermingled with government at any level.
frugal-one
8-26-22, 5:44pm
ok.. So who now is going to justify trump having classified documents in his possession? I saw noted that a guy who had ONE classified document was given 9 years in prison. Hopefully, trump will get that for EACH document he tried to take although I doubt it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/what-is-ndi-affidavit-reveals-trump-had-defense-documents/ar-AA118iEf
ok.. So who now is going to justify trump having classified documents in his possession? I saw noted that a guy who had ONE classified document was given 9 years in prison. Hopefully, trump will get that for EACH document he tried to take although I doubt it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/what-is-ndi-affidavit-reveals-trump-had-defense-documents/ar-AA118iEf
A President, or former President for that matter, holds a unique spot among all citizens regarding classified information. I would think any prosecution would involve a lot of legal firepower interpreting charges for someone holding that title. It's not quite as cut and dry as it was for lets say Hillary Clinton who stored classified documents on her home server and used insecure personal email to conduct sensitive business, or perhaps Sandy Berger (National Security Advisor to Bill Clinton) who actually stole classified documents from the National Archive. One of those suffered no consequences and the other was put on probation for two years and lost his security clearance for three years. What makes you think Trump should be treated more harshly if any sort of criminal charges should even be pressed?
ok.. So who now is going to justify trump having classified documents in his possession? I saw noted that a guy who had ONE classified document was given 9 years in prison. Hopefully, trump will get that for EACH document he tried to take although I doubt it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/what-is-ndi-affidavit-reveals-trump-had-defense-documents/ar-AA118iEf
Reality Winner served four.
A President, or former President for that matter, holds a unique spot among all citizens regarding classified information. I would think any prosecution would involve a lot of legal firepower interpreting charges for someone holding that title. It's not quite as cut and dry as it was for lets say Hillary Clinton who stored classified documents on her home server and used insecure personal email to conduct sensitive business, or perhaps Sandy Berger (National Security Advisor to Bill Clinton) who actually stole classified documents from the National Archive. One of those suffered no consequences and the other was put on probation for two years and lost his security clearance for three years. What makes you think Trump should be treated more harshly if any sort of criminal charges should even be pressed?
As I recall. Hillary Clinton inadvertently had three or four e-mails at the lowest possible classification stored on her server, which were clearly more secure than any document under Trump's purview. She was exonerated. Everyone in Trump's White House used unsecured phones--most especially Trump himself. And.it turns out, he stowed hundreds of sensitive documents here and there at Mar-a-Lago, keeping them for God knows what purpose. They should have all been turned over to the National Archives before the end of his term--as were all his predecessors' documents.
frugal-one
8-26-22, 9:15pm
A President, or former President for that matter, holds a unique spot among all citizens regarding classified information. I would think any prosecution would involve a lot of legal firepower interpreting charges for someone holding that title. It's not quite as cut and dry as it was for lets say Hillary Clinton who stored classified documents on her home server and used insecure personal email to conduct sensitive business, or perhaps Sandy Berger (National Security Advisor to Bill Clinton) who actually stole classified documents from the National Archive. One of those suffered no consequences and the other was put on probation for two years and lost his security clearance for three years. What makes you think Trump should be treated more harshly if any sort of criminal charges should even be pressed?
------
See #497.
rump himself, turns out, stowed hundreds of sensitive documents here and there at Mar-a-Lago, keeping them for God knows what purpose. They should have all been turned over to the National Archives before the end of his term--as were all his predecessors' documents.
former president or not... he had no business taking sensitive documents... not a "unique spot" in any situation. He no longer holds the prestigious position of president but of an ordinary citizen. He has put many people in danger because of his ? stupidity/duplicity/selfishness... take your pick. He should not be above the law and, hopefully, will be prosecuted for this!!
See #497.
I saw it. As far as we know there may have been 30,000 or so documents, but they disappeared before anyone had a chance to look. They're all probably on a non-disclosed backup sitting on a public cloud server somewhere. No big deal.
When hubby Bill took thousands of digital copies of documents home with him and the National Archives asked for them back he just said "No, those are personal documents, you don't need em". Again, no big deal.
This time it's a big deal. I wonder what's changed?
frugal-one
8-26-22, 10:06pm
I saw it. As far as we know there may have been 30,000 or so documents, but they disappeared before anyone had a chance to look. They're all probably on a non-disclosed backup sitting on a public cloud server somewhere. No big deal.
When hubby Bill took thousands of digital copies of documents home with him and the National Archives asked for them back he just said "No, those are personal documents, you don't need em". Again, no big deal.
This time it's a big deal. I wonder what's changed?
Where did you get this info? And, if true, stated above listed as personal. trump took classified documents? What's changed is personal and classified documents are not the same. Personal doesn't pose a national security threat.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.