Yes. The part where they want soldiers to refuse direct orders from their commanding officers was quite impressive.
Printable View
Yes. The part where they want soldiers to refuse direct orders from their commanding officers was quite impressive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
Fabulous!
#1275. Florida
The murderous treason of the last Republican president
Marjorie Taylor Greene (or whatever she's calling herself now) engaging in illegal revenge porn by showing private citizen Hunter Biden's alleged dick pic in an open Congressional hearing for no apparent reason.
Graphical representation of Mann Act violation and improper tax deduction for "professional services"? A picture is worth a thousand words.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
The Mann Act?? Oh, please. I'm sure there was no sex trafficking going on. And Biden's tax cheating could be better addressed by the IRS, if warranted, without Congress getting involved. Same could be said for the "Mann Act" idiocy. MTG et al have no right to harass a private citizen in any case outside of the government. I remarked to a friend that Billy Carter, Roger Clinton, and Neil Bush should be glad they're not living in these crazy times.
I'm guessing you didn't watch the line of questioning. It had to do with payments made from business accounts and then deducted on tax forms for flights transporting "personal assistants" across state lines and those "personal assistants" turning out to be prostitutes from California. Annual memberships in expensive sex clubs were also deducted.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
Kinda silly in one sense and a bit of showboating on MTG's part but overall a valid discussion point in a hearing with IRS investigators showcasing charges ignored or deliberately delayed until statute of limitations kicks in.
Did you see today's hearing on governmental censorship where the entire Democratic delegation tried to censor Robert Kennedy Jr to keep him from testifying about being censored? These hearings are nothing if not entertaining.
I remember when legislators focused more on the business of government and less on silly political stunts. Hunter Biden may be a reprobate, but if anything, his escapades are a matter for law enforcement, not Congress.
Ah, for simpler times....
https://i.imgur.com/U9GsT38.jpg
Looks like they couldn’t get the judge to sign off on Hunter’s plea deal. It wasn’t the completely usual nothing-to-see-here nothingburger people were claiming it to be.
I am actually glad because it didn’t seem right to me. I am for justice not party.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
it is nothing to see because main stream media is not covering much of it, or they’re covering only the broad story that they’re forced to cover. were it a real story they would be all over it! /sQuote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
I listened to NPR’s On The Media interview with Michael Sulzberger, New York Times publisher, who swears up down and sideways that his newspaper is not a liberally focused newspaper. Early in the podcast the interviewer said with a bit of exasperation “why don’t you just admit that it’s a liberal publication? that doesn’t discount your reporting is professional, thorough, and factual.”
Sulzberger wouldn’t budge.
I’m waiting for that NYT front page expose of Hunter Biden. I might then subscribe to it. How long will I have to wait?
Since I do not follow details of the Hunter Biden story, and there’s certainly smoke there don’t know about fire, the real story has always been the complacency of media and government officials to refuse to cover the story. Ongoing now for years. I enjoyed watching the New York Post reporter testify in front of Congress and give a beatdown to her journalistic colleagues. Yes, I know that the Post is a rag, but that girl has journalism chops. Just like the college freshman had journalism chops, the kid who brought down Stanford University’s president for his unrelenting investigation into cooked research published by the president. Just like that college sophomore who was key in bringing down Elizabeth Holmes.
The Internet has millions of little voices twittering incredibly stupid stuff, but the Internet also allows truth to rise to the top.
Not a real story, like the Russia collusion thing? Or Brett Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook?Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
No, it most certainly wasn't. Hiding what appears to be a blanket pardon (or at least a promise not to prosecute any additional violations which may come to light) within the pre-trial diversion section of the agreement seems like a big deal indeed. I suspect the judge's attention to detail will now force the DOJ to explore potential FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act) violations which is the very last thing the Biden administration and main stream media want to happen. If Hunter is found to be in violation the question of what he had to offer comes to the forefront, and the answer is influence.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
To think that would have been pushed under the rug in the absence of one simple question from the judge is remarkable.
I also think that's a perfect example of why you shouldn't vote Republican, the double standards, graft and influence peddling will have to be a little less obvious otherwise.
The very smart Marcy Wheeler has an interesting take on what’s going on with the Hunter Biden plea deal. The very short TLDR, both the government and Hunter’s lawyer bungled the whole thing although she also seems to think the government may have been trying to back door Hunter into testifying himself into a FARA crime admission that they don’t otherwise have admissible evidence for because of the whole laptop scam being tainted beyond usefulness.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/07/2...-hunter-biden/
i’m not sure I understand what this author is saying (it’s hard to wade through the first few paragraphs of this article because she’s so self congratulatory ) but is her conclusion really that the DOJ can’t do what they need to do because —-Donald J Trump? It’s Trump’s fault?Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Really, is this the conclusion?
Partly yes. Because the DOj under Donald trump did stuff the DOJ can’t do. But the bigger conclusion is that the DOJ was trying to fix that by scamming Hunter into confessing crimes that the DOJ wouldn’t otherwise be able to prove due to the ‘irregularities’ that occurred under Barr’s tenure.
Basically her understanding from a strictly legal point of view is that neither the right wing or left wing accepted point of view of why this has played out is accurate.
I think what she was basically saying is that the DOJ was trying to set Hunter Biden up through specific language in the plea agreement and that the defense attorneys were too stupid to notice. It occurs to me that the DOJ might attempt something like that but any competent lawyer, not to mention an entire team of lawyers would see through that at first glance. It doesn't pass the smell test for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
It seems more likely to me that this was a concerted effort between both sides to put this entire matter to rest while doing the least possible damage to the defendant, and also to provide immunity from future prosecution for related charges without admitting to the potential charges themselves. The judge threw a monkey wrench into the mix by asking pertinent questions which forced the prosecution to backtrack on what they and the defense had previously agreed upon but couldn't publicly admit.
Also, Hunter doesn't have very good attorneys according to her although I can’t imagine why.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Maybe because he has long had addiction issues and judging from how he didn’t really seem aware of the fact that his iCloud account had been taken over by hackers is still not really ‘together’? I don’t have addiction issues but if I was in a legal situation the only way I’d know whether my counsel sucked would be because I have a few friends that are lawyers. Lots of people, possibly including hunter given his addiction issues, may not have responsible and smart lawyer friends to help him.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
Isn't Hunter himself a lawyer and graduate of Yale Law School?Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
Wow - I just looked him up and his bio. He certainly managed to fail upwards with great speed!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
True. Just like W but with addiction thrown in to make things complicated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
I understand that there are now a dozen or so federal judges who won’t consider Yale Law grads for clerkships, largely over that institution’s hostility to the concept of free speech.
I find it difficult to believe a man with his money and connections can’t get decent advice.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
As I recall, W had drug and alcohol issues as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...s/70487604007/
Great idea in Texas to turn school libraries into detention/disciplinary centers. We don't need no books.
https://money.yahoo.com/law-shields-...184600474.html
And new law so Desantis can use State vehicles for his 2024 presidential campaign. Because the money isn't needed to help the actual taxpayers. They all have a roof over their head, great health insurance, decent food and excellent schools. Not.
Considering how he thinks the Florida state government exists to serve his personal hate filled desires this is absolutely not a surprise. The only surprise about desantis is that his thin skinned, hate filled existence isn’t more popular outside Florida.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
I still hold out hope for Tim Scott. He must be getting at least some traction, or they wouldn’t be trying out Uncle Tom smears on him.
And the latest on Florida
https://abcnews.go.com/US/florida-ef...y?id=101996465
So AP psychology cannot mention sexuality because Ron the dictator says so. No AP African American or psychology unless they change the curriculum to what they want.
Imagine the students they are hurting. Maybe they can offer bible study instead.
At a certain point, people bear some responsibility for the people they choose to put in office.Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
If Floridians enjoy this sort of thing, well, more power to them and their hellscape.
Heck, there's a good chance Trump will get re-elected in 2024.
i’m fascinated to know what kind of established, irrefutable facts about gender and its identity they are teaching. You know, THE SCIENCE of psychology and sociology of gender. Are there any?Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Lol. Judging from his milk toast response to the trump indictments the other day he has about as much chance as peewee Herman of becoming president.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
His lame response may be fine for you but it appeals to exactly no one. Magas will hate it. Democracy lovers will hate it. Only the 5% of people like you that are in between those two groups will find it at all acceptable.
I think there is more space between people who love Trump and people who love to hate Trump than you suggest. I think the more people see of Scott the more they will like him. In an era of frothing-at-the-mouth hatred and puerile insults passing for politics, he’s a breath of fresh air. The non-neurotic vote may be larger than you think, and being insuffiently agitated could actually be a positive.Quote:
Originally Posted by jp1
The article posted refers to that. All around us sexuality, gender, and identity is something to understand. Making believe it doesn't exist will not make it go away. Education About it makes informed, critical thinkers.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
I spent 30+ years working on locked psych wards, plus some in addiction units. So many people have sexual conflicts, have dealt with sexual abuse, sexual harassment, gender identity and rejection by their family due to their sexual preferences. there is no one way to deal with them. But understanding and accepting them is the first step. What are republicans afraid of? Perhaps they protest too much.
Greg Abbott is a great example of how not to be a human being--born without a soul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flowerseverywhere
Oh, I know and I’m not interested in tamping down on topics taught or removing books from public libraries or necessarily other libraries, so in the big overview picture sure – sex, sexuality, gender, identity, etc. exist and I theoretically support those appropriate topics for education. You speak in generalities, and I agree.
I just wonder what exactly they are teaching about those topics. The devil is in the details. I think it’s likely that some “statements of fact” a teacher might make would be ones I disagree with as factual.
I don’t want to control information that might promote a point of view in opposition to mine, I would much rather see an atmosphere of free and open discussion on these and other matters. It’s just that it’s unlikely in our educational institutions these days. That is too bad, the quashing of intellectual exploration from all sides of the political spectrum. It’s unfortunate.
Nothing I’m saying here is intending to support the state of Florida’s control on sex and race education. Neither am I necessarily supporting the current educational environment.
if I had children, I was sending to public school. I hope I would have enough sense to counter at home some of the nonsense they’re getting in classroom instruction, but I would also welcome a broadening of their outlook on life they might not get in my home. If they felt inclined to —for instance—use the wrong nomenclature in their gender study class which would earn them a failing grade, would counsel them to smile and go along with the game in order to get a good grade. I think my kids would be smart enough at high school age to understand life is not black-and-white.