Or,Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
It seems almost forms of social media have become weaponized and designed to fictionalize us beyond recognition...
Printable View
Or,Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
It seems almost forms of social media have become weaponized and designed to fictionalize us beyond recognition...
-New Trump rape allegation by E. Jean Carroll that is both believable and describes repulsive behavior. I would love to hear Trump'ers explain why Trump cannot at least informally be considered a predator but that Weinstein, Spacey, and other serial abusers can be. Would also love to hear what they think due process is again.
Should he be criminally charged and then get the full panoply of constitutional protections? Should Congress investigate the allegations to make sure he is not being unjustly accused? If due process refers to the institution of procedures to prevent an unjust deprivation of liberty or property, then maybe it's time he faces the consequences that necessitate those protections.
On the one hand, I can understand why there is a convention that prohibits the prosecution of the President -it could be used by opponents to bring case after case that interferes with the job. On the other hand, this President has made it clear that he knows -because the lawyers have told him it is so -that Executive Privilege allows him to do many things which are not illegal but violate an established 'standard of behaviour' -standards he does not adhere to because he chooses not to- but which also includes illegal actions, on which the President is clear: I am breaking the law, what are you going to do about it?
Violating the Atomic Energy Act to sell nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia; by-passing Congress on issues that relate to a 'national emergency' where there is none or is contested; employing people who break the law (Conway and the Hatch Act); ordering present and former employees of the White House to refuse to answer questions posed by Congressional committees. At what point does the term Executive Privilege become Executive Dictatorship?
The question is can the relationship be changed in law, can Congress impose legal limits on the Presidency that enable the Justice Department, when the evidence is there, to proseute the President where impeachment is not the relevant course of action? And yet it seems to me the President is deliberately breaking the law to prove he can do it with impunity, it is his way of taking revenge on all those political and public figures who have ridiculed him over the years: 'Yes, I am a schmuck, but I am the schmuck in the White House and you are nothing'.
Change the rules, and while you're at it, change the President.
The Mueller Report proved Trump was guilty of obstruction, and that alone is enough to impeach him, but doing the right thing would destroy the Republican Party as we know it, and Mitch McConnell will block the Democrats until the Supreme Court says he can't. That's why he's packed the courts with Federalist Society Judges.
I don't think we're quite at the point to shred the Constitution, I think as soon as Trump is out of the White House the Insanity stops.
I don't think anything is more important than showing Trump's base that their Idol laundered millions of Oligarch dollars, and Putin did indeed command Donald Trump, not them. Let them chew on that for a while.
I'm afraid that as far as the Hung Angels Politics and Religion section goes, it went. To twitter. As an old geezer, I have a hard time keeping up, but the comedy over there can be as good as it gets. And you get a good feel of what's really going on with the Trump Base. Yech.
I know that Putin messed with the election and Brexit, but goddam it I want details. There was a recent article about the Pentagon setting up a way to zap the entire Russian power grid (just in case) and they didn't tell Trump. I forget the details. I sincerely believe there are Americans 100 times smarter and more powerful than me who know exactly what's going on and aren't allowed to poke their nose into politics.
Don't forget, we are the Nation that melted 100,000 Japanese civilians with one B-29.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/27/18761166/supreme-court-gerrymandering-republicans-democracy
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-422_9ol1.pdf
The second link is to the actual case of Rucho v. Common Cause. The Supreme Court has decided that partisan gerrymandering is not unconstitutional and that the drawing of districts in Congressional elections is a political question left to other coordinate branches of government, namely state legislatures.
I haven't read the case but I did skim the synopsis at the beginning and what stands out to me is this quote from a previous gerrymandering case: "The question is one of degree: how to provide a standard for deciding how much partisan dominance is too much." Huh? If it can be inferred that the districts in a state were drawn a particular way to entrench one party in power, that should violate equal protection. How much partisan gerrymandering is too much? Any. How do you prove an impermissible motive? The same way you would in any other case, through statistical inference, statements by people involved in the process etc.
The Court seems to rely on precedent to say that some partisan gerrymandering is permissible. I cannot imagine that there is a rational or legitimate government objective to create rules that make it easier for the party in power to maintain power.
The Court goes on to say that it is difficult to come up with standards for how districts should be drawn since the choices are varied and it is beyond the ken of the judiciary to engage in such an exercise. They are not being tasked with devising a method for drawing districts. They are only tasked with determining whether partisanship was a factor in the way they were drawn. The legislatures would have full leeway to draw districts how they please unless they engage in racial or partisan gerrymandering, in which case it should be struck down as unconstitutional. Any choice they make might fall within some range of discretion; unless they provably drew districts based on racial demographics or to ensure a political outcome, the courts would not constrain their choices.
Anyhow, I probably will read the dissent...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYMm3tivK7A
Didn't see the debates. Saw this exchange and agree with Harris.
They say after Angela Merkel shook hands with Obama the last time a little tear went down her face, I look at the 20 Democrats and just see the problems. I knew this was a racist country, but I don't think even Atticus Finch could sway Fox Nation. Free Racism is a better sell than free healthcare.
With all of them? Preliminarily I like Harris and Buttigieg. Biden has always seemed like a nice enough guy. I watch him and get the feeling he wants to be liked. I've always thought Bernie wants to be idolized and now sees it as his chance to be an important figure after a lifetime as an outsider. I should probably watch the debates but I've always been impressed by Harris. She's prepared and on message.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
I liked maybe half, but I don't see any of them on Mt Rushmore. I thought your boy Hickenlooper did well. Following Donald Trump is going to be a hard act to follow. Maybe when it gets down to eight we'll have something to chew on. While I thought either Hillary or Bernie would be a great choice in 2016, for reasons I can't explain, they seem like aliens now. Seems like a long time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
:) i'm nowhere near colorado!! :dQuote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
8 sleepy years with Joe would please me.
On the one hand a depressing example of the SC not wanting to intervene in a matter they claim is political, yet one so blatant in its intentions to rig elections one wonders what the relationship between voting and the Constitution might be.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
On the other hand can Congress now intervene, for example through a Federal Boundary Commission and take the right to draw boundaries away from the States? How far do 'State's rights' enable a State to make its own rules?
If Congress can assert itself over the State on this issue, it should do so before 2020, just as voter suppression and the closure of polling stations ought to be dealt with too. But does the US Congress have the will to change things?
I'm not sure the answer to this. The Constitution provides a means of figuring out how many representatives each state should have in the house but I'm not sure it prescribes the methods for drawing districts. If the Constitution did specifically prescribe a way for states to do it, then Congress would not be able to legislate over it. If it doesn't I'm still not sure what power this would fall under for Congress. Finally, as you say, if they had that power, would they exercise it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
What is so strange about the majority opinion in this case is that the Supreme Court already has said that they can step in to remedy "racial gerrymandering". It makes their argument that they cannot come up with standards for analyzing "partisan gerrymandering" ring hollow. They are right that it isn't their job to prescribe procedures for districting, but it is their job to ensure people's votes aren't diluted by a process of rigging as you accurately put it. There IS a legitimate distinction between telling states they cannot adopt a particular method (because it entrenches the incumbent) and telling the states exactly what method to adopt.
https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/redistricting
https://www.brennancenter.org/analys...essional-bills
Don't know much about the Brennan Center, except that they're a non-profit affiliated with NYU Law. Here's what they have to say about Stavros' question, especially the second link.
I also looked up Article 1 Section 4 referenced above:The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Have a feeling the below House Resolution would not pass the senate or if it did would be vetoed. But it seems pretty sensible. Maybe after the next elections we can pass something similar and ensure greater fairness in House elections.
H.R. 145: An omnibus anti-corruption reform bill including a requirement for each state to use a nonpartisan independent commission to conduct congressional redistricting, starting with the redistricting that follows the 2020 census; prohibits the use of federal funds for election administration purposes unless the state uses a nonpartisan independent redistricting commission to draw state legislative districts.
Nice shot, Bronco, they were talking about that on C-Span, they basically said what you said, they added that gerrymandering started in some form before 1776.
I was in College when Nixon was president, my draft # was 28. I once went to a student demonstration, I was having a good time seeing people from the dorms I knew from freshman year. Then a police car blew up, and "the pigs" pushed the crowd against me, pinning me against a car. I had my bicycle with me, so I was being impaled and my adrenaline was spiking and I could not wiggle one inch. When I finally broke away, I was running down the side street, when a girl grabbed my arm and said "SLOW DOWN" ….As soon as she touched me, I calmed right down, in fact, I dropped into a completely relaxed sleepwalk, we were walking down the middle of the street at night, and on either side of us running long haired freaks were getting their heads busted by galloping cops on horseback. But it was exciting back then. In fact it was a gas.
My Mom is now 97, she can't remember 10 seconds ago, so we talk about the great depression and WWII. She was born in an Arkansas boom town, and was 17 when Gone with the Wind first screened.
To make a long story short, as bad as the trials and tribulations have been, I am thankful that this joke administration must surely come to an end, and I'm hopeful that when the truth comes out, Trump's base will own what they did and sour on the lies and hate they've been spoon fed.
On the Democrat side, as refreshing as a Kamala or Buttigieg might be, I want an old white guy in the middle with Chuck and Nancy on either side. I want the Democrat Republicans like best. I want the Nation to roll up it's sleeves and work together under the Union Flag. No, not the YANKEE flag, the Union flag. WORK is the great equalizer.
This looks sane and reasonable, but will it pass?Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
Two more examples that stretch the boundaries of credulity. I have posted on the case of child marriages in the US before, an investigation broadcast on BBC Radio 4 offers some insights into this, and a lot of pathetic excuses. At least resolve some of the problems by standardizing the age of marriage to 16 (and the age of consent where in states it is still eighteen with limits on the age of the spouses -the programme is here-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07f1zcs
As for Marshae Jones being prosecuted for manslaughter because her baby was shot by someone else...yes, it is Alabama, but unless it secretly seceded to revive its Confederate heritage (or never gave it up) it is still part of the USA...???
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...wn-birth-canal
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8982751.html
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...30380981067777
This is so disgusting and indefensible. Of all the public statements Trump has made this might be the worst one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Gallagher_(Navy_SEAL)
Best case scenario for Eddie Gallagher: He was a psychopath known for taking "militarily pointless shots" in order to murder random Arabs; he witnessed a fellow serviceman murder a POW and decided to pose with the body.
Worst case scenario for Eddie Gallagher: He was a psychopath known for taking militarily pointless shots and murdering random Arabs; he also murdered a POW and posed with the body.
I forgot to mention that in the best case scenario, at least one serviceman testified to Gallagher stabbing the POW but not being the ultimate cause of death...either way the President of the United States just sent a message of support to a cold-blooded killer.
The BBC is releasing a documentary on whether Labour is anti-semitic. There is some question over the use of non-disclosure agreements being used to prevent people from talking about Labour anti-Semitism. Oftentimes ndas are used to protect patent processes or trade secrets, but are typically not allowed to shield whistleblowing activity. Whether it is whistleblowing activity will depend on what is contained in the documentary.
I've seen large numbers of Labour members, in advance of the documentary, try to find different grounds for accusing the documentary makers of bias (one accusation was disqualification by Jewishness, which was probably even embarrassing for some of the worst rabble rousers). I'm always a bit suspicious when someone wants to discredit something whose findings they don't know yet. But maybe Labour supporters have been disingenuous when asking to see the evidence and really they know what it is. In my experience they should sometimes be told "you're the evidence". I've seen the same accusations about the pending statutory investigation by EHRC. With such an attitude they seem to hold out no hope for exoneration.
Related to this, the Guardian published a letter signed by a relatively small number of signatories from the Jewish community claiming the accusations of anti-Semitism are a smear campaign. This is not the first time they've published such a letter, often with the same signatories, but this is the first time they've pulled the letter, after it was reported one signatory was a Holocaust denier and one had publicly admitted to pretending to be Jewish because of its usefulness. I think one was a 9/11 truther but that doesn't necessarily make them less Jewish.
A few resignations today as well. I'm curious to see the documentary and the findings of the EHRC investigation. If I were compiling evidence, I would have enough to make the argument so I have to imagine a team of people will dutifully report it.
One of the signatories of the letter in the Guardian wrote "Rothchild funded both the British and French Napoleonic Wars", that "Jews do not pray to Jesus, they killed him", "thankfully the Hispanics are outbreeding Jews in New York" and "Zionists are animals to be exterminated".
This was by the signatory of a letter hoping to exonerate Labour!!! I wonder what the opinion is of the broader public about what's going on there.
I just heard we were demoted to 29th in the United Federation of Planets,...Damn you Trump!!!
Scientists must admit we are trained animals.
My thought?
Break training.
I honestly don't know what's going to happen with Trump, I've been wrong so far. I think Robert Mueller is chugging a bottle of Maalox about now, thinking about the good old days in Viet Nam. Everything Trump says, even the lies, is about 37% right. That makes him 100% wrong.
Those Clowns Trump hangs with make a million bucks on a phone call.
Nobody believes in the Devil but they all know his name.
Latest from the President of the USA: 'I can do anything I want'.
Is this true, and is it because nobody in over 200 years ever thought a man so corrupt would be President that the Constitution would allow anything and everything that is not specifically not allowed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
pretty much.
So you changed one number in Stavros' quoted text and wrote pretty much three indents from the left. What is going on here? From my abode in Denver this seems awfully suspicious:)Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
You said you didn't live in Colorado...…I was actually thinking the same thing Stavros was thinking, Trump isn't the President who acts like an asshole, he's an asshole who acts like a President.His election is completely unbelievable. This can't happen.
I think Mueller has everything. The taxes, the money laundering, the Putin connection, as well as other crimes farmed out to New York. They were sloppy. And they will receive no mercy in Court.
Mueller even ponied up the dough to pay the 25 million price tag from the Paul Manafort seizures. Nice touch.
Some powerful and emotional responses in defence of Baltimore following the dog's attack, though one should pause to recall that typical volley of abuse was provoked by Rupert Murdoch's 'news' infotaintment., just as one marvels at the claim he made when Obama was President that if he was flown into the city he would 'fix it quick'! Whereas David Simon said if he was flown into West Baltimore where they shot The Wire, the President would 'wet himself'.
The full version of Blackwell's passionate response is here-
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/28/p...ets/index.html
The editorial in the Baltimore Sun is surely the most astonishing attack on a sitting President in the press, maybe worse than anything said by Nixon? I copy it below having had to work round the fact the Baltimore Sun is not available from the UK (I had to use the Cached function on google).
But here is the thought: what is the thinking behind all this racist garbage? Is 2020 really going to be fought on issues around 'the browning of America' and the allusion to disloyalty to America based on colour and religion? Can the people advancing this be so utterly ignorant of their own history? Murdoch and his dog hate government, and will do anything they can do denigrate, demean and undermine the concept of it as well as its actual practice -they want a world without taxation, regulation (and without tariffs and quotas) where even defence of the 'nation' is provided by organized militias. Congress and its Congressional Representatives are USELESS, that is the key message from the Murdoch-Dog kennel.
The silence from the bulk of the Republican Party is expected, but is it not also a violation of their oath to not respond when the USA is being attacked like this? Is it not time to impeach, if not the President, members of Congress for violating their oath of office?
Baltimore Sun Editorial
"In case anyone missed it, the president of the United States had some choice words to describe Maryland’s 7th congressional district on Saturday morning. Here are the key phrases: “no human being would want to live there,” it is a “very dangerous & filthy place,” “Worst in the USA” and, our personal favorite: It is a “rat and rodent infested mess.” He wasn’t really speaking of the 7th as a whole. He failed to mention Ellicott City, for example, or Baldwin or Monkton or Prettyboy, all of which are contained in the sprawling yet oddly-shaped district that runs from western Howard County to southern Harford County. No, Donald Trump’s wrath was directed at Baltimore and specifically at Rep. Elijah Cummings, the 68-year-old son of a former South Carolina sharecropper who has represented the district in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1996.
It’s not hard to see what’s going on here. The congressman has been a thorn in this president’s side, and Mr. Trump sees attacking African American members of Congress as good politics, as it both warms the cockles of the white supremacists who love him and causes so many of the thoughtful people who don’t to scream. President Trump bad-mouthed Baltimore in order to make a point that the border camps are “clean, efficient & well run," which, of course, they are not — unless you are fine with all the overcrowding, squalor, cages and deprivation to be found in what the Department of Homeland Security’s own inspector-general recently called “a ticking time bomb."
In pointing to the 7th, the president wasn’t hoping his supporters would recognize landmarks like Johns Hopkins Hospital, perhaps the nation’s leading medical center. He wasn’t conjuring images of the U.S. Social Security Administration, where they write the checks that so many retired and disabled Americans depend upon. It wasn’t about the beauty of the Inner Harbor or the proud history of Fort McHenry. And it surely wasn’t about the economic standing of a district where the median income is actually above the national average. No, he was returning to an old standby of attacking an African American lawmaker from a majority black district on the most emotional and bigoted of arguments. It was only surprising that there wasn’t room for a few classic phrases like “you people” or “welfare queens” or “crime-ridden ghettos” or a suggestion that the congressman “go back” to where he came from.
This is a president who will happily debase himself at the slightest provocation. And given Mr. Cummings’ criticisms of U.S. border policy, the various investigations he has launched as chairman of the House Oversight Committee, his willingness to call Mr. Trump a racist for his recent attacks on the freshmen congresswomen, and the fact that “Fox & Friends” had recently aired a segment critical of the city, slamming Baltimore must have been irresistible in a Pavlovian way. Fox News rang the bell, the president salivated and his thumbs moved across his cell phone into action.
As heartening as it has been to witness public figures rise to Charm City’s defense on Saturday, from native daughter House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Mayor Bernard C. “Jack” Young, we would above all remind Mr. Trump that the 7th District, Baltimore included, is part of the United States that he is supposedly governing. The White House has far more power to affect change in this city, for good or ill, than any single member of Congress including Mr. Cummings. If there are problems here, rodents included, they are as much his responsibility as anyone’s, perhaps more because he holds the most powerful office in the land.
Finally, while we would not sink to name-calling in the Trumpian manner — or ruefully point out that he failed to spell the congressman’s name correctly (it’s Cummings, not Cumming) — we would tell the most dishonest man to ever occupy the Oval Office, the mocker of war heroes, the gleeful grabber of women’s private parts, the serial bankrupter of businesses, the useful idiot of Vladimir Putin and the guy who insisted there are “good people” among murderous neo-Nazis that he’s still not fooling most Americans into believing he’s even slightly competent in his current post. Or that he possesses a scintilla of integrity. Better to have some vermin living in your neighborhood than to be one."
I think what I hate most is that Trump is getting away with it. Behind the clown tweets he and his are on a four year smash and grab heist, seeding away millions where no-one will ever find it. Money for a rainy day. A grand old time. And we're all watching. How can anybody jack off to Shemales and enjoy it when that's what he wants us to do!!!!
If you spent more time in the general discussion section rather than always loitering in the political section you might be aware that "shemale" has not been an acceptable term on this forum for some time.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
And if you turn your gaze to the right of this page you might see an ad for SHEMALE JAPAN 8Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
If you send a check to Donald Trump made out to "racist, childish, shithead prick" it will be cashed, I guarantee you.
"Let them eat cake" -Marie Antoinette
"You can't insult me with cash" -Bobby the Brain Heenan.
I know it's a waste of time trying to educate you on anything, but these are the rules according to Grooby Steven http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/sho...dated-may-2019Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
"2. You should be aware of the proper terminology if you want the respect and answers. Trans, Tgirls, Transsexual, TG, TS, Transgender, etc. are appropriate. Tranny, Shemale, Chicks with Dicks aren't."
If you scroll down you will see they have decided not to go back and change past titles like Shemale Japan 8, though the series is now called Tgirl Japan.
"There is a fine line between irreverence and being a jerk." - Me
I know it's a waste of time trying to educate you on anything
Now you know how your Mom feels.
"2. You should be aware of the proper terminology if you want the respect
Anytime I feel the driving need for respect I head to a porn site!
If you scroll down you will see they have decided not to go back and change past titles like Shemale Japan 8, though the series is now called Tgirl Japan.
I mocked this site years ago for using terms like SHEMALE. I'm glad they finally heeded my advice.
"There is a fine line between irreverence and being a jerk."
There's a fine brown line around your dick too.
I'm just fuckin' with you, filghy2, maybe now that you've put me in my place you can state your case on politics and religion, and see if anyone salutes.
I've done so many times before, but I'm a bit over it at this stage. Everything Trump and co does follows a predictable pattern so it's hard to say anything that hasn't been said before. Also, there's probably no more than 5 people coming to this section regularly and they mostly agree, which is why we end up arguing over minor things. Unlike the good Stavros I don't have an endless appetite for preaching to the choir, and even he seems to be tiring of it lately.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
What this section needs is some villains to spice up the discussion. Where are you Mr Fanti, Redvex, Nick Danger, CD Sasha? Even being called a c**t by that oaf Peejaye might be better than nothing.
I'm not sure there is a calm way to say the President is guilty of Treason. There should be no discussion about it. The reason there are so many Mexicans here is because Americans don't do their own dirty work anymore.
I guess the bottom line is that it was a lot more fun being a World Class Asshole when Obama was President, none of the current Democratic hopefuls will give the World hope and guidance like Obama did.
So in your opinion, what would happen if there no longer were any "outside" people here, to do the dirty work you say Americans wouldn't do anymore? Let's just say, for sake of argument, that was no longer an option.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
I have no clue, Fred, I guess we'd buy all our produce from Mexico. Why, what do you think would happen?Quote:
Originally Posted by fred41
Well..., because we simply don't know - it somewhat comes down to what you mean as "dirty work". In rural areas it seems to mean manual, backbreaking field work; in urban areas - I would guess it means working in the low wage areas in a restaurant or (at some of it's worst) hanging around Home Depot hoping someone would ask you to help with their bullshit home construction project; in the suburbs it would mean doing the grunt work for a landscaper or being a nanny or housekeeper, with the added risk of being paid sub par wages under the threat of being fired.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
So, if for the most part, those options went away...what would happen?
Well certainly, in the suburban examples, the assholes should be simply forced to pay more...someone will do the job. In the urban example, some restaurants may close...some may have to pay more to staff...no crisis. The agricultural area is the toughie....but if you can't afford real wages, then you can't afford a business...unions used to agree with that.
I don't know either...hardly ever post anymore, came through and saw your post and figured - have a little debate. All theory anyway. I'm not fucking with you, but I did see some previous posts, in other political threads and totally understand why you might think that...but, like you, I also don't understand why Stavros came at you in that other post either...lol. Kinda funny though, no? Almost deserves it's own thread.
Please reply.....I'm so lonely.
I have had shit jobs, I was a telemarketer for one evening. I've never been the boss.
I guess you could ask "what if there had never been slavery in the US?" It seemed to make sense in 1819, but now it would be cheaper to hire an illegal alien to do the grunt work. Nobody is a Loser until someone says they are. If you want to control someone, give him a job. If you're lonely, get a dog. If you like to debate, get married.
I believe in Great Britain as well as the US, Brexit and Trump signify our weakness showing. Everything is great until it falls apart. Eleven Million undocumented laborers is a bad sign. Fifty five million voters for Trump is a bad sign.
The last day of work I did I was soaked in sweat from head to toe, working inside. I found out I was 100% disabled after working 25 years. My whole career I was sick. I was a lot more scared of being broke than being sick.