B-Man Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) Gorsuch Makes Minced Meat of Dick Durbin’s Gotcha Attempt Edited March 21, 2017 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logic Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Two things:First, I agree with Chuck Schumer about the fact that it's unseemly to allow a president currently under FBI investigation for colluding with a foreign enemy to appoint a justice to a lifetime position.Second, at the VERY LEAST, it seems reasonable to slow the process down a bit in order to get a more thorough chance to vet Gorsuch and to let more of the Trump/Russia process play out. And for anyone who says "enough obstructionism" or "why wait?", well: The GOP saw fit to let 322 days pass without even giving Garland a hearing, and now they think it's important to push through Gorsuch ASAP? What's the hurry all of a sudden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Two things: First, I agree with Chuck Schumer about the fact that it's unseemly to allow a president currently under FBI investigation for colluding with a foreign enemy to appoint a justice to a lifetime position. Second, at the VERY LEAST, it seems reasonable to slow the process down a bit in order to get a more thorough chance to vet Gorsuch and to let more of the Trump/Russia process play out. And for anyone who says "enough obstructionism" or "why wait?", well: The GOP saw fit to let 322 days pass without even giving Garland a hearing, and now they think it's important to push through Gorsuch ASAP? What's the hurry all of a sudden? WHEN did Russia become the enemy? Can someone tell me that? Not even four years ago, you were laughed at for suggesting they were merely an international foe. Now we're at war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) Two things: First, I agree with Chuck Schumer about the fact that it's unseemly to allow a president currently under FBI investigation for colluding with a foreign enemy to appoint a justice to a lifetime position. Second, at the VERY LEAST, it seems reasonable to slow the process down a bit in order to get a more thorough chance to vet Gorsuch and to let more of the Trump/Russia process play out. And for anyone who says "enough obstructionism" or "why wait?", well: The GOP saw fit to let 322 days pass without even giving Garland a hearing, and now they think it's important to push through Gorsuch ASAP? What's the hurry all of a sudden? Edited March 21, 2017 by meazza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logic Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 WHEN did Russia become the enemy? Can someone tell me that? Not even four years ago, you were laughed at for suggesting they were merely an international foe. Now we're at war? When they hacked the 2016 presidential election. Here's a Wiki, in case you missed it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), representing 17 intelligence agencies, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) jointly stated that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and leaked its documents to WikiLeaks.[3][4] In early January 2017, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper testified before a Senate committee that Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign went beyond hacking, and included disinformation and the dissemination of fake news often promoted on social media.[5] Six federal agencies have also been investigating possible links and financial ties between the Kremlin and Trump's associates, including his advisers Carter Page, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone.[6][7] U.S. intelligence agencies assessed that Putin "personally directed" the operation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorbait Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 I might not agree with the old-school conservative way of thinking and ruling, however, I thought Gorsuch was very intelligent and compassionate with his answers today. Obviously, he is a very smart guy, knows his stuff, and I think he would be a good Supreme Court justice. His story about Byron White was fascinating. Trump could pick a lot worse than Gorsuch imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 When they hacked the 2016 presidential election. Here's a Wiki, in case you missed it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), representing 17 intelligence agencies, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) jointly stated that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Odd. That link you posted says they hacked the DNC. It doesn't say anything about hacking the election. Can you provide a link that backs your claim? Did they hack into voting machines? How did this "hacking the election" thing happen? We'll wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Oh and : When they hacked the 2016 presidential election.Here's a Wiki, in case you missed it:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2016_United_States_elections The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), representing 17 intelligence agencies, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) jointly stated that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and leaked its documents to WikiLeaks.[3][4] In early January 2017, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper testified before a Senate committee that Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign went beyond hacking, and included disinformation and the dissemination of fake news often promoted on social media.[5] Six federal agencies have also been investigating possible links and financial ties between the Kremlin and Trump's associates, including his advisers Carter Page, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone.[6][7] U.S. intelligence agencies assessed that Putin "personally directed" the operation First: Wiki is not a source you should be posting here. Second: The DNC is not a government entity, it is a private entity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logic Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Is that supposed to count as a rebuttal or reasonable refutation of my opinion? Deflection is not discussion. Be honest: If the scenario were flipped and, say President Hillary Clinton was under ongoing FBI investigation for collusion with a foreign government to affect the presidential election, and she was trying to push through a Supreme Court justice, how would you feel? I'm sure you'd be all for it, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Is that supposed to count as a rebuttal or reasonable refutation of my opinion? Deflection is not discussion. Be honest: If the scenario were flipped and, say President Hillary Clinton was under ongoing FBI investigation for collusion with a foreign government to affect the presidential election, and she was trying to push through a Supreme Court justice, how would you feel? I'm sure you'd be all for it, right? If you consider hacking the RNC hacking the election, yes I would. But I also love pointing out hypocrisy. Russia was everyone's BFF until Trump won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Two things: First, I agree with Chuck Schumer about the fact that it's unseemly to allow a president currently under FBI investigation for colluding with a foreign enemy to appoint a justice to a lifetime position. Second, at the VERY LEAST, it seems reasonable to slow the process down a bit in order to get a more thorough chance to vet Gorsuch and to let more of the Trump/Russia process play out. And for anyone who says "enough obstructionism" or "why wait?", well: The GOP saw fit to let 322 days pass without even giving Garland a hearing, and now they think it's important to push through Gorsuch ASAP? What's the hurry all of a sudden? Confirm Gorsuch, or live with the Court Trump creates over the next 4-8 years, via the nuclear option. Democrats don't hold any cards. Confirm the classically liberal Episcpalian, or live with a Court populated with socially conservative Evangelicals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logic Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Oh and : First: Wiki is not a source you should be posting here. Second: The DNC is not a government entity, it is a private entity. Odd. That link you posted says they hacked the DNC. It doesn't say anything about hacking the election. Can you provide a link that backs your claim? Did they hack into voting machines? How did this "hacking the election" thing happen? We'll wait. You both act as if the head of the FBI didn't JUST testify that this very matter is currently under investigation. You also act as if hacking one political party's servers and not the other's doesn't constitute a potentially damaging altering of public opinion for a specific purpose. Under questioning from Representative K. Michael Conaway, Republican of Texas, Mr. Comey confirmed the intelligence agencies’ findings that the goal of Russian interference in the election was to hurt Mrs. Clinton, a particular target of the ire of Russian President Vladimir V. Putin. “To be clear, Mr. Conaway, we all agreed with that judgment,” Mr. Comey said, and Admiral Rogers added his assent. But Mr. Conaway repeatedly probed the agencies’ additional conclusion: that Russia, and Mr. Putin, also wanted to help Mr. Trump. Mr. Comey stated what he suggested was obvious: “Putin hated Secretary Clinton so much, that the flip side of that coin was he had a clear preference for the person running against the person he hated so much.” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/us/politics/takeaways-russia-intelligence-committee-hearing.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Important to note that the early IC reports were that the RNC was attempted to be hacked, but their technology prevented the intrusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 You both act as if the head of the FBI didn't JUST testify that this very matter is currently under investigation. You also act as if hacking one political party's servers and not the other's doesn't constitute a potentially damaging altering of public opinion for a specific purpose. Under questioning from Representative K. Michael Conaway, Republican of Texas, Mr. Comey confirmed the intelligence agencies’ findings that the goal of Russian interference in the election was to hurt Mrs. Clinton, a particular target of the ire of Russian President Vladimir V. Putin. “To be clear, Mr. Conaway, we all agreed with that judgment,” Mr. Comey said, and Admiral Rogers added his assent. But Mr. Conaway repeatedly probed the agencies’ additional conclusion: that Russia, and Mr. Putin, also wanted to help Mr. Trump. Mr. Comey stated what he suggested was obvious: “Putin hated Secretary Clinton so much, that the flip side of that coin was he had a clear preference for the person running against the person he hated so much.” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/us/politics/takeaways-russia-intelligence-committee-hearing.html Political parties are private. It is up to them to protect their data from hacking. Did you have a problem when the Obama admin tried to influence the Israeli election? Important to note that the early IC reports were that the RNC was attempted to be hacked, but their technology prevented the intrusion. I guess they changed their passwords from "passwords" to something a little trickier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 You both act as if the head of the FBI didn't JUST testify that this very matter is currently under investigation. You also act as if hacking one political party's servers and not the other's doesn't constitute a potentially damaging altering of public opinion for a specific purpose. I can't speak for meazza, but I'm acting as if the FBI said Russia hacked the DNC when YOU keep saying Russia hacked the presidential election. Those are two TOTALLY different things. So let me ask again: HOW did Russia hack the presidential election? Did they tamper with voting machines? Did they buy off people who counted the votes? HOW did Russia "hack the presidential election?" Did you have a problem when the Obama admin tried to influence the Israeli election? And did you have a problem when the Obama administration used the IRS to target and shut down conservative groups? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) Every time you use the term "hacked" it is a giveaway. There are indications that they wanted to influence our election through public opinion. They tried to "meddle", to "sway", to "shape" But when you use the proven lie of "Hacked" there is no further need to continue reading. ACTUAL, DNC and Podesta e-mails were released.......................by parties unknown..............thats all you got. Gorsuch Destroys Dems' False Attacks On His Worker Rights Record Edited March 21, 2017 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Two things: First, I agree with Chuck Schumer about the fact that it's unseemly to allow a president currently under FBI investigation for colluding with a foreign enemy to appoint a justice to a lifetime position. Second, at the VERY LEAST, it seems reasonable to slow the process down a bit in order to get a more thorough chance to vet Gorsuch and to let more of the Trump/Russia process play out. And for anyone who says "enough obstructionism" or "why wait?", well: The GOP saw fit to let 322 days pass without even giving Garland a hearing, and now they think it's important to push through Gorsuch ASAP? What's the hurry all of a sudden? Of course you do, mindless drone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 It has nothing to do with him being left or right, he is there to interpret the law which he has argued faithfully today. My Bad. Still wiggle room when judges interpret. It is called being human. Not everything is black and white. Many shades of gray. Not all are like Tom's Bot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 My Bad. Still wiggle room when judges interpret. It is called being human. Not everything is black and white. Many shades of gray. Not all are like Tom's Bot. So far toms bot has been pretty spot on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 And did you have a problem when the Obama administration used the IRS to target and shut down conservative groups? Or the Carter Administration actively conspiring with the USSR in a failed bid to defeat Reagan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts