boyst Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 1 minute ago, billsfan1959 said: I am Spartacus Hi Spartacus. I am Donaticia, a Puerto Rican immigrant of 20 years, once a dreamer now left to fend for myself in this cold dark Trump World Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 4 hours ago, OJ Tom said: Who did you hear that coke was Trump's drug of choice from? Coca-Cola President Trump does not drink alcohol or do drugs (he's a teetotaler). His brother Fred (who died in 1981) was an alcoholic. It had a major impact on his decision not to drink. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: Hi Spartacus. I am Donaticia, a Puerto Rican immigrant of 20 years, once a dreamer now left to fend for myself in this cold dark Trump World Puerto Ricans are not immigrants. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: Puerto Ricans are not immigrants. Right? My island tipped over. I had to swim the Ariana Grande to make it to America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan1959 Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 11 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Ok, that's two insults, so it's on! Yes, stupid, that is an attack. You really think having a dong in your face isn't an attack? Should we poll the other members here? I may have been wrong on who sent the texts, but it changes nothing. Are you thrilled you found a small mistake on the internet? 1. She accused him of indecent exposure, which, in most states does not even arise to the legal definition of sexual assault. Yes it is wrong and reprehensible, and there are laws that deal with it. However, you can poll as many posters as you want, indecent exposure is not an "attack" under the law. 2. In regard to your mistake, my point was you cannot seem to get simple facts straight, which, according to your Democratic Senators on the confirmation committee, would seem to fall under the category of "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 That memo from the prosecutor hired by the GOP who complained it was impossible to conduct an investigation in that manner. Quote Though Senate Republicans said the memo was helpful, legal experts from both political parties and advocates for victims of sexual assault on Monday questioned how Mitchell could reach such a conclusion without a fuller investigation and without the ability to cross-examine witnesses such as Mark Judge, the only other person Ford says was in the room when the alleged incident occurred in the summer of 1982. “As a former prosecutor myself, I’ve come to no conclusion other than the conclusion that there needs to be more facts to come to a conclusion,” said Douglas Wigdor, an employment lawyer who has represented plaintiffs in sexual assault and harassment cases. Wigdor, a Republican, called the memo “a joke” and “preposterous.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/experts-question-gop-prosecutors-memo-on-christine-blasey-ford/2018/10/01/85a454c0-c5a2-11e8-b1ed-1d2d65b86d0c_story.html?utm_term=.1cc37d273124 1 minute ago, billsfan1959 said: 1. She accused him of indecent exposure, which, in most states does not even arise to the legal definition of sexual assault. Yes it is wrong and reprehensible, and there are laws that deal with it. However, you can poll as many posters as you want, indecent exposure is not an "attack" under the law. 2. In regard to your mistake, my point was you cannot seem to get simple facts straight, which, according to your Democratic Senators on the confirmation committee, would seem to fall under the category of "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus." It's more serious than that, he put it close enough that she had to push the offending dong away. There was contact. Attack. Yes, you got me, I made a mistake. Golf clap. And no, are you seriously implying I made a statement on the friggin internet under oath? You are an idiot. Let me guess, the right wingers on here that post straight up fake news are ok, though? Have you called them out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan1959 Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: That memo from the prosecutor hired by the GOP who complained it was impossible to conduct an investigation in that manner. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/experts-question-gop-prosecutors-memo-on-christine-blasey-ford/2018/10/01/85a454c0-c5a2-11e8-b1ed-1d2d65b86d0c_story.html?utm_term=.1cc37d273124 It's more serious than that, he put it close enough that she had to push the offending dong away. There was contact. Attack. Yes, you got me, I made a mistake. Golf clap. And no, are you seriously implying I made a statement on the friggin internet under oath? You are an idiot. Let me guess, the right wingers on here that post straight up fake news are ok, though? Have you called them out? We can parse words on legal definitions all day - it doesn't matter. The central issue here is due process and the accuracy of evaluating facts. At this point in time, there are no facts that corroborate Ramirez' allegation. You quote a memo in which the central theme is that more facts are needed before a conclusion can be reached. Yet, you and virtually every democrat out there seem to have no problem reaching conclusions of guilt without supporting facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 The Case against Kavanaugh Is Collapsingby David French Original Article A very strange thing happened over the weekend: If you follow Twitter closely, you’ll notice that the debate over Brett Kavanaugh moved significantly from the central question of last Thursday’s hearing — did he commit sexual assault? — to a raging debate over whether he lied about high-school slang, college drinking, and inside jokes, and whether he was just too “angry” to be a Supreme Court judge. This torrent of commentary (most of it silly, including competing, furious arguments about how people described anal sex in 1982) obscures an important development: The sexual-assault claims against Kavanaugh are in a state of collapse. Kavanaugh to Get Senate Vote This Week, McConnell Says by Laura Litvan Original Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 Flake I think is going to vote no. Hes been speaking in front of liberal audiences and when you read the comments in the live streaming events he gets lots of support from the left. He has no home on the right and I think hes going to look out for his next career whether that is to be an MSNBC token Republican or a moderate independent presidential candidate. I believe he will make the calculation that there is more currency to vote with the left. I think there is less than a 30% chance he votes for him. Murkowski I think votes for Kavanaugh. She wouldn't be re elected if she didnt. Collins is in no man's land. She's !@#$ed either way. I really dont know what she will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 Jennifer Rubin nails it; https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/10/02/not-everyone-belongs-on-the-supreme-court/?utm_term=.1b3073f2e568 Quote The first canon of the Code of Conduct for federal judges admonishes them: Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends on public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depend in turn on their acting without fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law and should comply with this Code. Adherence to this responsibility helps to maintain public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. Conversely, violation of this Code diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and injures our system of government under law. A judge is obligated to recuse himself from matters in which he harbors “a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding” (Canon 3). If you’re a Democratic senator, someone associated with Hillary Clinton or an outspoken advocate of progressive causes, or a progressive cause (or defense) is at issue in a case, you’d be foolish to forget Kavanaugh’s threat (“What goes around, comes around“). The country would have every reason to doubt than an adverse 5-4 ruling against a Democratic/progressive group was arrived at by a fair application of the law and facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 If only the criteria cherished by the 'mocrats were available before all this started, e.g., never had a beer in hhigh school, never held hands with a cheerleader, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, Magox said: Flake I think is going to vote no. Hes been speaking in front of liberal audiences and when you read the comments in the live streaming events he gets lots of support from the left. He has no home on the right and I think hes going to look out for his next career whether that is to be an MSNBC token Republican or a moderate independent presidential candidate. I believe he will make the calculation that there is more currency to vote with the left. I think there is less than a 30% chance he votes for him. Murkowski I think votes for Kavanaugh. She wouldn't be re elected if she didnt. Collins is in no man's land. She's !@#$ed either way. I really dont know what she will do. Joe Manchin Under Fire: Pressure Mounts in WV on Kavanaugh Vote by Robert Kraychik Original Article Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) was told by passers-by at Sunday’s West Virginia Pumpkin Festival in Milton, WV, to vote in favor of confirming Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. Manchin has abstained from committing to vote one way or another, claiming to want more time to consider Kavanaugh’s nomination. One festival patron told Manchin, “If you don’t vote for him, I won’t vote for you.” Manchin replied, “I get that a lot.” Another shouted, “Vote Kavanaugh!” to which Manchin responded, “I hear you.” Kavanaugh Smear Campaign – Anticipating Mid-Week Shift To Phase #4 The highly predictable strategy by Democrats, far-left activists and compliant ideological media to smear/destroy Judge Brett Kavanaugh is solidly in phase three: √ Phase 1 – Activate last minute delay chaos (prior “Me Too” investment). √ Phase 2 – Use sex assault claims to demand investigation, further delay. Use republicans, not democrats, to establish/frame the delay. √ Phase 3 – Use investigation to frame validity narrative; further delay. Use republican fear (leverage Jeff Flake) not democrats, to continue the delay. Manipulate FBI. Shift investigation goalposts. <=WE ARE HERE Phase 4 – Use “deeply flawed investigation” narrative (witnesses ignored); to isolate Murkowski/Collins and keep Flake in position. Drum mid-term “Let the voters decide”. Phase 5 – The mid-term election. So far, the DC UniParty is executing this flawlessly. The shift to Phase 4 should be anticipated for Thursday’s media-cycle. On/Around October 15th the mid-term gravitational field will take over. https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/10/01/kavanaugh-smear-campaign-anticipating-mid-week-shift-to-phase-4/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Jennifer Rubin nails it; https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/10/02/not-everyone-belongs-on-the-supreme-court/?utm_term=.1b3073f2e568 Jennifer Rubin? Democrat hack disguised as a columnist. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Ok, that's two insults, so it's on! Oh man, it's on! It's on like Donkey Kong! BF1959, be prepared for the "I'm rubber, you're glue" attack, and the "Double Dumbass Pork Chop on You" feint. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 23 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: Jennifer Rubin? Democrat hack disguised as a columnist. Hey now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 45 minutes ago, Magox said: Flake I think is going to vote no. Hes been speaking in front of liberal audiences and when you read the comments in the live streaming events he gets lots of support from the left. He has no home on the right and I think hes going to look out for his next career whether that is to be an MSNBC token Republican or a moderate independent presidential candidate. I believe he will make the calculation that there is more currency to vote with the left. I think there is less than a 30% chance he votes for him. Murkowski I think votes for Kavanaugh. She wouldn't be re elected if she didnt. Collins is in no man's land. She's !@#$ed either way. I really dont know what she will do. He's committed to voting for BK. He called for the FBI investigation and they will find nothing more about the sexual assault allegations. And if it's true he's planning on running for President, he'll have to vote for him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 14 minutes ago, Doc said: He's committed to voting for BK. He called for the FBI investigation and they will find nothing more about the sexual assault allegations. And if it's true he's planning on running for President, he'll have to vote for him. Only if he's running as a Republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 If someone made an unwelcome advance by whipping out their dick to me, and I felt as if I was violated in some manner by this supposed sexual deviant, I sure as hell wouldn't be taking a smiley group photo with the alleged perpetrator. 21 minutes ago, Doc said: He's committed to voting for BK. He called for the FBI investigation and they will find nothing more about the sexual assault allegations. And if it's true he's planning on running for President, he'll have to vote for him. We will see but that's not how I see it. Let's see if he sticks to his original statement which was that absence of any corroborating evidence he would vote him in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 8 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Only if he's running as a Republican. To run as anything else would be a waste of his time. 3 minutes ago, Magox said: If someone made an unwelcome advance by whipping out their dick to me, and I felt as if I was violated in some manner by this supposed sexual deviant, I sure as hell wouldn't be taking a smiley group photo with the alleged perpetrator. We will see but that's not how I see it. Let's see if he sticks to his original statement which was that absence of any corroborating evidence he would vote him in. Yes, anything can happen, but if he's a man of his word, as he wants to portray himself, he'll have no choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts