Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Donald Trump, US President #47, US President #45, convicted felon, twice impeached, four times indicted, liable of rape, convicted for financial fraud, guilty of hiding hush money payments to porn actress in attempt to influence 2016 elections

1 | ... | 1281 | 1282 | 1283 | 1284 | 1285 | 1286 | 1287 | 1288 | 1289 | 1290 | 1291 | ... | 2270

9207 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2592556 27-Oct-2020 19:47

Paul1977:

Batman: Either way, there is a serious risk of civil war IMO

This is far more likely to happen if Trump loses.

Agreed - but fortunately Trump has alienated the military. 😶

Sideface

quickymart

13627 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2592582 27-Oct-2020 21:51

By an amazing coincidence, at the moment I'm halfway through this:

https://www.amazon.com/Shattered-Inside-Hillary-Clintons-Campaign/dp/0553447084

Really in-depth analysis of what happened with Hillary's campaign in 2016. A fair number of people on her campaign back then are now no longer working in politics.

I always wonder what it would have been like if Bernie had won the primary in 2016; I reckon Trump would have been running scared.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2592592 28-Oct-2020 00:18

kingdragonfly: As Justice Scalia would put it, a democracy in which the people’s will is repeatedly thwarted by a committee of unelected lawyers is not a democracy at all.

Scalia does not in any way, shape or form believe in democracy in any meaningful way. Democracy doesn't mean some kind of raw majoritarianism or people in established positions of power taking advantage of structures which are highly discriminatory of minorities and political opponents to cement their influence well past decades after they have been six feet under. Barrett as his protege and as established by her track record of selling herself out to demented conservative causes, her family's connection to big oil, and basically half-a-lifetime's record of defending the advantaged and privileged, fundamentally reveal to any informed person that she's possibly the most repulsive human being on the USSC bench. This is quite an achievement when one sitting justice was quite credibly accused as an sexual predator and whose reaction to legitimate inquiries into his conduct was so unhinged and unbecoming of a judge that he isn't fit to judge a sunday beer league game, let alone sitting on a country's highest court.

And I pity any counsel appearing in the USSC from now on -- imagine trying to decipher questions from this "thing" whose intellect might be even more bankrupt than her character. She can barely pronounce simple and basic words consistently. The contrast between her and her predecessor, who spent a lifetime successfully elevating the lot of the unfairly suffering, whilst battling and defeating sexist, racist and religiously bigoted pigs in politics and law -- and continued to be a force for good and represented almost all the best qualities of a human for her whole life of indelible achievements -- couldn't be greater. People like Ginsburg gave "things" like Barrett a chance to have opportunities that many in the former's generation can only dream of. And Barrett and her ilk's wet dream is to pull themselves up with the ladder and then kick it away whilst laughing in the name of "justice".

*vomit*

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
78906 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2592594 28-Oct-2020 00:26

Go on @dejadeadnz... I feel you are holding your feelings back.

My technology disclosure

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2592595 28-Oct-2020 00:38

I most certainly am. To be blunt, if somehow this world was a computer game and I only had one choice between making Barrett or Trump disappear, I have a fairly strong sense that I would pick the former in a heartbeat. That's saying a lot.

And here's one of many reasons why: this woman is associated with a whack group of religious fanatics/morons called People of Praise. Some "glorious" snippets of what crap they believe in.

The AP reported earlier this week that People of Praise’s belief system is rooted in charismatic Catholicism, a movement that grew out of the influence of Pentecostalism, which emphasizes a personal relationship with Jesus and can include baptism in the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues.

Founded in 1971, the group’s 22 branches organize and meet outside the purview of the Roman Catholic Church and include people from several Christian denominations, though the majority of its roughly 1,800 adult members remain Catholic.

Former female members of the group told AP earlier this week that wives were expected to obey their husband’s wishes in all matters, including providing sex on demand. One of the women also said she was forbidden from getting birth control because married women were supposed to bear as many babies as God would provide.

And of course Barrett never mentioned her association with this group in any of her confirmation hearings. This group also rather dutifully rubbed out her relationships with them:

Among the items that were scrubbed in 2017 were select back issues of “Vine & Branches” that included birth and adoption announcements for some of the couple’s seven children. Also deleted was a 2006 issue of the magazine that included a photo of a smiling Amy Barrett attending the group’s Leaders’ Conference for Women.

...

Web pages and articles that mentioned Amy Barrett’s father, Michael Coney Sr., who has served as the principal leader of People of Praise’s New Orleans branch and was on the group’s national board as recently as 2017, also disappeared. And a 2006 magazine story about Barrett’s parents that referred to Linda Coney as a “handmaid,” a female leader assigned to help guide other women, was also deleted. The article noted that five of the Coney’s seven children were People of Praise members, though it did not say which ones.

And these voluntarily mental "conservatives" talk about cancel culture? They cancel out their own misdeeds through lies and re-writing history.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2592629 28-Oct-2020 09:12

This:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society

Paul1977

4978 posts

Uber Geek

#2592640 28-Oct-2020 09:40

Fred99:

This:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society

Well, that certainly doesn't fill me with dred.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2592644 28-Oct-2020 09:54

Paul1977:

Fred99:

This:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society

Well, that certainly doesn't fill me with dred.

It shouldn't if you're comfortable with the idea of a formal group of elite conservative "originalists" lawyers working together and helping each other to stack the US court system with "like minded" anti-liberal judges.

Sounds like a swamp to me.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18522 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2592647 28-Oct-2020 09:58

Some old dudes wrote something 250 years ago so that should be immutable and never evolve forever, like the bible.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2592654 28-Oct-2020 10:16

SC judges can be impeached. and it's only "established convention" that they can be impeached only for misconduct, lest partisan politics threatens the "independence of the judiciary".

Openly stacking the court with highly partisan appointments clearly challenges that supposed independence. So that convention has been well and truly thrown out the window.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2592672 28-Oct-2020 11:11

Rikkitic:

Some old dudes wrote something 250 years ago so that should be immutable and never evolve forever, like the bible.

Some old white dudes who owned property/horses/muskets/women/slaves in that order of priority.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2592695 28-Oct-2020 11:38

dejadeadnz:

And of course Barrett never mentioned her association with this group in any of her confirmation hearings. This group also rather dutifully rubbed out her relationships with them:

I agree with your comments about her but she could have been questioned about her association with this group by the Democratic members of the panel and possibly wasn't. Why would she mention it if it was not raised as an issue?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18522 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2592696 28-Oct-2020 11:46

The religion thing is an extra hot potato and the Democrats won't go near it because they have been burned on it before.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Sideface

9207 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2592707 28-Oct-2020 12:12

Rikkitic: Some old dudes wrote something 250 years ago so that should be immutable and never evolve forever, like the bible.

Sideface

kingdragonfly

10961 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2592764 28-Oct-2020 15:18

New York Times: How Republican Senator Mitch McConnell delivered Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s rapid confirmation

Ignoring cries of blatant hypocrisy, the Senate leader pushed through pre-election approval, capping off his reshaping of the judiciary.

Within hours of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death last month, Senator Mitch McConnell was on the phone with President Trump, assuring him that Senate Republicans would not hesitate to fill the sudden vacancy despite the imminent election.

But he offered a word of warning to the president: “This will be the hardest fight of my life,” Mr. McConnell said, according to an aide. “We have to play this perfectly.”

There was good reason for caution. Mr. McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, had moved just as quickly in 2016 to block President Barack Obama from filling a Supreme Court vacancy nine months before the election, saying voters should decide who selected the next justice. Now, he was proposing to brazenly reverse course and muscle through a nominee who would cement a conservative court majority in the middle of presidential voting and a pandemic that had reached the Senate.

That approach would set in motion the most partisan Supreme Court confirmation in modern history, a sprint that shredded past Senate practice and skirted some arcane rules. It drew outrage from Democrats who called the entire process illegitimate, and set up a tight timetable that could have been derailed by any number of unexpected events.

But on Monday night, as Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, denounced the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court as one of the “darkest days” in Senate history, Mr. McConnell sat nearby on the Senate floor, smiling and chuckling to himself with the knowledge that he was minutes from a vote that would fulfill his highest goal.

To Mr. McConnell, Monday was a day for celebration as he achieved what even he could not have imagined four years ago, when he set out to leverage Donald J. Trump’s presidency and his own formidable Senate power to put a deep and enduring conservative imprint on the federal courts. Three Supreme Court justices, 53 appeals court judges and scores of new young conservatives presiding on the district courts: All were delivered under Mr. McConnell’s close supervision and direction.

“I certainly didn’t expect to have three Supreme Court justices,” Mr. McConnell said in an interview on Tuesday as he savored an accomplishment he said had placed him in the top tier of Senate leaders in history. “At the risk of tooting my own horn, look at the majority leaders since L.B.J. and find another one who was able to do something as consequential as this.”
...

1 | ... | 1281 | 1282 | 1283 | 1284 | 1285 | 1286 | 1287 | 1288 | 1289 | 1290 | 1291 | ... | 2270