EPTI'm not being critical her taking the case btw. Just that bardtown wasn't saying what you guys were saying he was saying.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5352
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Amarok
Australia2003 Posts
I'm not being critical her taking the case btw. Just that bardtown wasn't saying what you guys were saying he was saying. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On October 06 2016 07:57 Amarok wrote: Fair enough, I didn't know that about the US system and I'm not aware of such a law here. I'm not being critical her taking the case btw. Just that bardtown wasn't saying what you guys were saying he was saying. you seem to not be accounting for his previous posting today on the topic. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Amarok
Australia2003 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 06 2016 08:05 Amarok wrote: I dunno, from pretty early on I read his posts as being critical of someone laughing at situation rather than taking the case but this has gone on long enough so I'll leave it there. That is a very charitable view of his point and basically disregards the entire section of moral outrage about her even taking the case. But that argument is flawed because he is saying that it is inappropriate for a defense attorney laugh about any aspect of a tragic case. Ever. Even in private. That they can never find humor in any aspect of a case with a peer and display stoic respect every part of their their private life. It is a completely unreasonable standard and that is why he got called out on it. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17984 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
On October 06 2016 07:31 bardtown wrote: Got it, so my crime here is elaborating on my position in a second post. Forget about Hillary; put yourself in that situation. As far as you're concerned, this man raped this girl. The prosecution are incompetent and you are not. Do you take the case? Personally, I wouldn't, but I can understand the argument for doing so and I don't know the extent to which she protested the situation, etc. Fast forward a while. You're now reminiscing about the time a man you were convinced raped a 12 year old girl got off with 2 months (essentially nothing considering the crime). What, I wonder, is going through your head? Is it amusing to you, or does it make you angry/depressed? I'm trying to understand why I need to try to explain this. There's a huge child abuse inquiry going on in the UK right now and just the thought of somebody involved in the case joking about any aspect of it makes me feel ill. It would be career/social suicide. But not for Hillary. Why? Because she's up against Trump. You obviously never had to deal with horrible things before in a professional sense and know how people deal with having to handle those things. She did even try to get off the case but was denied I don't know what you want...Her to purposefully throw the case? So then the guy could get off scott free because of bad representation? Go listen to that conversation and the context of it. She wasn't gleefully having a laugh about her accomplishment with her bros after work. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5583 Posts
| ||
|
ZeaL.
United States5955 Posts
On October 06 2016 08:02 LegalLord wrote: That he didn't know what he was talking about, but still felt himself qualified to speak on, kind of is what he was criticized for. This applies to around 95% of this thread | ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On October 06 2016 08:34 Nevuk wrote: This is hilarious, don't know why I didn't expect it : http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/10/05/donald_trump_jealous_that_mike_pence_did_well_in_debate_reports_say.html "CNN’s John King, reporting from a source close to Trump, that the reviews that Pence did better then he did won’t go over well with Trump" "Trump adviser on debate after Pence passed up opportunities to defend him: "Pence won overall, but lost with Trump" "God willing, Donald Trump is going to fire Mike Pence tonight and put Ivanka, Newt, Don Junior, or Omarosa on the ticket." God willing, we can find better campaign journalism than gossip tabloids. What is this the shitty entertainment magazine at on the checkout stands you see while waiting in line at the gas station? Oh yea I can just feel the jealousy On October 06 2016 08:41 TheYango wrote: I ignore these "someone in the campaign said" tweets on both sides. This. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On October 06 2016 08:34 Nevuk wrote: This is hilarious, don't know why I didn't expect it : http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/10/05/donald_trump_jealous_that_mike_pence_did_well_in_debate_reports_say.html I ignore these "someone in the campaign said" tweets on both sides. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On October 06 2016 08:40 GGTeMpLaR wrote: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783660227530862592 This comment is a bit rich from Trump, though. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9118 Posts
On October 06 2016 08:41 TheYango wrote: I ignore these "someone in the campaign said" tweets on both sides. Yeah and this is even shoddier than the usual hearsay, the usage of 'won't' makes it a prediction rather than an observation as Slate pretends in the title | ||
|
farvacola
United States18826 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States5583 Posts
On October 06 2016 08:51 farvacola wrote: "At a Trump Rally in Reno" will be the title of an amazing short story someday, I'm sure of it. I strongly hope it doesn't have any Johnny Cash references. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On October 06 2016 08:40 GGTeMpLaR wrote: What is this the shitty entertainment magazine at on the checkout stands you see while waiting in line at the gas station? That's the one that Donald relied upon in an argument against Ted Cruz during a presidential campaign. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Clinton Foundation officials quietly refiled three years of tax-related forms this week after the New York attorney general acknowledged the charity had failed to disclose all of its donors in accordance with state law. Two entities operating within the Clintons' sprawling philanthropic network — the Clinton Health Access Initiative and the Clinton Global Initiative — submitted supplementary financial disclosures for different years between 2012 and 2014 while denying Tuesday that the attorney general's office had asked them to do so. "The Clinton Foundation is properly registered to solicit funds under Article 7A, which requires organizations to register before they solicit funds in New York," said Ricardo Castro, general counsel for the Clinton Foundation. Donald Trump's eponymous foundation was issued a cease-and-desist letter Monday from the New York attorney general's office over the charity's failure to register under that same statute. Washington Examiner | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
As long as they were not using funds to buy 10 foot paintings of Bill, I think they will be in the clear with some missing paperwork. | ||
| ||
