|
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. |
DWS is claiming that her IT staffer was only arrested due to racial profiling...
ongresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz defiantly stands by her decision to keep an information technology aide on her payroll for six months after he was banned from the House network and fired by other members of Congress.
“I believe that I did the right thing, and I would do it again,” Wasserman Schultz said Thursday in an exclusive interview with the Sun Sentinel. “There are times when you can’t be afraid to stand alone, and you have to stand up for what’s right.
“It would have been easier for me to just fire him,” she said.
The Weston Democrat did fire Imran Awan last week after he was arrested on bank fraud charges at an airport while trying to leave the country.
As the former Democratic National Committee chairwoman, Wasserman Schultz is the most prominent Democrat who employed Awan. Her decision to keep employing Awan has been under fire from her Democratic primary challenger, Republicans and multiple conservative websites. They’ve suggested Wasserman Schultz is hiding something and the Awan matter is much more serious than she’s letting on.
His arrest, the congresswoman said, had nothing to do with the months-long investigation of Awan as an IT worker for a variety of members of Congress. An FBI affidavit filed with the criminal complaint said Awan and his wife claimed a property used to secure a home equity line of credit was a “principal residence,” when it was, in fact, a rental property. Wasserman Schultz said there still hasn’t been any evidence presented that he’s done anything wrong involving his work for Congress.
Awan, his wife and brothers worked for years for various members of Congress, including Wasserman Schultz. He was a so-called shared employee, with each office paying a part-time salary.
In February, Wasserman Schultz said, chiefs of staffs for members of Congress were told that Awan was under investigation and his access to the House network was suspended. House payroll records show that multiple members of Congress terminated Awan quickly, early in February.
Instead of firing him, Wasserman Schultz said her office worked with the House chief administration officer to develop a job description that “would allow him to continue to do work … until such time as there were other charges brought or we had some evidence that there was something that was produced that warranted further action.”
[...]
www.sun-sentinel.com
|
I believe that about as much as I believe that DWS did nothing wrong and that she resigned because she just took one for the team.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I don't think democratic when talking about judiciaries, so I find the Fox point moot.
|
I hate arguments like this. Something being democratic does not automatically make it "good". Something being undemocratic does not automatically make it "bad". Police are not democratic. School is not democratic. There are a billion of instances in criminal justice where it is not democratic.
A pathetic, shitty strawman.
|
On August 05 2017 06:48 Nevuk wrote:DWS is claiming that her IT staffer was only arrested due to racial profiling... Show nested quote +ongresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz defiantly stands by her decision to keep an information technology aide on her payroll for six months after he was banned from the House network and fired by other members of Congress.
“I believe that I did the right thing, and I would do it again,” Wasserman Schultz said Thursday in an exclusive interview with the Sun Sentinel. “There are times when you can’t be afraid to stand alone, and you have to stand up for what’s right.
“It would have been easier for me to just fire him,” she said.
The Weston Democrat did fire Imran Awan last week after he was arrested on bank fraud charges at an airport while trying to leave the country.
As the former Democratic National Committee chairwoman, Wasserman Schultz is the most prominent Democrat who employed Awan. Her decision to keep employing Awan has been under fire from her Democratic primary challenger, Republicans and multiple conservative websites. They’ve suggested Wasserman Schultz is hiding something and the Awan matter is much more serious than she’s letting on.
His arrest, the congresswoman said, had nothing to do with the months-long investigation of Awan as an IT worker for a variety of members of Congress. An FBI affidavit filed with the criminal complaint said Awan and his wife claimed a property used to secure a home equity line of credit was a “principal residence,” when it was, in fact, a rental property. Wasserman Schultz said there still hasn’t been any evidence presented that he’s done anything wrong involving his work for Congress.
Awan, his wife and brothers worked for years for various members of Congress, including Wasserman Schultz. He was a so-called shared employee, with each office paying a part-time salary.
In February, Wasserman Schultz said, chiefs of staffs for members of Congress were told that Awan was under investigation and his access to the House network was suspended. House payroll records show that multiple members of Congress terminated Awan quickly, early in February.
Instead of firing him, Wasserman Schultz said her office worked with the House chief administration officer to develop a job description that “would allow him to continue to do work … until such time as there were other charges brought or we had some evidence that there was something that was produced that warranted further action.”
[...]
www.sun-sentinel.com
She keeps on doubling down. Everybody else dumped the IT guy after his rights to work in congressional servers were revoked. This was several months ago, but DWS kept him on staff. Unforced errors, guys. To think she once stood as the DNC chair. GOP no better with Priebus. Such dysfunction.
|
On August 05 2017 07:05 Mohdoo wrote:I hate arguments like this. Something being democratic does not automatically make it "good". Something being undemocratic does not automatically make it "bad". Police are not democratic. School is not democratic. There are a billion of instances in criminal justice where it is not democratic. A pathetic, shitty strawman.
On top of the hypocrisy and the bad argument, I legit don't understand how grand juries would possibly be argued to be undemocratic in the first place.
Like, what does he want, a national poll before indictment?
|
On August 05 2017 07:25 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 07:05 Mohdoo wrote:I hate arguments like this. Something being democratic does not automatically make it "good". Something being undemocratic does not automatically make it "bad". Police are not democratic. School is not democratic. There are a billion of instances in criminal justice where it is not democratic. A pathetic, shitty strawman. On top of the hypocrisy and the bad argument, I legit don't understand how grand juries would possibly be argued to be undemocratic in the first place. Like, what does he want, a national poll before indictment?
Candidate got electoral votes --> bad things happening to him is undemocratic is the long story short I think.
|
On August 05 2017 07:30 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 07:25 Nebuchad wrote:On August 05 2017 07:05 Mohdoo wrote:I hate arguments like this. Something being democratic does not automatically make it "good". Something being undemocratic does not automatically make it "bad". Police are not democratic. School is not democratic. There are a billion of instances in criminal justice where it is not democratic. A pathetic, shitty strawman. On top of the hypocrisy and the bad argument, I legit don't understand how grand juries would possibly be argued to be undemocratic in the first place. Like, what does he want, a national poll before indictment? Candidate got electoral votes --> bad things happening to him is undemocratic is the long story short I think.
Okay... There's no universe in which that actually makes sense though right?
I'm with you on the main point, I'd rather we cover how the arguments are bad before we cover possible hypocrisy connected to them, it's a more sound approach
|
|
|
On August 05 2017 07:25 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2017 07:05 Mohdoo wrote:I hate arguments like this. Something being democratic does not automatically make it "good". Something being undemocratic does not automatically make it "bad". Police are not democratic. School is not democratic. There are a billion of instances in criminal justice where it is not democratic. A pathetic, shitty strawman. On top of the hypocrisy and the bad argument, I legit don't understand how grand juries would possibly be argued to be undemocratic in the first place. Like, what does he want, a national poll before indictment?
Then you'd have people arguing for a system to make people from smaller states count more.
|
grand juries have like a 98% indictment rate so thats a possible argument
|
A federal jury in Brooklyn, N.Y., has convicted former pharmaceutical executive and "pharma bro" Martin Shkreli of securities fraud.
He was found guilty Friday on three counts — two counts of securities fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud — out of a total of eight counts. Shkreli is best known for increasing the price of a life-saving drug for people with AIDS by 5,000 percent, from $13.50 to $750 per pill, when he was head of Turing Pharmaceuticals.
Shkreli has not been sentenced and faces up to 20 years in prison, as WSHU's Charles Lane tells our Newscast unit. Still, he declared victory when he was acquitted of what he termed the most "important charges."
"After the verdict was read, Shkreli and his lawyer said they were pleased and anticipated a light sentencing with minimal fines and no jail time," Lane reported. "During the trial, Shkreli openly mocked prosecutors and ultimately never took the stand in his defense."
Source
I just want that damn Wu-Tang album
|
United States44448 Posts
His defence there was amusing. It was essentially "yeah, I was running a Ponzi scheme to fund my wild degen Wall St bets but then I won big and paid them all back so what's the big deal?"
|
On August 05 2017 07:52 IgnE wrote:
grand juries have like a 98% indictment rate so thats a possible argument
Could that be because they are not formed until solid proof has already been found?
|
The standard for a true bill is also really low, so I think it's a mix. Frankly, the only real problem I see with grand juries deals with their treatment of the cops. Beyond that, they tend to get a bad rap because of how cloak and dagger they seem, though most folks don't understand that preliminary exams are mostly the same thing in front of a judge instead of a grand jury.
|
Would you even care if he was guilty? - Fox News
WOULD YOU EVEN CARE IF HE WAS GUILTY?
The stock market is up, unemployment is down and the economy seems to be picking up some steam. The streets are mostly safe, the nation is mostly secure and the world is mostly at peace.
So does it matter to you whether or not the president is a crook? The answer for a lot of Americans may be no.
With the revelation that a grand jury is looking at evidence against members of President Trump’s 2016 campaign team, we move closer still to the possibility that someone could be in very big trouble.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his squad are moving fast, and the likelihood that some charges will be brought can no longer be ignored. It is not hard to imagine a moment in the very near future where some associate of the president is in the dock, charged with misdeeds relating to Russian interference in the 2016 election.
But, again, we ask: Would it matter to you?
...
|
|
|
United States44448 Posts
That's the peak of Fox News doublethink.
Firstly, economy picking up some steam? Ah yes, because the 8 years of economic growth and the doubling of the stock market wasn't enough but now Trump has taken over the economy has finally picked up steam. And that 60% unemployment rate or whatever that Trump was talking about? Well he added 200k jobs and now we're at full employment. Things are good. Everyone praise Trump. And the streets are safe. Not like last year when he was insisting that rape gangs of immigrants were murdering everyone. Now it's fine.
Secondly, does it matter if the President conspired with a foreign power to change the result of the election? Well, yes, yes it does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
