|
On September 29 2018 09:57 Nebuchad wrote:
No one told me that you guys were here :/
Now you know  Welcome!
On September 29 2018 10:02 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2018 09:57 Nebuchad wrote:
No one told me that you guys were here :/ Welcome to the resistance?
Hahahah
______________________________________________________________________________________
On this Kavanaugh thing I don't think it's set-in yet that Democrats just handed Republicans a win with this investigation. Kavanaugh was going to the court either way but now the main talking point Democrats had on the issue will be gone and they will look like asses to people who thought this was a political stunt from the beginning.
Most impressive, when they dig up these tapes from an archive in 20 years, Trump looks like one of the most level headed and reasonable people in the Kavadrama. (save for his "she's fine" comment, that was weird).
|
On September 29 2018 09:57 Nebuchad wrote:
No one told me that you guys were here :/
You have to reach a higher form of enlightenment to find this place, which you did.
|
We're at the late-stage part of political show trials. Kavanaugh was nominated by Trump to replace Kennedy on the Supreme Court bench. His confirmation hearings and process at the very end was derailed by sexual assault allegations. Now, Democrats and media figures claim simply getting mad at the accusations of gang rape and emotional at his kid praying for Ford is disqualifying enough for a judge.
I don't think calling this insanity goes far enough. I take this together with Cruz getting booted out of the restaurant and Flake having a screaming woman in the elevator (though in his case, he caved, so maybe I shouldn't be so down on the method ... food for thought).
Second up, the trumpeting of the news that the American Bar Association was publicly calling for a delay of the confirmation until the FBI investigated is now fake news.
The was just the president of the bar acting in his private capacity to recommend against.
|
On September 29 2018 14:42 Danglars wrote:We're at the late-stage part of political show trials. Kavanaugh was nominated by Trump to replace Kennedy on the Supreme Court bench. His confirmation hearings and process at the very end was derailed by sexual assault allegations. Now, Democrats and media figures claim simply getting mad at the accusations of gang rape and emotional at his kid praying for Ford is disqualifying enough for a judge. https://twitter.com/USATODAY/status/1045840651827449856I don't think calling this insanity goes far enough. I take this together with Cruz getting booted out of the restaurant and Flake having a screaming woman in the elevator (though in his case, he caved, so maybe I shouldn't be so down on the method ... food for thought).
Second up, the trumpeting of the news that the American Bar Association was publicly calling for a delay of the confirmation until the FBI investigated is now fake news. https://twitter.com/senjudiciary/status/1045791085598068737The was just the president of the bar acting in his private capacity to recommend against.
Didn't Cruz get booed out of a restaurant, not booted? He chose to leave no?
|
On September 29 2018 06:55 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2018 02:07 Howie_Dewitt wrote:On September 29 2018 01:23 xDaunt wrote:On September 28 2018 19:24 IgnE wrote:On September 28 2018 06:47 xDaunt wrote:On September 28 2018 02:45 IgnE wrote:
i see brett kavanaugh as embodying all the contradictions and hypocrisies that make social conservatism a completely untenable order of norms, despite any supposed advantages which might flow therefrom (see eg tyler cowen etc) I actually haven't done a deep dive on Kavanaugh's jurisprudence. What specifically do you not like about it? im not talking about his jurisprudence. im talking about his “virgin” boy scout talk cast against a conservative political platform of christian temperance and family values What, is it really so hard to believe that there are truly decent people out there? This is one of the major problems that I have with the current Leftist influence on culture: we aren't allowed to have true heroes anymore. Everyone is necessarily flawed. Paragons don't exist. Everything is gray. In my opinion, this particular strain of Leftist nihilism is particularly harmful to young men/boys, who need true heroes to aspire to. From a perspective of someone who you would probably for onto that group of "young men/boys," most people my age tend to not think too much on character; high school felt much more achievement-driven, to the point of neglecting what kind of person you really are. If you ask someone who they look up to, you might get some answers; ask why, and their coherence goes away pretty fast. I actually got asked that question recently, and my answer was that I can't look up to any one person for everything; I aspire to different people in different areas of my life, including people on this forum for their willingness to at least entertain opposing ideas, even if they disagree. Why do you think this is?
I believe it's because college has almost become a necessity for lots of kids. High school degrees don't mean shit if you want a job that takes you safely away from the poverty line, and it was the assumption (at least at my school) that every kid was going to college of they could afford it. I never heard anyone ask, "what are you doing to do after high school?" It was always "what college are you going to?"
That, combined with the extreme amount of competition for the more selective colleges, meant that a lot of kids weren't thinking about what they wanted to do yet. That seemed to be "something you did in college." There wasn't any time to think about what role models you had, you needed to be in the present, and the present was about testing and resumes and college.
I think that's a huge problem on its own, but you didn't really ask about that. I would say that high school felt more like a competition than an education, because it wasn't the final step for anyone. Hope this helps, even if it is rambly.
|
This is basically a gentle slap on the wrist right (I'm not intimately familiar with the structure of the companies he's credited for)?
The Securities and Exchange Commission settled charges with Tesla CEO Elon Musk over his aborted bid to take the company private, with the billionaire remaining as the helm of the company, but relinquishing his chairman title and getting slapped with a hefty fine.
The SEC action brings to a conclusion a saga which began in early August, in which Musk announced via Twitter that he had secured enough funding for a massive buyout of Tesla. The original SEC complaint alleged that Musk issued "false and misleading" statements, and failed to properly notify regulators of material company events.
As part of the settlement, which is still subject to court approval, Musk will also pay a civil penalty of $20 million and give up his role as chairman of the board for at least three years. Additionally, the SEC imposed a $20 million fine on Tesla, which will also be expected to appoint two new independent directors to the board.
In settling the charges, regulators faulted Tesla for not exerting more control over Musk's tweeting.
www.cnbc.com
In some DC bar these people will meet with Trump's team and commiserate.
|
Looks like the GOP is weaponizing the FBI investigation into the Kavanaugh accusations. Trump wants the FBI to look at who leaked Ford’s accusations, and Hatch has requested an investigation into why Ford did not know about the SJC’s offer to interview her in CA.
|
On September 30 2018 07:07 GreenHorizons wrote:This is basically a gentle slap on the wrist right (I'm not intimately familiar with the structure of the companies he's credited for)? Show nested quote +The Securities and Exchange Commission settled charges with Tesla CEO Elon Musk over his aborted bid to take the company private, with the billionaire remaining as the helm of the company, but relinquishing his chairman title and getting slapped with a hefty fine.
The SEC action brings to a conclusion a saga which began in early August, in which Musk announced via Twitter that he had secured enough funding for a massive buyout of Tesla. The original SEC complaint alleged that Musk issued "false and misleading" statements, and failed to properly notify regulators of material company events.
As part of the settlement, which is still subject to court approval, Musk will also pay a civil penalty of $20 million and give up his role as chairman of the board for at least three years. Additionally, the SEC imposed a $20 million fine on Tesla, which will also be expected to appoint two new independent directors to the board.
In settling the charges, regulators faulted Tesla for not exerting more control over Musk's tweeting. www.cnbc.comIn some DC bar these people will meet with Trump's team and commiserate.
Yeah, it basically is a slap on the wrist. My suspicion is that Musk has been misleading investors for a year or two, if not more. I’d have liked to have seen the SEC take a good look at the company and the books.
|
On September 30 2018 07:47 xDaunt wrote:
Looks like the GOP is weaponizing the FBI investigation into the Kavanaugh accusations. Trump wants the FBI to look at who leaked Ford’s accusations, and Hatch has requested an investigation into why Ford did not know about the SJC’s offer to interview her in CA.
I mean, what's it gonna do. If you don't already consider Feinstein a disgusting person for springing rape allegations at the last moment before a vote and after a hearing, what the hell's leaking and lying about it going to do? The worst on the second is she forgets being told that and lawyer swears she did, and everybody says the traumatic recollection of memories makes it likely it happened.
What's everyone's bets on new 11th hour uncorroborated allegations? Or votes of no among Flake/Murkowski/Collins and Manchin/vulnerable dem senators?
|
This is bound to raise some attention. The one thing that can end the farce from the Democrat side is proof that their re-election is much more in jeopardy with a 'no' vote.
|
I have a confession to make. I have developed quite a taste for watching Trump’s campaign rallies. I’m watching the one in West Virginia. The dude draws huge, raucous crowds.
|
Yeah, I don’t think red state senate dem incumbents are going to fair well. The silent majority is paying attention.
|
All this junk has the potential to arouse popular reaction to Democrats and their treatment of Judge Kavanaugh. I'm inclined to think it'll be top-5 vote influencing issue in the midterms. Mothers don't want their sons or husbands accused without corroborating evidence and their jobs and reputations destroyed. Men remember people in high school that might resurface a grudge now that they have the power to inflict severe harm even decades after the fact. All people know they can't prove their innocence if the court of public opinion will accept a date-less and location-less accusation.
Working against this presumption, and why I don't think it's a slam dunk issue that wins Republicans the midterms:
Low turnout in midterms
The usual show of dissatisfaction in midterm after a presidential party change year
The amount of people hearing news reports that simply say "Ford says this, and two other women are accusing Kavanaugh" and that's their level of engagement in political news. A couple radio stations in my area have been doing 30-sec news blurbs on the hour that basically smear Kavanaugh and could persuade voters uninformed on both sides.
Republicans did not repeal Obamacare, and voter's premiums will keep going up from intact regs. GOP mostly owns it now.
Things in favor of republicans:
Economy economy economy
Obamas lecturing on race and class divisions (as has been done and probably more)
Democratic messaging is terrible nationally and their leadership is visibly old and terrible
Even in saying they're against impeachment, this is pretty much an impeachment election.
The long drawn-out Mueller investigation that fails to find collusion and just finds process and financial crimes. Wild card if Mueller completes at the final minute.
|
On September 30 2018 07:07 GreenHorizons wrote:This is basically a gentle slap on the wrist right (I'm not intimately familiar with the structure of the companies he's credited for)? Show nested quote +The Securities and Exchange Commission settled charges with Tesla CEO Elon Musk over his aborted bid to take the company private, with the billionaire remaining as the helm of the company, but relinquishing his chairman title and getting slapped with a hefty fine.
The SEC action brings to a conclusion a saga which began in early August, in which Musk announced via Twitter that he had secured enough funding for a massive buyout of Tesla. The original SEC complaint alleged that Musk issued "false and misleading" statements, and failed to properly notify regulators of material company events.
As part of the settlement, which is still subject to court approval, Musk will also pay a civil penalty of $20 million and give up his role as chairman of the board for at least three years. Additionally, the SEC imposed a $20 million fine on Tesla, which will also be expected to appoint two new independent directors to the board.
In settling the charges, regulators faulted Tesla for not exerting more control over Musk's tweeting. www.cnbc.comIn some DC bar these people will meet with Trump's team and commiserate.
A shame that Silicon Valley frauds are allowed to get away with this sort of shit with little more than a small fine, but I suppose it's worth noting that there's still a criminal investigation into the matter by the DoJ. The company is a slow trainwreck in action and will be bankrupt as soon as the free investment money tap starts to run dry, which may very well happen pretty soon.
Funny thing is that the dude declined the settlement, the SEC went forward with the suit, and now he changed his mind and took a somewhat worse settlement. Great work.
|
Lol, look at this shit. Grassley is referring someone to the FBI for criminal prosecution for making false statements to the SJC. GOP is taking no prisoners.
|
On September 30 2018 09:50 xDaunt wrote:Lol, look at this shit. Grassley is referring someone to the FBI for criminal prosecution for making false statements to the SJC. GOP is taking no prisoners.
On September 29 2018 10:05 GreenHorizons wrote:
On this Kavanaugh thing I don't think it's set-in yet that Democrats just handed Republicans a win with this investigation. Kavanaugh was going to the court either way but now the main talking point Democrats had on the issue will be gone and they will look like asses to people who thought this was a political stunt from the beginning.
I think it's setting-in slowly now.
|
Anyone Hillary supports should be kept as far away from the nomination as possible in 2020.
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's favorability with U.S. adults is unchanged from last November (2017) -- remaining at a record low (36%).
These results, from a Sept. 4-12 Gallup poll, confirm that Clinton's image remains in a rut nearly two years after she lost the presidential contest in 2016. Her favorable rating is down seven percentage points from where it stood on the eve of the election.
Two key trends would suggest that Clinton should become more popular, not less, after the 2016 presidential election. The first is specific to Clinton. While opinions of Clinton have varied over her long time in the public limelight, she has tended to be quite popular when she is no longer seen as a purely political figure. When her husband, former President Bill Clinton, faced impeachment in 1998, for instance, Hillary Clinton's favorable rating rose to a record high of 67%. Clinton was also generally well-liked over the course of her 2009-2013 tenure as secretary of state.
Trump's favorability, at 41% in this poll, also remains low, in line with past readings during his presidency. And, unlike his 2016 opponent, Trump has become somewhat more popular since the presidential election than on the eve of it, largely because of more positive opinions among his fellow Republicans after he won.
news.gallup.com
|
They look at statistical trends without even understanding why they happen. Most laymen could tell you quite easily why exactly it is that Hillary isn't getting some sort of popularity boost right now, but these people are for some reason blind to what is obvious to everyone else.
|
On October 01 2018 00:44 LegalLord wrote:
They look at statistical trends without even understanding why they happen. Most laymen could tell you quite easily why exactly it is that Hillary isn't getting some sort of popularity boost right now, but these people are for some reason blind to what is obvious to everyone else.
It's hard to be properly introspective when you're perpetually living in a media echo chamber.
|
Democrats may regret starting this Kavanaugh sham sooner rather than later:
There will be a final passage vote late this week, Graham promised, saying he’s confident Kavanaugh would be confirmed. Then he asked Maria if he could list out what he’s going to do this week.
"Here’s what’s gonna happen. I’m gonna ask Senator Grassley to get to the bottom of how this hearing process was so hijacked, the unethical aspects of it, the slash-and-burn aspects of it, the effort to delay it, to abuse, I think, Dr. Ford’s trust."
And, he’s going to find out why Dr. Ford was apparently ignorant of the Committee’s offer to interview her privately in California. He listed the communications that were made extending the offer:
September 19 – Grassley sent letter to Katz offering to go to California “or anywhere”
September 22 – SJC staff email to Katz offering the same
September 22 – Grassley tweet
September 22 – Grassley letter to SJC Democrats
September 22 – Grassley letter to Feinstein
That’s not the only issue that should be investigated, as many of us at RedState have noted. Graham continued:
"I’m gonna find out who on Feinstein’s staff recommended Katz to be Dr. Ford’s lawyer. It’s improper for senators to recommend lawyers for constituents.
I’m gonna ask, if you thought she needed a lawyer as a staff member, why didn’t you come forward and tell the Committee about the allegation?
I’m going to try to find out who betrayed Dr. Ford’s trust to remain anonymous. There are three groups had the letter: a Democratic congresswoman and her staff, Feinstein and her staff, and I don’t believe Feinstein did this, and Dr. Ford’s lawyers. No friend sent this out to the press. No friend would do this to her. The person who sent this…had a political agenda.
I’m going to find out who on the Democratic side leaked an anonymous letter sent to Senator Gardner…claiming that Judge Kavanaugh did something wrong in 1998 in Colorado.
The bottom line is, we’re going to look into a betrayal of trust by Dr. Ford, a betrayal of the Committee rules."
Source.
The beauty of the investigation into why Dr. Ford did not know about the offer for the SJC to go to California is that there's only two possible outcomes. The first is that Dr. Ford will be nailed for perjury. The second will be that her attorneys are going to get nailed for breaching ethical duties. The inquisition into who leaked the letter/Ford claim should also cause some democrat sphincters to tighten. Again, there are only three possible outcomes: 1) Dr. Ford perjured herself, 2) the Democrats or their staffers leaked it and are going to face a tremendous backlash, or 3) the attorneys are going to face ethical problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
