Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:31 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 107131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 ... 2679  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6568
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:23 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17081
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Ted. wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Quote:

What's your problem then? Come on, out with it, and none of your usually pissing around either.

Edit: And wot HH said, but I can scarcely believe that had to be spelt out for you.


I've read what you and hh have written several times and concluded I must be missing something. You cant just accuse someone of a criminal act without necessary evidence and cost them a job. Imagine what kind of world that would be - maybe we are finding out. I guess I've misunderstood what you're saying.


It's fitness and propriety to hold the post. That doesn't just stop at criminal accusations. Nor am I saying that necessarily forfeits the Kav as a fit candidate for the job. It's merely an observation for those that are wetting their knickers of criminal level proof. It is not necessary.

It's part and parcel of a flawed system, IMO. Having a politicised judiciary is very risky from the POV that the judiciary should never be beholding to the lawmakers (who are beholding to lobby groups and vested interests). Lawmakers should not be interpreting the law and the judiciary should not be interpreting the political winds (societies, yes).


I think the attempt to make this not requiring of criminal proof was the other two accusations, to look like a pattern. But they so clearly didn't hold water that the opposite occured: the initial more plausible claim now looks to many like part of a pattern by the Democrats.

Nonetheless, as a standard rule for a society you can't just willy nilly accuse someone of stealing the money out of the social committee jar and cost them a job. That would not be good.


Which then behoves a full investigation is carried out by professional investigators. One way or another the bottom of it must be got to and the appropriate response or actions taken. Either way, the right outcome will occur most times. The way this has been conducted does nothing to either exonerate the Kav and punish a false accuser, or alternatively prevent an unfit person from being appointed to an extremely powerful and important office, give justice to a victim and relieve the American people of a despicable fraud.

What has transpired is akin to an unruly circus (with the bearded lady, dwarf tossing, monkeys, an elephant and clowns all on display, sans the decorous ringmaster).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6568
Quote:
It's quite interesting to see how people react to having a well rehearsed story being questioned. A good, experienced investigator can get a lot more out of someone than a politician grandstanding for the cameras.


You're just trolling now. For weeks the narrative was "Ford is a victim who shouldn't be interogated by old white men". Now it's, "Why, Oh Why, is the GOP preventing the FBI from waterboarding her. All we want is the truth".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 23038
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.

And we get called hysterical :uhoh:

I understand that it's a political right, although it doesn't automatically come with winning an election of course

However, once the nomination has been made, the senate process looks into the fitness of the nominee for the position, which is effectively a glorified job interview.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21769
Location: Middle East
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
It's quite interesting to see how people react to having a well rehearsed story being questioned. A good, experienced investigator can get a lot more out of someone than a politician grandstanding for the cameras.


You're just trolling now. For weeks the narrative was "Ford is a victim who shouldn't be interogated by old white men". Now it's, "Why, Oh Why, is the GOP preventing the FBI from waterboarding her. All we want is the truth".



Turbogoat wrote:

Does taking things to a ridiculous extreme help rationalize your more petulant arguments?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:33 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17081
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.


A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

No one should be at all concerned by the appointment of a judge. They should only need to be concerned that the system is uncorrectable and free from political interference and the office free of politicisation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6568
happyhooker wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.

And we get called hysterical :uhoh:

I understand that it's a political right, although it doesn't automatically come with winning an election of course

However, once the nomination has been made, the senate process looks into the fitness of the nominee for the position, which is effectively a glorified job interview.


No it f*ckin isn't.

It's the point at which political control of the Executive and the Legislature has to align. It does now. It likely will not in a few months. Derailment of Kav is intended to fundamentally restrict the GOP by moving the appointment process into a different political enviroment.

The question facing the senate is: against what standard of proof should that be allowed to happen?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6568
Ted. wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.


A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

No one should be at all concerned by the appointment of a judge. They should only need to be concerned that the system is uncorrectable and free from political interference and the office free of politicisation.


Well, take it up with the "Living Constitution" mob. I for one welcome you to the dark side of judicial restraint.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21610
Trump takes the credit when the Stock Market goes up, blames the FED when it goes down :roll: . All the while conveniently forgetting his ego driven trade wars are the reason for the voliatility


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8028
sewa wrote:
Trump takes the credit when the Stock Market goes up, blames the FED when it goes down :roll: . All the while conveniently forgetting his ego driven trade wars are the reason for the voliatility


Take credit for everything good, even when it defies logic. Deny, deny, deny and accept no responsibility for anything bad. It's a simple but depressingly effective playbook.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24432
Seneca of the Night wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Ted. wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.


A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

No one should be at all concerned by the appointment of a judge. They should only need to be concerned that the system is uncorrectable and free from political interference and the office free of politicisation.


Well, take it up with the "Living Constitution" mob. I for one welcome you to the dark side of judicial restraint.


This is such an important point. This means so much to the Dems as they 'activated' the court. Having done so, and profited it from it for decades, they are about to lose it, and this is sending them mental.



It is a major weapon they lose. It was used to neutralise bi-partisan legislative authority, pass by majorities and neuter republican values.

Trump is slowly but surely making history, MAGA.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10231
Location: Texas
Ted. wrote:
A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

Elections have consequences, I’m sure someone said that earlier.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6568
Quote:
A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?


If it makes you feel better, Kav was an infinitely more bi-cameral decison than Obamacare.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10231
Location: Texas
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Mr Mike wrote:
Ted. wrote:
A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

Elections have consequences, I’m sure someone said that earlier.
He paid for that remark it seems.
I get Ted’s view, for Kiwis judges have historically had a very limited and disciplined role (highlighted and questioned by CJ Elias recently). Add to that the different expectations about how lawyers are expected to emote in advocacy and elected judiciary at lower levels and the system is very different here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:55 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17081
Santa wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
Santa wrote:

They are largely inconsistencies between her testimony and previous claims she has made, between different claims she has made outside her testimony, or between her testimony and other evidence that she has refused to provide (e.g. the original therapist notes).

Really you should have a basic understanding of the situation before you go wailing in.

Very odd response, but entirely expected.

Seriously? you think that the notes taken by a therapist on the ordeal of a sexual violence survivor should be opened up for the gratification of the public? Personally, I can see every reason why she wouldn't want that, even if you can't.


Yes. Yes I do think they should be opened up to the general public, as I clearly stated above.

But failing that ideal situation perhaps they could be turned over for private examination by the body that is investigating the allegations. This seems a sensible compromise from my original and quite clear proposal to publicise the records because the allegator has cited them as corroborating evidence.

Alternatively we could go full #metoo and a) believe the initial allegation because she made it and she's a woman, and b) believe her summary of the independent associated evidence because she's a woman.


If that was a criminal investigation, which it is not, firstly the investigators are hardly likely to make that sort of information public, and secondly, in a civilised country the details of the files are likely to be suppressed if the case proceeds to a trial. None of that prevents the investigators doing their job. Why on earth is it you think that untrained politicians should investigate things that require specialised knowledge and most of all, tact and circumspection?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:56 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17081
Mr Mike wrote:
Ted. wrote:
A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

Elections have consequences, I’m sure someone said that earlier.


Not for a judge appointed for life, nor necessarily the appointees.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10231
Location: Texas
Ted. wrote:
Mr Mike wrote:
Ted. wrote:
A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

Elections have consequences, I’m sure someone said that earlier.


Not for a judge appointed for life, nor necessarily the appointees.

It did for Kennedy, he felt able to retire.

Trivia point, Kennedy and Gorsuch are the first time that a former clerk has joined his or her Justice on the court. Kavanaugh is another former clerk of Kennedy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10231
Location: Texas
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Ted. wrote:
Mr Mike wrote:
Ted. wrote:
A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

Elections have consequences, I’m sure someone said that earlier.


Not for a judge appointed for life, nor necessarily the appointees.


Ellis has been our Chief Justice since 1999. When are we kicking her to the long grass?

She has less than six months left.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10231
Location: Texas
Mandatory retirement at 70 IIRC


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 12:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9499
Mr Mike wrote:
Ted. wrote:
Mr Mike wrote:
Ted. wrote:
A political right to choose the highest judicial officers i the land?

What an indescribably f**ked up system. Give us strength from this stupidity.

Elections have consequences, I’m sure someone said that earlier.


Not for a judge appointed for life, nor necessarily the appointees.

It did for Kennedy, he felt able to retire.

Trivia point, Kennedy and Gorsuch are the first time that a former clerk has joined his or her Justice on the court. Kavanaugh is another former clerk of Kennedy.


Have any previous presidents had the power to appoint SC judges for life or is it just Trump?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17382
zzzz wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.

And we get called hysterical :uhoh:

I understand that it's a political right, although it doesn't automatically come with winning an election of course

However, once the nomination has been made, the senate process looks into the fitness of the nominee for the position, which is effectively a glorified job interview.


No it f*ckin isn't.

It's the point at which political control of the Executive and the Legislature has to align. It does now. It likely will not in a few months. Derailment of Kav is intended to fundamentally restrict the GOP by moving the appointment process into a different political enviroment.

The question facing the senate is: against what standard of proof should that be allowed to happen?

Absolute nonsense.

It may have been an unedifying spectacle, but the whole process was to assess his suitability for the job.

Dr Ford felt that she had good reason to believe that he wasn't suitable for the job, and frankly, I think it helps no one to have an attempted rapist on the bench of the Supreme Court. Apart from other rapists, of course.

Kavanaugh may have suffered damage to his reputation and this is regrettable, but as it's only a job interview, he won't be going to prison for attempted rape, either.

If he had defended himself in a measured and composed way, if he had declared himself open to an FBI investigation, if he hadn't directly contradicted his own hand-drawn calendar, then I would venture to suggest that his reputation would probably not have suffered quite as much as it has.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40662
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Yo! Anti-Trumpers! Check this out it goes a little something like this:

Image


Is that the bit when he was foaming at the mouth about what goes around comes around?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21769
Location: Middle East
Kiwias wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Yo! Anti-Trumpers! Check this out it goes a little something like this:

Image


Is that the bit when he was foaming at the mouth about what goes around comes around?


It might be how he pronounces 'Gulag'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 8503
Santa wrote:

Have any previous presidents had the power to appoint SC judges for life or is it just Trump?


Two schools of thought, the first that only Trump could and would wield such power, and then there's reality


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4936
In other news - Melania Trump is the most bullied person in the world, or at least in the top 10...

:roll:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45818267


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4936
Seneca of the Night wrote:
BokJock wrote:
In other news - Melania Trump is the most bullied person in the world, or at least in the top 10...

:roll:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45818267


And you're bulling her right now.


Melania is a bored member?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1502
Location: Saint Paul
zzzz wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.

And we get called hysterical :uhoh:

I understand that it's a political right, although it doesn't automatically come with winning an election of course

However, once the nomination has been made, the senate process looks into the fitness of the nominee for the position, which is effectively a glorified job interview.


No it f*ckin isn't.

It's the point at which political control of the Executive and the Legislature has to align. It does now. It likely will not in a few months. Derailment of Kav is intended to fundamentally restrict the GOP by moving the appointment process into a different political enviroment.

The question facing the senate is: against what standard of proof should that be allowed to happen?


It is as if a precedent had already been established. Let's call it the Merrick rule.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9499
puku wrote:
zzzz wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.

And we get called hysterical :uhoh:

I understand that it's a political right, although it doesn't automatically come with winning an election of course

However, once the nomination has been made, the senate process looks into the fitness of the nominee for the position, which is effectively a glorified job interview.


No it f*ckin isn't.

It's the point at which political control of the Executive and the Legislature has to align. It does now. It likely will not in a few months. Derailment of Kav is intended to fundamentally restrict the GOP by moving the appointment process into a different political enviroment.

The question facing the senate is: against what standard of proof should that be allowed to happen?


It is as if a precedent had already been established. Let's call it the Merrick rule.


The Merrick Rule involves saving an uncorroborated rape allegation until late in the confirmation process in order to force the appointment in a new political environment?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1502
Location: Saint Paul
Santa wrote:
puku wrote:
zzzz wrote:

No it f*ckin isn't.

It's the point at which political control of the Executive and the Legislature has to align. It does now. It likely will not in a few months. Derailment of Kav is intended to fundamentally restrict the GOP by moving the appointment process into a different political enviroment.

The question facing the senate is: against what standard of proof should that be allowed to happen?


It is as if a precedent had already been established. Let's call it the Merrick rule.


The Merrick Rule involves saving an uncorroborated rape allegation until late in the confirmation process in order to force the appointment in a new political environment?


You seem confused. You are making a statement not asking a question.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9499
puku wrote:
Santa wrote:
puku wrote:
zzzz wrote:

No it f*ckin isn't.

It's the point at which political control of the Executive and the Legislature has to align. It does now. It likely will not in a few months. Derailment of Kav is intended to fundamentally restrict the GOP by moving the appointment process into a different political enviroment.

The question facing the senate is: against what standard of proof should that be allowed to happen?


It is as if a precedent had already been established. Let's call it the Merrick rule.


The Merrick Rule involves saving an uncorroborated rape allegation until late in the confirmation process in order to force the appointment in a new political environment?


You seem confused. You are making a statement not asking a question.


No I'm trying to work out what it involves. Can you expand?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1502
Location: Saint Paul
Santa wrote:
puku wrote:
Santa wrote:
puku wrote:
zzzz wrote:

No it f*ckin isn't.

It's the point at which political control of the Executive and the Legislature has to align. It does now. It likely will not in a few months. Derailment of Kav is intended to fundamentally restrict the GOP by moving the appointment process into a different political enviroment.

The question facing the senate is: against what standard of proof should that be allowed to happen?


It is as if a precedent had already been established. Let's call it the Merrick rule.


The Merrick Rule involves saving an uncorroborated rape allegation until late in the confirmation process in order to force the appointment in a new political environment?




You seem confused. You are making a statement not asking a question.


No I'm trying to work out what it involves. Can you expand?


You think you asked a question? Fück me.

And, you are not trying to work out what it involves. You seem to have made up your mind. Here's a question for you, why add the language "uncorroborated rape allegation" do you have a particular event in mind?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9499
You're struggling. Let me help.

The Merrick Rule involves shifting the appointment process from any political environment to a different one for any reason at all.

Is that an accurate formulation of your rule?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9499
That's got to be it because it's the only formulation that covers the different situations where:

A. a misaligned (with the president) legislature uses its granted powers to shift the appointment process

And B. The subordinate power in an otherwise aligned (with the president) legislature uses an uncorroborated rape allegation to shift the appointment process.

Those seems like equivalent situations that can reasonably be covered by a single very witty rule. :thumbup:


Last edited by Santa on Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1502
Location: Saint Paul
Santa wrote:
You're struggling. Let me help.

The Merrick Rule involves shifting the appointment process from any political environment to a different one for any reason at all.

Is that an accurate formulation of your rule?


Avoiding my question by asking your own. Interesting approach.

To answer your question. No


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9499
puku wrote:
Santa wrote:
You're struggling. Let me help.

The Merrick Rule involves shifting the appointment process from any political environment to a different one for any reason at all.

Is that an accurate formulation of your rule?


Avoiding my question by asking your own. Interesting approach.

To answer your question. No


Please formulate it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1502
Location: Saint Paul
Santa wrote:
That's got to be it because it's the only formulation that covers the different situations where:

A. a misaligned (with the president) legislature uses its granted powers to shift the appointment process

And B. The subordinate power in an otherwise aligned (with the president) legislature uses an uncorroborated rape allegation to shift the appointment process.

Those seems like equivalent situations. :thumbup:


There you go again with that statement. Who alleged they were raped?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9499
puku wrote:
Santa wrote:
That's got to be it because it's the only formulation that covers the different situations where:

A. a misaligned (with the president) legislature uses its granted powers to shift the appointment process

And B. The subordinate power in an otherwise aligned (with the president) legislature uses an uncorroborated rape allegation to shift the appointment process.

Those seems like equivalent situations. :thumbup:


There you go again with that statement. Who alleged they were raped?


Ah. That's all you've got. :lol:

Ok. Insert the word 'attempted'. I'm sure that will change everything.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5575
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
Santa wrote:
That's got to be it because it's the only formulation that covers the different situations where:

A. My guys fudge your guys - good

And B. Your guys try fudge my guys - bad

Those seems like equivalent situations that can reasonably be covered by a single very witty rule. :thumbup:


fxd!

The conservative version of a democracy, now known as a hypocracy :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4115
puku wrote:
zzzz wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
zzzz wrote:
Quote:
What's happened recently has been basically a glorified job interview.
#

Of all the hot takes floating around about Kav, this is one of the most excruciatingly stupid.

It's clearly not a f*ckin job interview. It's the excercise of of one of the most important political rights that comes with winning a general election. Actually, its probably the most important political consequence of a US election. Millions of people held their noses and voted for Trump purely so the GOP could make this appointment. Equally, millions of people have completely lost their shit about the fact the GOP will make this appointment.

And we get called hysterical :uhoh:

I understand that it's a political right, although it doesn't automatically come with winning an election of course

However, once the nomination has been made, the senate process looks into the fitness of the nominee for the position, which is effectively a glorified job interview.


No it f*ckin isn't.

It's the point at which political control of the Executive and the Legislature has to align. It does now. It likely will not in a few months. Derailment of Kav is intended to fundamentally restrict the GOP by moving the appointment process into a different political enviroment.

The question facing the senate is: against what standard of proof should that be allowed to happen?


It is as if a precedent had already been established. Let's call it the Merrick rule.


It's called the Biden rule.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZlzhULrJC0


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2018 6:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5522
Location: By the mighty beard of Adam Jones
This been done?

https://news.sky.com/story/trumps-stunned-silence-as-kanye-rants-in-white-house-11523779


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 107131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 ... 2679  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], CarrotGawks, Harveys, irishrugbyua, jdogscoop, kiwigreg369, KnuckleDragger, koroke hangareka, Lazy Couch potato, Nolanator, normilet, Pat the Ex Mat, SaintK, Sensible Stephen, sockwithaticket, Ted. and 65 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group