OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
I'm just shocked that this was the best a doctoral student could bring to the table. I guess I expected a little more, like actually making a salient argument.
If your recent posts are any indication of what you think a salient argument looks like, then I’m happy to disappoint you in that regard.
Take your meds.
"I Know Where All The Bodies Are Buried": Clinton Foundation CFO Spills Beans To Investigators
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...f5W2rEbTFw4ZSWjOg7aI4H-DtZwIXCb_FOHBF91YrvIXI
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...f5W2rEbTFw4ZSWjOg7aI4H-DtZwIXCb_FOHBF91YrvIXI
VIDEO: Students oppose Clarence Thomas building… but don’t know why
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11617
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11617
That's where we're at now. People get outraged that you don't get outraged.
They strive to be offended.
It's not always offended. In fact, most of the time it's embarrassed for, or even laughing at. Outraged and offended are very rarely used when it actually applies. Concerned might be another way of saying it. Outrage is rarely if ever the case.
Fox News Top Legal Analyst Says Donald Trump Could Be Charged With 3 Crimes and Indicted While President - Newsweek https://apple.news/AnurMho-jR-abHwOoNwFEDg
See... I don't get this "could be charged" stuff. It almost seems like theater. Anybody could be charged with something.
People generally don’t get charged with crimes unless there is evidence that points towards them committing that crime. The discussion here is about whether trump’s actions were criminal and he could be charged. Saying “anyone could be charged with something” is just needlessly muddying the waters. Just because they technically could be charged doesn’t mean there is any realistic probility of it happening. By saying trump saying he could be charged, what he means is there is a realistic probability of it happening. I don’t see how that’s theater at all. This isn’t some liberal reporter trying to stir up a headline. The guy works at Fox News.
I get it... it's just that this gets old. I still think this is just theater. We all know that Trump won't be charged, indicted or convicted.
We don’t know anything. Tell your theory about socioeconomic elites being immune from prosecution to the guys from Enron.
Being powerful or well connected doesn’t make you immune from being charged, indicted or convicted. Plenty of powerful and well connected people have ended up in prison. I don’t know if trump will end up in prison, but we certainly don’t know he won’t be charged, indicted or convicted. The recent revelation from this investigation substantially increased the probability of him being indicted. Whether or not he is convicted will depend on the quality of evidence.
If it’s getting old then just stop following the story. These investigations always take a long time, and both sides will speculate throughout the process.
A Former Trump Campaign Staffer Was Ordered To Pay $25,000 For Violating Her Nondisclosure Agreement
Jessica Denson is going to court to challenge the award to the campaign, which came out of secret proceedings in arbitration.
Zoe Tillman
BuzzFeed News Reporter
Reporting From Washington, DC
Posted on December 10, 2018, at 5:28 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON — Jessica Denson, a former staffer for President Donald Trump's campaign, is fighting an order to pay nearly $25,000 for violating a nondisclosure agreement, according to court papers.
The award to the Trump campaign came out of arbitration — non-public proceedings the campaign pursued against Denson after she filed two lawsuits against it. Denson was ordered to pay $25,000 to the campaign in October, but the award wasn't made public until Denson's lawyers included it in court filings in New York County Supreme Court in late November. The documents obtained by BuzzFeed News this week were not filed electronically.
The award payment is part of a complicated, ongoing legal battle between the Trump campaign and Denson, who, according to her court filings, worked on the campaign as a national phone bank administrator and as director of Hispanic engagement. Denson sued the campaign in New York County Supreme Court in November 2017, claiming that officials discriminated against her, cyberbullied her, and were otherwise hostile towards her; it did not include any allegations against Donald Trump personally. She sought $25 million in damages.
But the Trump campaign claimed Denson's lawsuit violated the terms of her nondisclosure agreement, which prohibited her from disclosing confidential information, disparaging the campaign, competing with the campaign, or violating its intellectual property. The NDA gave the campaign the power to take issues that arose under the agreement to arbitration, and so the Trump campaign went to the American Arbitration Association and initiated the arbitration case against Denson, which has taken place behind closed doors; she has declined to participate.
Read more here:
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...ign-nda-lawsuit-jessica-denson-discrimination
Dear my darling, Jessica . . you made 4 mistakes that will haunt you for life . .
1. Became a Repug.
2. Signed a Trump NA.
3. Worked the Trump campaign and saw some of his confidential stuff.
4. Talked about his confidential stuff.
Now, you have to pay the man his money. See how he works?
I'm so sorry that you fell victim to this POS and his way of doing business . . it's what you get when you fall in line with #45, he'll fvck you 6 ways to Sunday and won't ever look back.
My condolences, Jessica . .
Jessica Denson is going to court to challenge the award to the campaign, which came out of secret proceedings in arbitration.
Zoe Tillman
BuzzFeed News Reporter
Reporting From Washington, DC
Posted on December 10, 2018, at 5:28 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON — Jessica Denson, a former staffer for President Donald Trump's campaign, is fighting an order to pay nearly $25,000 for violating a nondisclosure agreement, according to court papers.
The award to the Trump campaign came out of arbitration — non-public proceedings the campaign pursued against Denson after she filed two lawsuits against it. Denson was ordered to pay $25,000 to the campaign in October, but the award wasn't made public until Denson's lawyers included it in court filings in New York County Supreme Court in late November. The documents obtained by BuzzFeed News this week were not filed electronically.
The award payment is part of a complicated, ongoing legal battle between the Trump campaign and Denson, who, according to her court filings, worked on the campaign as a national phone bank administrator and as director of Hispanic engagement. Denson sued the campaign in New York County Supreme Court in November 2017, claiming that officials discriminated against her, cyberbullied her, and were otherwise hostile towards her; it did not include any allegations against Donald Trump personally. She sought $25 million in damages.
But the Trump campaign claimed Denson's lawsuit violated the terms of her nondisclosure agreement, which prohibited her from disclosing confidential information, disparaging the campaign, competing with the campaign, or violating its intellectual property. The NDA gave the campaign the power to take issues that arose under the agreement to arbitration, and so the Trump campaign went to the American Arbitration Association and initiated the arbitration case against Denson, which has taken place behind closed doors; she has declined to participate.
Read more here:
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...ign-nda-lawsuit-jessica-denson-discrimination
Dear my darling, Jessica . . you made 4 mistakes that will haunt you for life . .
1. Became a Repug.
2. Signed a Trump NA.
3. Worked the Trump campaign and saw some of his confidential stuff.
4. Talked about his confidential stuff.
Now, you have to pay the man his money. See how he works?
I'm so sorry that you fell victim to this POS and his way of doing business . . it's what you get when you fall in line with #45, he'll fvck you 6 ways to Sunday and won't ever look back.
My condolences, Jessica . .
It's not just me, there's a slew of 17 angry Democrats and a S/C that is working hard to eliminate the corruption and lies that our country has been subject to . . please do keep that checking account balance above $100, as that time is coming.
I will just take the title to your little brown truck. I will also let you drive and deliver once Lyles has loaded the dried seaweed that everyone in Yadkinville is so keen to buy.
Can I stop by and pick-up my Tattooed 22 year old girlfriend . . you know, for entertainment purposes . .
Lemme know . .
Sure. She likes laughing at pathetic old men as much as the rest of us- I'm sure she would be entertained.
Should I stop now before someone reports me?
I can entertain her to a satisfaction level never yet experienced . .
No one is going to report you . . as that is no longer necessary. LOL
I just have extreme doubts that the power structure wants to set a precedent of putting a president of the USA in jail.
What power structure? You act like there’s some conspiratorial group all colluding together to prevent that from happening. That’s just not how power works.
It's not conspiracy. You know that when institutions are in-place, they develop self-preservation mechanisms, just like most anything else. It's not some behind-the-scenes shadow entity. This isn't a perfect comparison, but; If I am thirsty, and a person in Zimbabwe is thirsty, we don't have to conspire in order to do what is natural to perpetuate our lives... drink something. There is a ruling class- the very wealthy- whatever you wanna call them. They don't have to meet with each other in order to conduct themselves- collectively and individually- in ways that will continue to guarantee their status. It's just a natural consequence.
Another way to look at it is; You and I both know that "exceptions are made" for just about every profit-driven institution in existence. Look at college sports and how it is selectively-enforced. Virtually EVERYTHING is selectively-enforced, when you get down to it. And, it isn't any different with government. Now, I am fully aware that people in government go to jail. They certainly do. But, I also know that "exceptions are made" quite often... and whenever possible! It's not absolutely impossible for Trump to get the hammer, but it sure as hell is not likely. If they didn't put Nixon in jail, then I highly doubt they put The Donald in jail. You know as well as I do that these people are corrupt as shit and they get away with all kinds of underhanded crap. They always have, and they always will. And, by "they", I mean people in power who are mutually connected and have similar "best interests" in common. Their political stripes are irrelevant. Politics is basically a laboratory for growing corruption.
However, I do believe that "good overcomes evil"... MOST of the time! But, not always. And, whenever it does, that's great. But, the lines of good and evil are blurred, or never even drawn, when it comes to politics and money.
Nixon would have gone to prison if he wasn’t pardoned. I’m not so sure the next president will be willing to commit political suicide by pardoning a traitor. And federal judges are not in the business of making exceptions. Let’s look at the example you have of college football. Programs have been allowed to get away with all kinds of stuff for a long time. The only thing that tends to stop it is when the legal system gets involved. Robert Mueller has no interest in protecting trump, and neither do the judges who would try him if he is convicted, unless they are judges that were appointed by him. Sure he is privileged in the sense that he has access to expensive lawyers and he can afford to drag out a case hoping that it will eventually fold. But that won’t keep him from being convicted if the evidence is there to do so.
Let’s just play a hypothetical game and pretend we have perfect information that confirms 100% that trump is compromised by the Russians. There isn’t a single person in American politics who would step up to save him. And if there’s anyone in government that is dumb enough to squander their influence and get themselves convicted, it is most certainly Donald trump.
I obviously can’t speak to the odds of him being convicted. But our point of disagreement seems to mostly come down to how likely we think a conviction is. I just think it’s higher than you do,
Exactly... remember that part. Keep it fresh in your mind. He WAS pardoned! He walked away with nothing but a bad reputation. Biiiig fvckin deal! You think Donald Trump would lose any sleep over a similar outcome? Hay-yul no! He'd parlay that into a fortune!
I know you're not THAT naive! I realize you think Trump deserves the full punishment. Many will think that. But... MANY WON'T think that! You've been watching what has been going on more than I have. And, there are plenty of Republicans who know full well that their constituents LOVE Donald Trump. This is no secret. So, I have complete confidence that he will have people in government that will cover for him.
That’s a good point but I think most of that support would evaporate if there was no doubt he committed treason. Most legal experts think he would be prosecuted after leaving office, so if that’s true and if democrats take the White House in 2020 the odds of him getting pardoned are roughly zero.
A whole lot of If's in that response... too many.
I've seen plenty of people create doubt even when there is no doubt.
Similar threads
