Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 09-25-2018, 02:20 PM   #31
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Spence, it’s bad for the senate to bring in an expert sexual crimes prosecutor who is a female, to question both Ford and Kavanaugh? i’d think you and Ford would love that move. i doubt she wants to get questioned by a bunch of old white guys, right? why not bring in an expert who knows how to best get to the truth in these situations?

It can’t be that neither you nor Ford is interested in the truth, but rather in smear, can it?

that would explain why she hasn’t asked the Md police to investigate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 02:24 PM   #32
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
and i think she’s right, been saying that all along. Why isn’t Ford asking the MD police to investigate?? privacy isn’t an issue anymore, so if she believes what she is saying, why limit it to the political arena?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Statute of limitations is long gone, this is not a court of law, there is way more at stake here than one man's life.
Sorry that is the way politics works, it's not pretty or nice.
I said last week they should have gracefully yanked him, and put in a woman.

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 02:32 PM   #33
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Statute of limitations is long gone, this is not a court of law, there is way more at stake here than one man's life.
Sorry that is the way politics works, it's not pretty or nice.
I said last week they should have gracefully yanked him, and put in a woman.
i keep hearing that in MD there is no statute of limitations on this accusation?

the maryland police posted something, they didn’t say the statute was up, they said something to the effect that if she asked, they’d investigate.

you’re right that politics isn’t pretty or nice. but it doesn’t need to be this ugly, this regularly. i know this because i’m old enough to remember when it wasn’t.

you did say to put in the woman. trump will not yank him, nor should he, with just an accusation. if that’s enough, who will ever get confirmed again? an accusation is not evidence, not even close.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 02:36 PM   #34
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Spence, it’s bad for the senate to bring in an expert sexual crimes prosecutor who is a female, to question both Ford and Kavanaugh?
I've not seen anything that says the attorney is going to question both people. Regardless, you'd do this because you hope to destroy the witness, not get to the facts.
spence is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 02:37 PM   #35
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
What is really scary here is . . . Ultimately he could have more effect on our government than any elected official other than the president and for life.
Yet you still believe that SCOTUS Justices should "interpret" the Constitution by personal opinion rather than textual limitation.
detbuch is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 02:47 PM   #36
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Yet you still believe that SCOTUS Justices should "interpret" the Constitution by personal opinion rather than textual limitation.
I see, so judges are binary. Some rule by textual limitation and others rule by personal opinion. There's nothing in between.

Right.
spence is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 03:13 PM   #37
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
i keep hearing that in MD there is no statute of limitations on this accusation?

the maryland police posted something, they didn’t say the statute was up, they said something to the effect that if she asked, they’d investigate.

you’re right that politics isn’t pretty or nice. but it doesn’t need to be this ugly, this regularly. i know this because i’m old enough to remember when it wasn’t.

you did say to put in the woman. trump will not yank him, nor should he, with just an accusation. if that’s enough, who will ever get confirmed again? an accusation is not evidence, not even close.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
You're correct there is no statute of limitation on that and that means they don't have to do it today or tomorrow. They might be being nice about it and giving him a chance to bow out, rather than put either one of them thru a trial. None of us can do more than guess.
"Investigators in Montgomery County have apparently spoken with either a woman or her attorney about allegations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh that date back to his senior year of high school.
Investigators have apparently spoken to multiple witnesses about the allegations.
A formal complaint has not been filed.
“Without a complaint, they cannot conduct a further investigation,” said Karem. “That’s the fulcrum.”
In Maryland, there is no statute of limitations for rape and attempted rape.
The county police and the Montgomery County prosecuting attorney’s office have said they would conduct an investigation into the case, if a complaint is filed."


It's always been this ugly, you just never saw it.
I've known some old politicians and had that discussion.
It was done in backrooms, out of sight and the newscycle was a week, not minutes. Nobody had email, they talked and left no trace.

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 03:36 PM   #38
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I've not seen anything that says the attorney is going to question both people. Regardless, you'd do this because you hope to destroy the witness, not get to the facts.
i have seen multiple reports that the attorney would question both. she’s a prosecutor, not a defense expert. you’d only run from this, if you feared the truth. kind of like opposing drug tests.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 03:38 PM   #39
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
i have seen multiple reports that the attorney would question both. she’s a prosecutor, not a defense expert. you’d only run from this, if you feared the truth. kind of like opposing drug tests.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Why wouldn't the Senators question her themselves? I'm sure they have attorney's behind the scene writing the questions.

What are they afraid of?
spence is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 03:39 PM   #40
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
You're correct there is no statute of limitation on that and that means they don't have to do it today or tomorrow. They might be being nice about it and giving him a chance to bow out, rather than put either one of them thru a trial. None of us can do more than guess.
"Investigators in Montgomery County have apparently spoken with either a woman or her attorney about allegations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh that date back to his senior year of high school.
Investigators have apparently spoken to multiple witnesses about the allegations.
A formal complaint has not been filed.
“Without a complaint, they cannot conduct a further investigation,” said Karem. “That’s the fulcrum.”
In Maryland, there is no statute of limitations for rape and attempted rape.
The county police and the Montgomery County prosecuting attorney’s office have said they would conduct an investigation into the case, if a complaint is filed."


It's always been this ugly, you just never saw it.
I've known some old politicians and had that discussion.
It was done in backrooms, out of sight and the newscycle was a week, not minutes. Nobody had email, they talked and left no trace.
i didn’t say they had to donut today. i asked why Ford isn’t asking for it. it’s not like she’s seeking privacy.

“they might be being nice about it”

i bet that’s it.

no, i see it. not that long ago, it wasn’t like this. Clarence Thomas got confirmed by a democrat controlled senate. it got ugly, and never returned to civilized, during bush’s presidency. it has not always been like this, not even close.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 03:43 PM   #41
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
the only reason they are having a female ask the question is so the can say look we cared ... she asked the question not us
wdmso is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 03:47 PM   #42
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
the only reason they are having a female ask the question is so the can say look we cared ... she asked the question not us
and if a bunch of silver haired white guys ask, the left will bitch about that. yes or no? fine she doesn’t want an expert, let the senators ask her, and watch how they get attacked for being mean.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 04:00 PM   #43
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
i didn’t say they had to donut today. i asked why Ford isn’t asking for it. it’s not like she’s seeking privacy.

“they might be being nice about it”

i bet that’s it.

no, i see it. not that long ago, it wasn’t like this. Clarence Thomas got confirmed by a democrat controlled senate. it got ugly, and never returned to civilized, during bush’s presidency. it has not always been like this, not even close.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Sitting in the low chair?
If i had evidence that someone had committed a crime, i have leverage over them. I can go to the police and file the complaint or just ask them to stop what they are doing that i disagree with.
That's what i mean by being nice, giving them a chance to just go on with their life and not continue in the direction they are going.

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 04:05 PM   #44
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I see, so judges are binary. Some rule by textual limitation and others rule by personal opinion. There's nothing in between.

Right.
Almost right. A judge cannot do both at the same time. It is only "scary," a la Pete F, that "he could have more effect on our government than any elected official other than the president and for life" when judges interpret by opinion than by original text. There is no in between.

Interpreting by text proscribes the desire to interject ideas and opinions outside of the text. It denies the ability of the judge to impact government other than limiting it to its constitutional powers.

Interpreting outside of the text eliminates the text (the Constitution), brushes it aside as an impediment to arriving at a desired judgment. And thereby gives a judge the ability to create policy or to support otherwise Congressional unconstitutional legislation. That is the scary that Pete F, perhaps inadvertently, refers to.

The two methods of interpretation cannot be used in conjunction with each other. They are opposing methods.
detbuch is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 04:36 PM   #45
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Almost right. A judge cannot do both at the same time. It is only "scary," a la Pete F, that "he could have more effect on our government than any elected official other than the president and for life" when judges interpret by opinion than by original text. There is no in between.

Interpreting by text proscribes the desire to interject ideas and opinions outside of the text. It denies the ability of the judge to impact government other than limiting it to its constitutional powers.

Interpreting outside of the text eliminates the text (the Constitution), brushes it aside as an impediment to arriving at a desired judgment. And thereby gives a judge the ability to create policy or to support otherwise Congressional unconstitutional legislation. That is the scary that Pete F, perhaps inadvertently, refers to.

The two methods of interpretation cannot be used in conjunction with each other. They are opposing methods.
So originalist judges are robots? What do they do when the code doesn't build?
spence is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 04:48 PM   #46
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
So originalist judges are robots? What do they do when the code doesn't build?
No, they are judges not legislators nor enablers of unconstitutional legislation.


What code? Judges don't build. And they don't create building codes. They judge by applying existing codes. If those codes don't "build," it is up to the builders to change them.

A good overall government code provides for change. As does the U.S. Constitution--which does not give the judicial branch the power to change the code.

If judges create the laws which they adjudicate, that should surely be a system that Pete F would think is scary. Are you suggesting we should have such a system?
detbuch is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 06:17 PM   #47
Ian
Idiot
iTrader: (0)
 
Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 2,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Spence, it’s also not a loss for Trump if the nomination gets withdrawn, and he nominated that female devout catholic ( Barrett or Jarrett?). the liberals should have asked themselves if having Kavanaugh on the court is the worst possible outcome for them. I’d think a brilliant, strong woman who is a rabid catholic, would be far less preferable, compared to Kavanaugh. if nothing else, Kavanaugh is an easier target, being a man. There is no way, none, that this seat isn’t filled before the new congress is sworn in. If the dems take the senate, Trump will do it in the lame duck session, and he won’t bat an eye.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
They’ll just accuse her of sexual assault... this seat will never get filled. It’s just going to be one criminal appointee after another. At least we have plenty of other justices?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The artist formerly known as Scratch59.
Ian is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 06:39 PM   #48
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian View Post
They’ll just accuse her of sexual assault... this seat will never get filled. It’s just going to be one criminal appointee after another. At least we have plenty of other justices?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
oh it’s going to get filled.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 06:53 PM   #49
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Of the 163 citizens nominated to the Supreme Court by presidents since the start of the Republic, only 125 were confirmed, 7 declined.
It’s not the end of the USA if he doesn’t get confirmed
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 09-25-2018, 09:18 PM   #50
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post

Why wouldn't the Senators question her themselves?
What are they afraid of?
so evil democraps can't whine that she's being bullied.....
scottw is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 11:15 AM   #51
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Of the 163 citizens nominated to the Supreme Court by presidents since the start of the Republic, only 125 were confirmed, 7 declined.
It’s not the end of the USA if he doesn’t get confirmed
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
if unsubstantiated allegations are enough to disqualify someone, it will mean no one gets confirmed.

If there is nothing beyond allegations and hearsay, he's probably going to get confirmed. I would say definite, but they might get 2 defections from Collins, Murkowski, and Flake. Also possible Pence breaks the tie.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 11:17 AM   #52
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
so evil democraps can't whine that she's being bullied.....
Nothing will stop them from that whining.

I still don't see the bad idea of bringing in a subject matter expert. Well, I see the problem if this is just a smear campaign, I see no problem if the goal is justice.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 01:31 PM   #53
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
I wonder if the democrats have reached peak crazy yet....
scottw is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 01:45 PM   #54
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
I wonder if the democrats have reached peak crazy yet....
I don't know about that, but somebody seems to be chasing the laser pointer.
Don't worry though, I hear someone is going to have a press conference and straighten everyone out as only he can.

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 02:03 PM   #55
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
I wonder if the democrats have reached peak crazy yet....
I'd be more concerned with the people sending death threats to senators for supporting Ford's right to be heard.
spence is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 02:25 PM   #56
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I'd be more concerned with the people sending death threats to senators for supporting Ford's right to be heard.
another from the whack leftist playbook....waaaaa...we're victims....we're getting death threats....
scottw is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 02:39 PM   #57
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
another from the whack leftist playbook....waaaaa...we're victims....we're getting death threats....
Jeff Flake is a wack leftist?
spence is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 02:56 PM   #58
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
which senator has not supported ford's right to be heard? they've bent over backwards to ensure that she is heard....yes flake is a flake....ahhh I see....someone from somewhere called his office....he's far more likely to be accosted by an angry mob of leftists in a restaurant if he votes to confirm

Last edited by scottw; 09-26-2018 at 03:12 PM..
scottw is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 03:30 PM   #59
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
so all the democrats want an fbi investigation, even though lithe fbi investigated him six times and missed that he participated in 10 gang rapes. Ten.

Does anybody believe this?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 09-26-2018, 03:42 PM   #60
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
What do Kavanaugh and bill Bill Cosby ? have in common

no one believed the women who accused him... at 1st
wdmso is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com