[QUOTE=jasong;486980][B]What if an American citizen doesn't want to participate in Social Security, do you have respect for that person as well?[/B] Even if I still had to invest the money that would have gone to social security and wouldn't get it back until age 60 or so, I'd rather do that than participate in social security.

Not all pyramid schemes are illegal, social security is an example of a legal pyramid scheme.[/QUOTE]
No. You also are pretty fuzzy on what a pyramid scheme is.

[QUOTE=jasong;486980]What if an American citizen doesn't want to participate in Social Security, do you have respect for that person as well?[/QUOTE]You might be shocked to find out that not all Americanos (that work at paying jobs), pay into or expect to get money from SS. And not all people that get money from SS have paid in.

[QUOTE=jasong;486980]What if an American citizen doesn't want to participate in Social Security, do you have respect for that person as well?[/QUOTE]

You might as well replace "participate in Social Security" with "break the law". Now I might still have respect for such a person if I deem the law in question to be inane (e.g. pot treated in law similarly to heroin, say) or unconstitutional (e.g. large parts of the Patriot Act and its successors). Not the case with SS - my main objections to SS are

[1] The rich only pay in up to a very limited salary cap. Made $1 billion this year, only pay SS on first $100K or so. ($128,400 for 2018). So Jeff Bezos and all the Wall Street hedge-fund billionaires pay the same roughly-$8000 that someone making just over 6 figures does.

[2] Government has for decades used the SS trust fund (and various others it has) as deficit-spending slush funds, which allows it to maintain the accounting fiction of "public debt", by which the total-government-debt number is [url=https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/pd_debttothepenny.htm]roughly 1/3rd less than the actual total[/url]. Even there my problem is not the debt per se - as an issuer of its own fiat currency the US government can never 'go broke', and deficit-spending which goes to the "little people" can be quite healthy for the overall economy - but rather what so much it goes for, such as blowing sh*t up all around the world and enriching the corrupt MIC in the process, and bailouts of Wall Street financial-fraud rackets.

As a callow youth I used to believe a lot of the nonsense about SS, like jasong does. With the benefit of hindsight let me say that no one under age 50 should think they have a clue about what their priorities and concerns will be once they near retirement age. Your job gets offshored and you find yourself unable to find work due to age bias, your body breaks down, those kinds of things can change your perception of such matters in quite profound ways.

[QUOTE=jasong;486980]What if an American citizen doesn't want to participate in Social Security, do you have respect for that person as well? Even if I still had to invest the money that would have gone to social security and wouldn't get it back until age 60 or so, I'd rather do that than participate in social security.
...[/QUOTE]As far as I understood in other threads, you declare that you live from an allowance ... from social security in other words*. You do participate but only by receiving not by contributing.

Jacob

* At least social security as we understand the concept in Europe for instance.

How Clintonites Are Manufacturing Faux Progressive Congressional Campaigns
 

[URL]https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/04/27/how-clintonites-are-manufacturing-faux-progressive-congressional-campaigns/[/URL]
We now have AstroTurf campaigns of self-styled Progressives from Intel backgrounds; in addition to DNC efforts to torpedo genuine Progressives who look too likely to beat the anointed candidates.

[QUOTE]But, precisely as Sanders had bellowed that night in Greenwich Village, the campaign was only the beginning. In the time since then, the progressive left has seen an upsurge in candidates seeking to unseat establishment Democrats in districts throughout the country. Democratic incumbents from [COLOR=#0563c1][U][URL="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2018/03/07/texas-primary-elections-women-are-running-and-winning/"]Texas[/URL][/U][/COLOR] and [COLOR=#0563c1][U][URL="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2018/03/22/what-do-the-illinois-primary-elections-tell-us/"]Illinois[/URL][/U][/COLOR] to [COLOR=#0563c1][U][URL="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/nyregion/cynthia-nixon-new-york-governor-cuomo.html"]New York[/URL][/U][/COLOR] and California now suddenly find themselves facing challenges from their left, forcing them to try to save their jobs by adopting progressive talking points.

While this upsurge could be seen as a welcome development for anyone interested in progressive causes, there is a dark side to the burgeoning left movement, one that remains mostly shrouded behind a veil of secrecy and omission.

For it seems that progressive candidates aren’t the only ones who learned the lesson of Bernie Sanders in 2016; the neoliberal Clintonites have too. So, while left-wing campaigns crop up in every corner of the country, so too do astroturf faux-progressive campaigns. And it is for us on the left to parse through it all and separate the authentic from the frauds.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;487004]...your body breaks down, those kinds of things can change your perception of such matters in quite profound ways.[/QUOTE]

Another example... You live in the tropics, and manage to catch the Chikungunya virus.

Reduced from typing at 80 words per minute for 12 hours a day to five words per minute for at most five minutes per hour. And barely able to walk. For 18 months...

The young don't understand what it is like to grow old....

Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack
 

[SIZE=2][COLOR=#222222][FONT=Arial][QUOTE]More than two years after the allegation of Russian hacking of the 2016 U.S. presidential election was first made, conclusive proof is still lacking and may never be produced, says Ray McGovern.[/QUOTE]It seems that this Lie has made it round the world a bunch of times, while the Truth is still fumbling with its boot laces.
[/FONT][/COLOR][/SIZE][QUOTE][COLOR=#222222][FONT=Arial]If you are wondering why so little is heard these days of accusations that Russia hacked into the U.S. election in 2016, it could be because those charges could not [URL="https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/%C2%A0"]withstand[/URL] close [URL="https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/20/more-holes-in-russia-gate-narrative/"]scrutiny[/URL]. It could also be because special counsel Robert Mueller appears to have never bothered to investigate what was once the central alleged crime in Russia-gate as no one associated with WikiLeaks has ever been questioned by his team.
[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#222222][FONT=Arial]Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity — including two “alumni” who were former National Security Agency technical directors — have long since concluded that Julian Assange did not acquire what he called the “emails related to Hillary Clinton” via a “hack” by the Russians or anyone else. They found, rather, that he got them from someone with physical access to Democratic National Committee computers who copied the material onto an external storage device — probably a thumb drive. In December 2016 VIPS [URL="https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/12/us-intel-vets-dispute-russia-hacking-claims/"]explained[/URL] this in some detail in an open Memorandum to President Barack Obama.[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=chalsall;487421]Another example... You live in the tropics, and manage to catch the Chikungunya virus.

Reduced from typing at 80 words per minute for 12 hours a day to five words per minute for at most five minutes per hour. And barely able to walk. For 18 months...

The young don't understand what it is like to grow old....[/QUOTE]

Oh dear I thought you were almost completely recovered.

How do you ever manage the Jack Hammer?

Hey Chris,
After what you've been through, I hope that Barbados is not home to [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leishmaniasis"][I]Leishmania[/I][/URL]. I am reading about an archaeological effort in Honduras, (The Lost City of the Monkey God -Douglas Preston.)
Almost everyone one who was on the deep jungle site was infected with this protozoan parasite, which is transmitted by sand flies between humans and host-animal reservoirs. It is ugly. It can be driven into remission with drugs which tend to be unpleasant to outright threatening. It is not know if it is actually curable, especially the Central American variety.

[QUOTE=Brian-E;413395]You're quite right. Clearly the new US president will have to be someone who can talk intelligently about cartoons.[/QUOTE]

Is this an appropriate platform for politics?

[QUOTE=devarajkandadai;489794]Is this an appropriate platform for politics?[/QUOTE]

Yes... as long as you restrict yourself to the Soapbox subforum, which this thread is.

[YOUTUBE]gynNg2qqV7w[/YOUTUBE]


You can´t take away chrildrens from their parents, it´s not only cruel. It´s also against international law.
Thats comes from a german, you should now stand-up and get rid fo him. "AmerikaFirst" is bullshit, it does not allow to start concentrations camps. YES, that´s is a concentration camp, not more not less.

[QUOTE=MisterBitcoin;490112]You can´t take away chrildrens from their parents, it´s not only cruel. It´s also against international law.[/QUOTE]Ah, but the videos give [i]Il Duce[/i] something to laugh about!

In a manner reminiscent of how our forbears used religion to justify slavery, Jeff Sessions even cited the Bible to justify this abomination. I'm sure he was referring to [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A43-45&version=KJV]Matthew 25:43-45[/url] and [url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+10%3A25-37&version=KJV]Luke 10:25-37[/url]
;-)

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;490116]Ah, but the videos give [I]Il Duce[/I] something to laugh about!

In a manner reminiscent of how our forbears used religion to justify slavery, Jeff Sessions even cited the Bible to justify this abomination. I'm sure he was referring to [URL="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A43-45&version=KJV"]Matthew 25:43-45[/URL] and [URL="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+10%3A25-37&version=KJV"]Luke 10:25-37[/URL]
;-)[/QUOTE]
Shirley! You jest! :razz:
[YOUTUBE]KM2K7sV-K74[/YOUTUBE]

As incontrovertibly horrifying as the the border separations are, just in case anyone was [url=https://shadowproof.com/2018/06/15/separation-immigrant-families-part-deportation-obama-now-trump-expanding-practice/]under the illusion that this is some kind of brand-new policy[/url]:
[quote]There seems to be confusion. To be clear, family separation and child detention are a basic feature of American deportation proceedings. They occur on a routine and systematic basis, even if the government in charge isn’t pounding its chest about it.

In fact, immigrant communities were outspoken on this reality for many, many years.

Family separation was a frontline issue for immigration activists for the last decade or more. They warned of a generation of orphans scarred by the loss of their parents. They cautioned that Obama expanded deportation forces on his own to a degree that would be horribly exploited by a Republican president. (At the time, they were worried about Mitt Romney.)

The Obama administration conceded as much on the issue of separation in 2011, when Cecilia Muñoz, White House director of intergovernmental affairs, told PBS, “Even if the [immigration] law is executed with perfection, there will be parents separated from their children.”

Many liberals contend Obama never ripped babies from the arms of screaming parents. They should ask, for example, the over 150,000 immigrant children separated from their parents due to detention and deportation proceedings in 2012 if that’s true. Or the over 500,000 immigrant children, who experienced separation between 1998 and that year.

The majority of those children were under 10 years-old. Over 5,000 were placed into foster care. Specifically, these were children whose parents were deported, not minors who came to the border unaccompanied.

Liberals suggest this separation under Obama was different than what’s happening under Trump because some of the children may have been born here and therefore not eligible for deportation like their parents. They argue families may have been separated, but Obama didn’t do what Trump is doing now.

These are troubling procedural arguments that legitimize certain kinds of violence.

Some liberals have said, even if Obama’s deportation machine was larger (and remember, it was twice as large), it was somehow kinder and gentler than Trump’s because Obama incarcerated families together and he didn’t jail kids alone. They see this as an example of how the Obama administration showed empathy towards families.

This is another semantic argument, and a rather twisted one at that because once again this argument involves defending the violence that occurs in detention. And because of that, the truth is missed.

Family detention centers were well-known havens for sexual violence and deprivation. They were overcrowded and lacked basic medical care. Numerous reports warned of these conditions over the years but were ignored throughout Obama’s presidency.

Ironically, even family detention involved separation, as the facilities primarily held women and children. Men were incarcerated separately and often forced to labor in dangerous conditions for little-to-no pay.

Obama organized ad campaigns in Central America that used the violent specter of these experiences to try and dissuade people from coming to the U.S. or sending their kids unaccompanied. Families were targeted for raids, which resulted in the detention of children and widespread fear in immigrant communities. That forced many to go deeper underground.

When unaccompanied minors were arrested on the border, they were placed in detention. Depending on where they arrived from and whether they were assessed to be victims of trauma or abuse, they would be deported or placed in foster care.[/quote]
Hey, if it takes Trump adding his unique mix of awfulness and bombast to these proceedings to generate the mass outrage needed to force change, great - but the flagrant hypocrisy from the liberal virtue-signalers who were silent on the issue during the Obama and Clinton years is deserving of little more than scorn.

And a quick pop quiz - see if you can get it right without cheating: Which 8-year administration deported the largest number of undocumented migrants, Obama, Bush or Clinton?

[QUOTE=ewmayer;490156]As incontrovertibly horrifying as the the border separations are, just in case anyone was [URL="https://shadowproof.com/2018/06/15/separation-immigrant-families-part-deportation-obama-now-trump-expanding-practice/"]under the illusion that this is some kind of brand-new policy[/URL]:

Hey, if it takes Trump adding his unique mix of awfulness and bombast to these proceedings to generate the mass outrage needed to force change, great - but the flagrant hypocrisy from the liberal virtue-signalers who were silent on the issue during the Obama and Clinton years is deserving of little more than scorn.

And a quick pop quiz - see if you can get it right without cheating: Which 8-year administration deported the largest number of undocumented migrants, Obama, Bush or Clinton?[/QUOTE]
Obama vastly exceeded the Bush numbers. Clinton has to be third ranked.

Anyone who follows the news knows the Obama Administration was deporting people in record numbers. Of course, whatever executive actions he took to ameliorate the asininity of immigration law were either challenged in court at the time by Republicans, or have been undone by [i]Il Duce[/i] & Co. I thought, and still think, Obama should have been much more confrontational with the Republicans about immigration, among other issues.

Regarding numbers of deportations, I have a vague recollection of Dubya's policies reducing the number of would-be immigrants to this country, to the point of immigrants already resident in the USA deciding to go back home. It is possible that [i]Il Duce[/i], in his own way, is seeking to discourage would-be immigrants from even [i]trying[/i] to come here. And he may have some success -- especially if he gets us into a trade war and tanks the economy.

I note that AG Sessions, in addition to using the Bible to justify [i]Il Duce[/i]'s "incarcerate the parents and put the kids in concentration camps" policy, has directed immigration judges (who are, unlike other judges, part of the DOJ) to disregard even credible threats of domestic or gang violence as possible grounds for asylum in the US. I'm sure [i]Il Duce[/i] gets a chuckle out of reports of battered women being sent home and murdered by their abusive husbands.

[quote]Hey, if it takes Trump adding his unique mix of awfulness and bombast to these proceedings to generate the mass outrage needed to force change, great[/quote]

If that kind of mass outrage comes to be generated, [i]Il Duce[/i] and a lot of his enablers had better head for the hills -- or Russia...

[QUOTE=ewmayer;490156]As incontrovertibly horrifying as the the border separations are, just in case anyone was [url=https://shadowproof.com/2018/06/15/separation-immigrant-families-part-deportation-obama-now-trump-expanding-practice/]under the illusion that this is some kind of brand-new policy[/url]:

Hey, if it takes Trump adding his unique mix of awfulness and bombast to these proceedings to generate the mass outrage needed to force change, great - but the flagrant hypocrisy from the liberal virtue-signalers who were silent on the issue during the Obama and Clinton years is deserving of little more than scorn.

And a quick pop quiz - see if you can get it right without cheating: Which 8-year administration deported the largest number of undocumented migrants, Obama, Bush or Clinton?[/QUOTE]

You're both right and wrong on this one. You're right that the Obama administration did some of these same things, but the what-aboutism misses a key point: the Trump administration HAS made a significant change in policy. Specifically, Sessions has directed that 100% of people crossing the border be charged criminally, meaning that it doesn't matter if you're here seeking asylum or not. You are charged as a criminal, which then results in the family separations according to US law. Absolute best case scenario is that the immigrant is able to convince a judge they deserve an asylum finding--except that Sessions has also stripped most of the ways a person can seek asylum (domestic violence? no longer enough. escaping gang violence? not good enough), so that's unlikely too.

Further, the Trump administration is far more flagrantly failing to meet the standards established in the Flores settlement (read here: [url]http://www.aila.org/File/Related/14111359b.pdf[/url]). In particular, Sections 21 and 23 on pages 8 and 9 and the licensure standards beginning on page 15. Please note that the Obama administration also failed to meet the standards (my lawyer wife researched and wrote up something about this), but they did eventually take at least some corrective actions following court cases.

TL;DR: yes, the Obama administration conducted similar practices, but the Trump administration has ramped it to 11 with the explicit goal of creating human bargaining chips to get what they want.


Edit for problems with the article you cited: That 150k number is misleading. For one thing, it appears to talk about children of undocumented immigrants who are US citizens, NOT immigrant children as the article claims, and is an estimated number based on some assumptions about average family size, which is quite a different issue from children who are not US citizens and are trying to come to the US. To be clear, I think that separation of families where the children are citizens and the parent(s) aren't is a major issue too, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and bet that the Trump administration ICE roundups will result in far more than 150k children being separated (using the same estimation metric that Human Impact used).

Edit TL;DR: The Obama administration had major issues on immigration, but that article has some issues too. And it comes across as trying to create an equivalence between the Obama and Trump administration that I think isn't accurate.

[QUOTE=wombatman;490178]The Obama administration had major issues on immigration, but that article has some issues too. And it comes across as trying to create an equivalence between the Obama and Trump administration that I think isn't accurate.[/QUOTE]

I don't see it as trying to create equivalence, rather to point out the dismal precedents which put in place so much of the mechanics which Trump is now yuugely expanding:
[quote]There is no denying President Donald Trump’s immigration policy is far more menacing in presentation than his predecessor, President Barack Obama. But how much is this a difference in style versus a difference in substance?

The material outcomes of Obama and Trump’s deportation approaches, and the reaction among Democrats to both, tell us a lot about the circumstances in which incontrovertible violence is deemed acceptable in America.

For Trump, immigration is part of the culture war, and he does not hide the ways in which his policy decisions are motivated by animus toward immigrants. Trump has demonized immigrants for years, and since taking office, he has publicly emphasized family separation as part of his deportation policy. He is expanding detention infrastructure specifically for children with plans for a tent city-style facility in Texas. The administration has pledged to pursue deportation against 100% of undocumented people.

But Trump is adding to a foundation developed by Obama, who aggressively detained and deported undocumented immigrants for nearly his entire presidency. He did so while acting as though he was little more than a manager of the system—a helpless custodian of the law.[/quote]
Meanwhile, with regard to my 'mass outrage' comment, [url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration/trump-says-would-back-both-house-immigration-bills-as-separation-crisis-grows-idUSKBN1JF177]this Reuters piece seems somewhat hopeful[/url], at least in terms of passing a bill which ends the worst abuses. After all it's an election year, even before this issue hit the headlines the Dems looked poised to win back a significant number of House seats, and it seems even many normally Republican-leaning voters are not supportive of the family separation policy.

Oh, the answer to my pop-quiz question re. total deportations: Bill Clinton is the 'winner' among the last three 8-year presidents with 12.3 million, GW Bush second at 10.3 million, and Obama third with 'only' 5.2 million. So Obama at least does deserve credit for halving the overall numbers relative to his predecessor, even if some rather ugly specific policies were instituted on his watch.

The impact on fall elections is not yet guessable. The rule change was not specifically from Thump, rather from Sessions deciding to criminally charge all persons who cross the border illegally, regardless of circumstances. This forced the separation of children from parents every time in line with laws that say children cannot be put in jail with parents. Is this a public relations nightmare for Thump? Yes, and it is still growing. Will it affect the elections? Yes, and will probably swing a few congressmen into office that would otherwise have lost. One more major P.R. disaster and the republican majority in congress could be history.

Note: Obama was not setting records with deportations. That distincton belongs to Bush and Clinton. It is correct to say that some of Obama's policies are now causing major issues.

[QUOTE]Oh, the answer to my pop-quiz question re. total deportations: Bill Clinton is the 'winner' among the last three 8-year presidents with 12.3 million, GW Bush second at 10.3 million, and Obama third with 'only' 5.2 million. So Obama at least does deserve credit for halving the overall numbers relative to his predecessor, even if some rather ugly specific policies were instituted on his watch. [/QUOTE]
It is really humiliating when one's accepted beliefs turn out to be exactly wrong. :davieddy:

There is also a "slight" matter of redefining what constitutes a "deportation," as explained [url=https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-deported-more-people/]here[/url]. Basically, people trying to get into the USA illegally, but turned away at the border, weren't counted as deportations until some time during the Dubya admin.

[i]Il Duce[/i] has, perhaps not surprisingly, done an about-face -- after first trying to blame the Democrats for the policy he himself had promulgated. It seems his wife Melania and daughter Ivanka were upset by the images and sounds of kids being taken from their parents and put in concentration camps.

This reminds me of the days of the Civil Rights movement, when images of kids being hit with fire hoses and attacked by police dogs shamed this country before the world.

Melania had better watch out with her criticism of [i]Il Duce[/i]'s policies, lest [i]she[/i] be deported
;-)

Last night, DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen decided to eat out at MXDC, a Mexican restaurant
:missingteeth:

A bunch of folks who don't necessarily agree with the "zero tolerance" policy decided to give her a piece of their minds to feast upon (apologies to Charles Dickens).

It seems she didn't have a good appetite for it.

Let's hear it for the First Amendment!

[quote]Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; [b]or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.[/b][/quote]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;490207]I don't see it as trying to create equivalence, rather to point out the dismal precedents which put in place so much of the mechanics which Trump is now yuugely expanding:[/QUOTE]

That's a fair point. And yes, the precedents are bad, and I can only hope that the outrage generated by Trump results in some of them being fixed.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;490207]Meanwhile, with regard to my 'mass outrage' comment, [url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration/trump-says-would-back-both-house-immigration-bills-as-separation-crisis-grows-idUSKBN1JF177]this Reuters piece seems somewhat hopeful[/url], at least in terms of passing a bill which ends the worst abuses. After all it's an election year, even before this issue hit the headlines the Dems looked poised to win back a significant number of House seats, and it seems even many normally Republican-leaning voters are not supportive of the family separation policy.

Oh, the answer to my pop-quiz question re. total deportations: Bill Clinton is the 'winner' among the last three 8-year presidents with 12.3 million, GW Bush second at 10.3 million, and Obama third with 'only' 5.2 million. So Obama at least does deserve credit for halving the overall numbers relative to his predecessor, even if some rather ugly specific policies were instituted on his watch.[/QUOTE]

Interesting info on the number of total deportations--I was also under the impression that Obama's tenure had the highest. As for the bills, I wouldn't be too hopeful. Aside from the fact that they're likely to keep families together by detaining them indefinitely (as Trump's executive order does), there's the other things included in the bill:

"Both Republican bills under discussion, which have been blasted by Democrats and immigration advocacy groups, would fund the border wall and reduce legal migration, in part by denying visas for some relatives of U.S. residents and citizens who are living abroad, sometimes referred to as “chain migration.”

The more conservative bill from Representative Bob Goodlatte would also deny “Dreamers,” immigrants brought illegally to the United States as children, the chance of future citizenship."

It seems more like the family separation thing is going to be used in a Overton window style attitude shift to try and push for immigration policy that the GOP wanted all along. It just looks better now compared to splitting up asylum-seeking families.

Trumphotels.org
 

An angry navy vet discovered that domain [URL="http://www.trumphotels.org"]www.trumphotels.org[/URL] was available and decided to use it for an expression of his First Amendment rights.

I wonder how long it will take to find some "National Security" excuse for shutting this down.

[QUOTE=kladner;490598]An angry navy vet discovered that domain [URL="http://www.trumphotels.org"]www.trumphotels.org[/URL] was available and decided to use it for an expression of his First Amendment rights.[/quote]
That quote from [i]Il Duce[/i]'s 1990 Playboy interview is a humdinger!

[quote]I wonder how long it will take to find some "National Security" excuse for shutting this down.[/QUOTE]If they go that route, my guess is they'd be in for a serious court fight. Perhaps the publicity would result is so much traffic, the site would crash
;-)

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;490608]That quote from [I]Il Duce[/I]'s 1990 Playboy interview is a humdinger!

If they go that route, my guess is they'd be in for a serious court fight.[B] Perhaps the publicity would result is so much traffic, the site would crash[/B]
;-)[/QUOTE]
ROFL! The hazards of popularity!

Meanwhile, some of the most-viral photos from the child-separation outrage-fest appear [url=https://www.theautomaticearth.com/2018/06/images-of-children-crying/]to be a wee bit problematic[/url] ("Fake" is such a strong term):
[quote][i]A distressing image of a crying toddler locked in a barred cage after purportedly being detained by US immigration officials has gone viral – but despite online claims, it does not actually depict what has been alleged. The image, which shows a little boy crying in a cage as he looks out between its bars, was shared by activist journalist and undocumented migrant Jose Antonio Vargas as a comment on the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown on families.

In the same thread, Vargas admitted that he came across the photo on a friend’s timeline and was still looking for the original source. Nevertheless, the snap quickly went viral with Vargas’ post garnering more than 23,000 retweets and many others sharing the image across their own social media accounts.

Vargas explained that he shared the photo because when he was detained by ICE in McAllen, Texas in 2014, he encountered children who were locked up there. “It wasn’t okay then; it’s not okay now,” he wrote, adding that he’s been outraged about the incident for years.

It has since emerged that the picture was in fact not from a detention facility at all, and instead was taken at a protest against Trump’s immigration policies held on June 10 outside Dallas City Hall. The demonstration organized by Brown Berets de Cemanahuac was held to call out the policy of family separation and confining undocumented children.
[/i]
Ergo: an activist journalist and undocumented immigrant makes it look as if a picture depicts something that in reality it did not. Note also that the article says he wanted to comment on the Trump immigration crackdown, because he has memories of the Obama immigration crackdown, when he saw children locked up. But then, hey, that’s social media, right? Anyone can say anything.

It’s different, though, when TIME Magazine uses such politics. And its editor-in-chief defends the use of the picture by saying it was the most visible symbol of something, even though he knew full well that the photo didn’t depict that something. [/quote]
I'd like to ask Mr. Vargas: if you were outraged by this stuff happening in 2014, why didn't you express your outrage on social media then? Looks like another case of "silence implies consent" hypocrisy.

To be fair, our beloved MSM clearly have no problem lying the country into war and genocide, so if in this case their lying ways happen to aid in achieving a rare good end, I say hey, lie away! Just spare us the pretense of being arbiters of the truth, please.

[b]Edit:[/b] I did find [url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/magazine/my-life-as-an-undocumented-immigrant.html]this 2011 NYT piece[/url] by Vargas in which he mentions the Obama administration having deported 800,000 undocumented migrants in 2 years. If anyone can find a 2014 MSM piece in which he expresses the outrage he felt that year, please post the link.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;490635]Meanwhile, some of the most-viral photos from the child-separation outrage-fest appear [URL="https://www.theautomaticearth.com/2018/06/images-of-children-crying/"]to be a wee bit problematic[/URL] ("Fake" is such a strong term):

I'd like to ask Mr. Vargas: if you were outraged by this stuff happening in 2014, why didn't you express your outrage on social media then? Looks like another case of "silence implies consent" hypocrisy.

To be fair, our beloved MSM clearly have no problem lying the country into war and genocide, so if in this case their lying ways happen to aid in achieving a rare good end, I say hey, lie away! Just spare us the pretense of being arbiters of the truth, please.

[B]Edit:[/B] I did find [URL="https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/magazine/my-life-as-an-undocumented-immigrant.html"]this 2011 NYT piece[/URL] by Vargas in which he mentions the Obama administration having deported 800,000 undocumented migrants in 2 years. If anyone can find a 2014 MSM piece in which he expresses the outrage he felt that year, please post the link.[/QUOTE]
The important thing to remember about all news reportage is, despite all pretenses, it is not about accurately conveying information, much less nuance. It is about generating emotion, regardless of the details. The stronger the emotion, the better, for the purposes of selling news media product, and the political views of the news media personnel involved.

[QUOTE=kriesel;490690]The important thing to remember about all news reportage is, despite all pretenses, it is not about accurately conveying information, much less nuance. It is about generating emotion, regardless of the details. The stronger the emotion, the better, for the purposes of selling news media product, and the political views of the news media personnel involved.[/QUOTE]

:tu:

[QUOTE=kriesel;490690]The important thing to remember about all news reportage is, despite all pretenses, it is not about accurately conveying information, much less nuance. It is about generating emotion, regardless of the details. The stronger the emotion, the better, for the purposes of selling news media product, and the political views of the news media personnel involved.[/QUOTE]
From the [url=https://www.ancient.eu/article/776/tacitus-account-of-the-battle-of-mons-graupius/]The Ancient History Encyclopedia[/url] we glean
[quote]Historians generally believe that the speech Calgacus makes before the battle is Tacitus' own invention, through which he was able to express his actual feelings toward Roman conquest and imperial government without running the risk of being executed by the emperor.[/quote]
That is, Tacitus put his own words into Calgacus' mouth.

In this speech, we find the immortal phrase,[quote]Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.[/quote]"To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a solitude, they call it peace."

Sometimes, "solitudinem" is translated as "desert."

[quote]The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.[/quote]
-- Ecclesiastes 1:9 (KJV)

But... but... he's WHITE!
 

[i]Il Duce[/i] now has a real poser on his hands regarding immigration.

The latest "illegal alien"" story from Breitbart, [url=https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/01/illegal-alien-arrested-for-allegedly-starting-colorado-wildfire/]Illegal Alien Arrested for Allegedly Starting Colorado Wildfire[/url]

raises the immortal question: How do we build a wall to keep out people from [b][i]DENMARK???[/i][/b]

He's an isolationist! Yeah, right...
 

It seems [i]Il Duce[/i]'s thought (if "thought" is the right word) that trade wars are "good and easy to win" applies to [i]real[/i] wars too.

[url=https://apnews.com/a3309c4990ac4581834d4a654f7746ef]Trump pressed aides on Venezuela invasion, US official says[/url]

On a rare upbeat note, EPA-henhouse fox-in-chief Scott "it's not corruption if I do it" Pruitt is out, complete with a wet "he did a great job" from his now-former boss. Poor Scott, he seems to have mistaken himself for a teflon-coated Big Finance mega-crook.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;491225]On a rare upbeat note, EPA-henhouse fox-in-chief Scott "it's not corruption if I do it" Pruitt is out, complete with a wet "he did a great job" from his now-former boss. Poor Scott, he seems to have mistaken himself for a teflon-coated Big Finance mega-crook.[/QUOTE]
Mistaken? I haven't heard anything about Pruitt being indicted. The only real question about his resignation is, "Why not sooner?"

Meanwhile, I'm sure Andrew Wheeler will clean things right up at the EPA...

I long to see his kind in orange, with chrome accents. It also seems that he owes the taxpayers quite a lot in restitution. Ain't holding my breath. :flex:

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;491232]Mistaken? I haven't heard anything about Pruitt being indicted. The only real question about his resignation is, "Why not sooner?"[/QUOTE]

I meant in the sense that he seems to have assumed that he could get away with literally anything sans consequences. One might hope for an eventual indictment, but let's face it, DC is a nest of influence-peddlers; Pruitt was simply more brazen than most in how he went about it.

And speaking of high-level corruption and quid pro quos, there is the matter of a SCOTUS nomination - but first let's have a look at the vacating justice:

[url=https://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2018/07/anthony-kennedy-and-our-delayed.html]Anthony Kennedy and Our Delayed Constitutional Crisis[/url] | DownWithTyranny

Reader J.Frie comments "It was always my perception that Kennedy was using his social votes like Marriage Equality as a cover to distract the media/country from the looting he was promoting by business and the wealthy. The court was definitively captured by 2000 as evidenced by [then-associate-justice Sandra Day] O’Connor’s widely reported reaction to the election night results and the votes in Bush v Gore."

[QUOTE=ewmayer;491253]I meant in the sense that he seems to have assumed that he could get away with literally anything sans consequences. [/QUOTE]
Aw, c'mon, he didn't didn't have to quit because of anything he'd done! It was unrelenting attacks on him personally and his family! It says so in his resignation letter. (Attacks by one of your favorite bugbears, the Establishment Media, no doubt.)

Also clear from the letter is, he's got his nose so far up [i]Il Duce[/i]'s patootie, he's talking out of [i]Il Duce[/i]'s mouth.

[QUOTE]And speaking of high-level corruption and quid pro quos, there is the matter of a SCOTUS nomination - but first let's have a look at the vacating justice:

[URL="https://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2018/07/anthony-kennedy-and-our-delayed.html"]Anthony Kennedy and Our Delayed Constitutional Crisis[/URL] | DownWithTyranny[/QUOTE]From the comments:
If the electorate in this shithole can't get out onto the streets for the supreme court coup in 2000 (SDOC's biggest payback for her nomination), I don't see them awakening for anything.
On that day:
1) the charade ended. we became a fascist state totally run by money.
2) gore showed all of us his vagina
3) more Nazis were activated to protest the recount in FL than in the nation protesting the coup. And, yes, most of the Nazis were paid. By the money.
4) SDOC cemented her legacy as the Neville chamberlain of this final chapter in our history. She should have been impeached.

After 2000, all further adoption of Nazi memes became predictable and inevitable.

[B]BTW, that makes obamanation the worst, by far, president and the democraps of 2009 our worst party in our history. The voters gave them the mandate and they utterly refused to act on it.[/B] [/QUOTE]

The continuing adventures of our Diplomat-in-Chief...
 

From this [strike]Minitrue[/strike][url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/12/trump-dubs-himself-stable-genius-calls-nato-summit-success.html]Fox News[/url] report of [i]Ill Duce[/i] at the NATO summit:[quote]One reporter, during the press conference, asked if Trump's message would change once he departed on Air Force One, perhaps referring to tweets that followed G7 talks, in which Trump turned on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Macron.

"That's other people that do that," Trump replied. "I don't. I'm very consistent. I'm a very stable genius."[/quote]

One other thing to note is that this very stable genius is claiming victory for getting our NATO allies to....reaffirm their commitment to increase their NATO defense spending to 2% of GDP by 2024.

So Trump went to the summit, threw a temper tantrum, didn't get anything except more ill will from our otherwise allies, and is now taking a victory lap on it.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;491600]From this [strike]Minitrue[/strike][url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/12/trump-dubs-himself-stable-genius-calls-nato-summit-success.html]Fox News[/url] report of [i]Ill Duce[/i] at the NATO summit:[/QUOTE]

I can semi figure out a use for his tariffs but he's far from genius.

[QUOTE=wombatman;491601]So Trump went to the summit, threw a temper tantrum, didn't get anything except more ill will from our otherwise allies, and is now taking a victory lap on it.[/QUOTE]As [i]Il Duce[/i] was busy generating that ill will at a breakfast with other NATO leaders, White House Chief of Staff John Kelly looked mighty uncomfortable. The White House claims it had nothing -- nothing at all -- to do with what [i]Il Duce[/i] was saying at that breakfast, like "Germany is totally controlled by Russia." Oh, no-no-no-no-no! He was upset about something [i]far[/i] more important. He was [url=http://www.businessinsider.com/john-kelly-nato-photos-breakfast-cheese-pastries-2018-7]displeased about breakfast options[/url].

And another cow flew by...

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;491619]And another cow flew by...[/QUOTE]

Indeed. I note with some amusement (and annoyance) that many arms producers used by NATO are US based. So, basically, Trump wants his allies to buy more arms (while imposing tariffs)...

Meanwhile, Canada has stepped up, and offered to lead the NATO training mission in Iraq.

How to lose friends and alienate people: tell your host that she's screwing up at her job.

Just curious - are the protests (and the giant Trump baby blimp) getting much coverage in the US media?

[QUOTE=xilman;491679]How to lose friends and alienate people: tell your host that she's screwing up at her job.[/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.davegranlund.com/cartoons/2018/07/12/trump-prefers-putin/]He can't help himself[/url].

[QUOTE=Brownfox;491683]Just curious - are the protests (and the giant Trump baby blimp) getting much coverage in the US media?[/QUOTE]I saw the giant Trump baby blimp on the news. I was hoping Her Majesty would "postpone" [i]Il Duce[/i]'s State Visit due to an emergency or schedule conflict. She could say Prince Philip is ill. She could say Prince Louis has colic. She could say she has a root canal job scheduled. She could say she needs a bikini wax.

I vaguely recall that [i]Il Duce[/i] had expressed the wish to ride in the royal carriage. What would happen if he did, and the thing collapsed with him in it?

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;491700]I saw the giant Trump baby blimp on the news. I was hoping Her Majesty would "postpone" [i]Il Duce[/i]'s State Visit due to an emergency or schedule conflict. She could say Prince Philip is ill. She could say Prince Louis has colic. She could say she has a root canal job scheduled. She could say she needs a bikini wax.

I vaguely recall that [i]Il Duce[/i] had expressed the wish to ride in the royal carriage. What would happen if he did, and the thing collapsed with him in it?[/QUOTE]

That would be very embarrassing for the UK. It's more likely that someone would have thrown rotten tomatoes or similar at him. Heck of a security risk anyway. Could have been JFK all over again.

[QUOTE=Brownfox;491703]That would be very embarrassing for the UK.[/quote](i.e. royal carriage collapsing with [i]Il Duce[/i] inside)[quote]It's more likely that someone would have thrown rotten tomatoes or similar at him. Heck of a security risk anyway. Could have been JFK all over again.[/QUOTE]IMO it's already very embarrassing for the UK that [i]Il Duce[/i] is being allowed to visit at all. Heck, they could have said "Sorry, Mr. President, but due to overwhelming public sentiment, we cannot guarantee your safety."

I understand the "baby blimp" is flying outside Parliament, and [i]Il Duce[/i] is avoiding London because he doesn't feel welcome there. Dang, they should have made one of those things for every municipality in the land!

The meeting at Helsinki illustrated [i]Il Duce[/i]'s subservience to Putin more fully than the original coverage suggested. Putin "offered" to let Mueller's team question the Russians he just got indictments against -- [i]if[/i] Putin's minions can "question" a list of people including [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Browder]Bill Browder[/url] -- who isn't even a US citizen (he gave up his US citizenship 20 years ago), and Michael McFaul, former US Ambassador to Russia. This is in regard to a supposed scheme to funnel 400 [strike]million[/strike] thousand dollars to Hillary Clinton's campaign.

WH Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said, "The president is gonna meet with his team and we’ll let you know when we have an announcement on that."

I wonder if "his team" includes Theresa May -- Bill Browder being a UK citizen...

Some more if [i]Il Duce[/i]'s kowtowing to Putin:

[url=https://www.npr.org/2018/07/18/630014819/australian-couple-who-lost-children-in-mh17-blame-trump-for-not-confronting-puti]Australian Couple Who Lost Children In MH17 Lambaste Trump For Not Confronting Putin[/url] [b]WARNING! WARNING![/b] There is possibly offensive language in the article!

[url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/18/state-dept-mh17-ukraine-russia-netherlands-malaysian-airlines/]State Department Silent on MH17 Anniversary Following Trump-Putin Firestorm[/url]

Now that elections are looming, and [i]Il Duce[/i]'s trade policies are hurting farmers, he's come up with a great, great solution: Put 'em on welfare!

He's using an emergency farm aid program started in the 1930's (the Commodity Credit Corporation), designed to deal with emergencies like droughts and whatnot, to cushion farmers from the effects of his own policies.

The first Trump-Cohen tape has come out, and it's interesting: [url]https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/24/politics/michael-cohen-donald-trump-tape/index.html[/url]

The TL;DR of the ~3-4 minute conversation is that Trump was an active participant in the payment of hush money to Karen McDougal (or, in this case, funneling money to the National Inquirer to buy and kill the story). Based on the conversation, it's clear that this situation has happened (many times?) before as Cohen uses informal lingo and Trump understands.

The only wildcard here is the fact that they also discuss campaign things -- polling, surrogates, and so on. That [I]could[/I] bring the payments under campaign finance laws, although it remains to be seen if that actually happens.

Of course, this is only one of 12 tapes that Trump's team waived privilege on, so who knows what's coming.

It looks like political manipulation has started on Facebook:
[url]https://tech.slashdot.org/story/18/07/31/1617243/facebook-has-identified-ongoing-political-influence-campaign[/url]

@DrS: That would be interesting if there were any actual credible evidence that the Russians rather than the Ukrainians brought down MH17. And re. farmers, no one ever said regaining a measure of autarky was gonna be easy: The US mfg economy wasn't offshored in a day. Of course the Chinese are gonna retaliate to some degree, but they are at a huge disadvantage due to the massive asymmetry of the bilateral trade in question.

@Wombatman: Violation of campaign finance laws is a huge nothingburger, historically and contextually speaking. and as with the Manafort tax-dodging allegations: we need a super-powered FBI task force for this kind of quotidian beltway grift, really? So why are we paying the IRS and FEC separately to investigate those kinds of issues? Again, we were promised yuuuuuuuuuuge revelations about commie subversion and treason, we instead get the DC equivalent of spitting on the sidewalk.

@Laurent: Re. FB, see the story by Glen Ford in my Thursday post [url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=493010&postcount=233]here[/url]. After the laughable "Russian Facebook trolls influenced the election!" hysteria, which involved some ridiculously small amount of site traffic, and included many anti-trump posts as well as ones made post-election, I treat these kinds of "revelations" with extreme skepticism. Sounds to me like FB is trying to rehabilitate its own reputation after the news of its massive and long-term for-profit data-selling and influence-peddling (e.g. Cambridge Analytica, but also its earlier 2012-campaign giveaway of its "social graph" to Team Obama operatives).

[QUOTE=ewmayer;493196]@DrS: That would be interesting if there were any actual credible evidence that the Russians rather than the Ukrainians brought down MH17.[/QUOTE]
The public prosecutor is still gathering evidence. It will be presented in court when the criminal trial opens.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;493196]@DrS: That would be interesting if there were any actual credible evidence that the Russians rather than the Ukrainians brought down MH17.[/QUOTE]

Depends what you mean by "credible." if you have already decided to parrot the Kremlin's line, and reject out of hand any evidence to the contrary, you will [i]never[/i] deem [i]any[/i] evidence the Russians are responsible to be "credible."

It is not clear to me what the current Russian version of events may be. The problem is, they keep changing their story. Or, more properly, "stories." Their faked image of MH17 being shot down by an air-to-air missile from another plane was a real hoot. This [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17]Wikipedia article[/url] for example, mentions that

[quote]Promoted by Russian media, the idea that a Su-25 could have downed the Boeing 777 with an air-to-air missile was dismissed by chief designer of the Su-25, Vladimir Babak.[186] In 2015 Bellingcat purchased satellite photos from the same area and time as used by the MoD and demonstrated that they had used older photos (May and June 2014) in their presentation that were edited to make a Ukrainian Buk launcher appear as if it was removed after the attack.[187] In the report published by the Dutch Safety Board, an air-to-air missile strike was ruled out.[6][/quote]

Although I'm sure you think the CBC is part of the US Democratic party conspiracy, I consider the article
[url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/netherlands-investigation-malaysia-flight17-russia-1.4675756]here[/url] to be credible.

[url]http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/400618-trump-reversal-on-russian-meeting-raises-pressure-on-interview[/url]

I guess the President just outright admitting knowingly receiving something of value from a foreign entity ([url]https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20[/url]) is something new. This whole "yeah, I broke the law, what of it?" tact is bold, to say the least.

[QUOTE=Dr Sardonicus;493210]Depends what you mean by "credible."[/QUOTE]

Unambiguous and independently verifiable - the Dutch are staunch members of NATO, have they allowed Russian or unaffiliated investigators access? In this case, both ethnic Russian and Ukrainian forces had working units of the missile system in question in the same general area. i.e. both satisfy the 'opportunity' part of the circumstantial-evidence equation. Given that the Ukrainians knew full well that - just like with the Syrian 'moderate rebels' - the Western media would instantly pounce on any civilian-targeting incident and blame it on their predesignated bad guys in the conflict, who had the greater motive to conduct the shootdown?

LOL, Kurt cites Bellingcat 'research' - they are an activist group, not any kind of unaffiliated outfit. A kind of MH17 analog of the Syrian 'White Helments', if you will. Here the late Robert Parry on their brand of MSM-amplified BS as on display in the MH17 incident:

[url=https://consortiumnews.com/2016/07/22/will-nyt-retract-latest-anti-russian-fraud/]Will NYT Retract Latest Anti-Russian 'Fraud'[/url] | Consortiumnews
[quote]But Kramer and the [NY] Times left out that the earlier Bellingcat analysis was thoroughly torn apart by photo-forensic experts including Dr. Neal Krawetz, [u]founder of the FotoForensics digital image analytical tool that Bellingcat had used[/u]. Over the past week, Bellingcat has been aggressively pushing the new analysis by armscontrolwonk.com, with which Bellingcat has close relationships.

This past week, Krawetz and other forensic specialists began weighing in on the new analysis and concluding that it suffered the same fundamental errors as the previous analysis, albeit using a different analytical tool. Given Bellingcat’s promotion of this second analysis by a group with links to Bellingcat and its founder Eliot Higgins, Krawetz viewed the two analyses as essentially coming from the same place, Bellingcat.

“Jumping to the wrong conclusion one time can be due to ignorance,” Krawetz explained in a blog post. “However, using a different tool on the same data that yields similar results, and [i]still[/i] jumping to the same wrong conclusion is intentional misrepresentation and deception. It is fraud.”[/quote]

And answer me this - how many of the lurid Assad-nerve-gas attack allegations have panned out? The pattern of propaganda and false-flaggery in support of a warmongering agenda is simply so glaringly obvious, but you 'exceptional empire' true-believers refuse to see it. The insanity of agitating for war with a country like Russia is simply mind-boggling. Just goes to show that being a bloody neocon is not limited to either of the major parties in the US - there is only one War Party in Washington, and its cheerleaders include plenty of 'highly educated liberals'.

------------------------

In other news, [i]Roll Call[/i] has a Week 1 takeaway from the Manafort tax-dodging trial which indicates Pat Lang over at SST make have been wrong in his surmise that PM might be acquitted due to the difficulty of proving intent. Not that I would shed any tears over a conviction, I would simply like to see prosectuion for such SOP beltway-insider grifting become more common than their historical exceptional rarity:

[url=www.rollcall.com/news/politics/3-takeaways-manafort-trial-day-4]3 Takeaways After First Week of Manafort Trial[/url]

------------------------

And in actual election-meddling news, Wombatman, would you consider having POTUS have to stand by and watch a foreign leader unilaterally convene a joint session of Congress and give a high-profile speech in which he aggressively undermines the president's foreign policy as 'kowtowing to a foreign leader'? Because funnily enough, I don't ever recall HitlerPutin doing any such thing:

[url=https://www.sgtreport.com/2018/08/chomsky-israeli-intervention-in-us-elections-vastly-overwhelms-anything-russians-may-have-done/]Chomsky: Israeli Intervention in US Elections "Vastly Overwhelms Anything Russians May Have Done"[/url] | SGT Report

[QUOTE=ewmayer;493308]In other news, [i]Roll Call[/i] has a Week 1 takeaway from the Manafort tax-dodging trial which indicates Pat Lang over at SST make have been wrong in his surmise that PM might be acquitted due to the difficulty of proving intent. Not that I would shed any tears over a conviction, I would simply like to see prosectuion for such SOP beltway-insider grifting become more common than their historical exceptional rarity:

[url=www.rollcall.com/news/politics/3-takeaways-manafort-trial-day-4]3 Takeaways After First Week of Manafort Trial[/url]

------------------------

And in actual election-meddling news, Wombatman, would you consider having POTUS have to stand by and watch a foreign leader unilaterally convene a joint session of Congress and give a high-profile speech in which he aggressively undermines the president's foreign policy as 'kowtowing to a foreign leader'? Because funnily enough, I don't ever recall HitlerPutin doing any such thing:

[url=https://www.sgtreport.com/2018/08/chomsky-israeli-intervention-in-us-elections-vastly-overwhelms-anything-russians-may-have-done/]Chomsky: Israeli Intervention in US Elections "Vastly Overwhelms Anything Russians May Have Done"[/url] | SGT Report[/QUOTE]

Well, Rick Gates testified today that Manafort gave him specific instructions to knowingly commit crimes: [url]http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/400628-gates-testifies-he-committed-crimes-while-working-with-manafort[/url]

If you believe Gates, that would easily satisfy intent.

As for Netanyahu, I was furious at that stunt, both with him and with those in Congress who helped it to happen. I was also disappointed in Obama's lack of any real response, given that Netanyahu was actively tampering with our democratic elections. That the Israeli lobby commands significant influence in our gov't (and has a detailed history of spying on us as well) is not new news.

This whataboutism doesn't excuse allowing it to happen again, whether from Israel, Russia, or anyone else.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;493308]And in actual election-meddling news, Wombatman, would you consider having POTUS have to stand by and watch a foreign leader unilaterally convene a joint session of Congress and give a high-profile speech in which he aggressively undermines the president's foreign policy as 'kowtowing to a foreign leader'?[/QUOTE]
If memory serves, PM Netanyahu didn't convene a joint session of Congress. He was invited to give a speech by Speaker of the House John Boehner. Whether it was "kowtowing to a foreign leader" more than an act of overt disrespect towards President Obama, is more than I can say.

In the latter category, I would point to the Senate's refusal even to consider Obama's nominee to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court created by the death of Antonin Scalia.

If you consider these to have been subversive acts, the blame clearly lies with the Republicans.

BTW, in 2015 Boehner also invited another head of state, Pope Francis, to give a speech before Congress. His speech might reasonably be deemed critical of US policies, foreign and domestic.

[url]http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/cohen-more-than-happy-to-tell-mueller-all-that-he-knows-attorney-1303813187974?v=raila[/url]

Looks like Cohen is warming his pipes up to save his ass.

[QUOTE]Michael Cohen attorney Lanny Davis: "Mr. Cohen has knowledge on certain subjects that should be of interest to the special counsel and is more than happy to tell the special counsel all that he knows, not just about the obvious possibility of a conspiracy to collude and corrupt the American democracy system in the 2016 election which the Trump Tower meeting was all about, but also knowledge about the computer crime of hacking and whether or not Mr. Trump knew ahead of time about that crime and even cheered it on."[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=wombatman;494420][url]http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/cohen-more-than-happy-to-tell-mueller-all-that-he-knows-attorney-1303813187974?v=raila[/url]

Looks like Cohen is warming his pipes up to save his ass.[/QUOTE]

LOL, citing rabid RussiaRussiaRussia screecher Rachel Maddow. Wake me when something factual beyond tawdry sexcapades turns up. So far it all looks like a McCarthyite witchhunt by the intel establishment and serial entrapment artist Mueller to overturn the results of the 2016 election and get themselves a more compliant POTUS.

Nice attempt to flip the script re. the Trump Tower meeting in the above, though - in place of very clear lying-to-the-FISA-court w.r.to the origins and people behind the toxic Steele dossier in order to illegally spy on a presidential campaign, we have more wild allegations about "obvious possibility of a conspiracy to collude and corrupt the American democracy system in the 2016 election which the Trump Tower meeting was all about".

But miilions of loyal MSM-propagandized Dem tribalists are fully invested in conjuring up something, anything, to continue avoiding coming to grips with "Hillary lost because she was a hugely incompetent campaigner, her fabled 'experience' consisted of riding her hubby's coattails first into a law career and later into a senate position, whoring for Wall Street (just as her hubby had) and committing/overseeing war crimes (Syria, Libya) and bungled CIA weapons-smuggling ops (Benghazi) as SoS." But it was Ras-Putin who forced her to blow off campaigning amongst the deplorables of Rust Belt, where the key county-level vote flips relative to 2012 occurred which tipped the election to Trump, right? And the Dems rigging their own primary process to place HRC atop the ticket is not in way collusion and conspiracy to subvert the electoral process - gotcha.

But, whatever - not as if the 'good and great' USofA has resembled any kind of 'government of/by/for the people' in a very long time. An actual coup by the Deep Staters would at least serve to make that clear beyond any doubt.

It has been years since I last saw Maddow on her show. I tried to watch, but cut out at the start of the interview. My partner, Dan, calls both MSNBC and Fox "The Fifteen minute hate."

I pretty successfully disconnected on our recent trip. I have been trying to limit re-engagement. :no:

[QUOTE=ewmayer;494423]screed[/QUOTE]

Not sure why I waste my time posting in this thread. I was very obviously quoting Lanny Davis, who said it on Maddow's show. So here's some other articles from generally well-reputed sources saying the same thing--maybe you can find one you won't disregard on its face:

[url]https://www.theguardian.com/world/news-blog/live/2018/aug/22/trump-turmoil-aftermath-cohen-manafort-verdicts-live?page=with:block-5b7d49b4e4b01460274dba25[/url]

[url]https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45270339[/url]

[url]http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/michael-cohen-wont-seek-pardon-trump-lawyer-says[/url]

[url]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-reaches-plea-deal-reports-180821183403656.html[/url]

Also, you recently cited the website SGTReport, which has the following as its current top blurb: "Child sex trafficking and satanic ritual abuse survivor and whistle blower Fiona Barnett joins me to discuss the plague upon the earth that is being exposed and that MUST be brought to an end. Fiona, a former child victim of very powerful people is not afraid to name the names of those she alleges abused her as a child. And according to Fiona, the CIA and the British Crown control most of the human trafficking activities around the world."

As well as posting something from Stefan Molyneux, who is a proponent of White Genocide Theory.

So maybe don't go mocking too hard.

[QUOTE=wombatman;494442]Not sure why I waste my time posting in this thread. I was very obviously quoting Lanny Davis, who said it on Maddow's show. So here's some other articles from generally well-reputed sources saying the same thing--maybe you can find one you won't disregard on its face:

[URL]https://www.theguardian.com/world/news-blog/live/2018/aug/22/trump-turmoil-aftermath-cohen-manafort-verdicts-live?page=with:block-5b7d49b4e4b01460274dba25[/URL]

[URL]https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45270339[/URL]

[URL]http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/michael-cohen-wont-seek-pardon-trump-lawyer-says[/URL]

[URL]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-reaches-plea-deal-reports-180821183403656.html[/URL]

Also, you recently cited the website SGTReport, which has the following as its current top blurb: "Child sex trafficking and satanic ritual abuse survivor and whistle blower Fiona Barnett joins me to discuss the plague upon the earth that is being exposed and that MUST be brought to an end. Fiona, a former child victim of very powerful people is not afraid to name the names of those she alleges abused her as a child. And according to Fiona, the CIA and the British Crown control most of the human trafficking activities around the world."

As well as posting something from Stefan Molyneux, who is a proponent of White Genocide Theory.

So maybe don't go mocking too hard.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, Wombatman. I should have qualified that I watch very little TV, except documentaries and nature shows. I am not exposed to those every night, either. I prefer to read news online, and tend to avoid many videos.

I suppose my tolerance is fairly low on these accounts. I was not reacting entirely to the content, but rather to a tone I found abrasive.

I hope you will continue to post as you see fit. I value your posts and your discussions of things.

[QUOTE=kladner;494497]Sorry, Wombatman. I should have qualified that I watch very little TV, except documentaries and nature shows. I am not exposed to those every night, either. I prefer to read news online, and tend to avoid many videos.

I suppose my tolerance is fairly low on these accounts. I was not reacting entirely to the content, but rather to a tone I found abrasive.

I hope you will continue to post as you see fit. I value your posts and your discussions of things.[/QUOTE]

You're fine. I was cranky this morning and ran out of time to edit.

[QUOTE=wombatman;494503]You're fine. I was cranky this morning and ran out of time to edit.[/QUOTE]
Been there, done that. I snapped at a co-worker who startled me today.

[url]https://www.wsj.com/articles/allen-weisselberg-longtime-trump-organization-cfo-is-granted-immunity-by-federal-prosecutors-in-michael-cohen-investigation-1535121992[/url]

The CFO, Allen Weisselberg, has worked handling accounting and other money-related tasks within the Trump organization for about 40 years, apparently. Should be interesting to see what he has to say that is getting him immunity.

A bit of light-hearted banter
 

Just to offset all the gloom this thread generates:
[QUOTE]If Trump shot Michael Cohen in broad daylight, here's what Republicans would say[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/23/trump-michael-cohen-broad-daylight[/url]

[QUOTE=kladner;494602]Just to offset all the gloom this thread generates:

[url]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/23/trump-michael-cohen-broad-daylight[/url][/QUOTE]

I do appreciate some good humor :tu::missingteeth::missingteeth::missingteeth:

About that "Op-Ed"
 

We Are Being Played -By Caitlin Johnstone
[QUOTE]I believe that a senior Trump administration official probably did write that anonymous op-ed. I do not believe that they were moved to write it out of compassion for the poor Americans who are feeling emotionally stressed about the president. I believe it was written and published for the same reason many other things are written and published in mainstream media: because we are all being played.[/QUOTE]Johnstone not only delves into fascinating topics, with a POV similar to my own; she does this with a style I find utterly engaging.
[url]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50219.htm[/url]

Your Once and Future Supreme C.....
 

[URL="https://www.thenation.com/article/brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached/"][U]Brett Kavanaugh Should Be Impeached[/U][/URL] -John Nichols, The Nation

[QUOTE]Lisa Graves, who as the chief counsel for nominations for the ranking Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the period in question wrote some of the research notes and talking points that were stolen from the Senate server by Republican staffer Manuel Miranda, argued last week in [URL="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.html"]a [I]Slate[/I] article[/URL] that “Kavanaugh actively hid his own involvement, lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee by stating unequivocally that he not only knew nothing of the episode, but also never even received any stolen material.”
Graves explains:[INDENT]Even if Kavanaugh could claim that he didn’t have any hint at the time he received the emails that these documents were of suspect provenance—which I personally find implausible—there is no reasonable way for him to assert honestly that he had no idea what they were after the revelation of the theft. Any reasonable person would have realized they had been stolen, and certainly someone as smart as Kavanaugh would have too.
But he lied.
Under oath.[/QUOTE]
Here is an egregious Constitutional Crisis. We've already seen that Mitch McConnell doesn't give a rat's patootie about his legal obligations. His only concern is, and has been for years, to stack the Federal Judiciary so as to complete the Republican/Koch/ALEC coup against the Constitution and the People. I can only hope that there are some members of the GOP who have[I] just a few[/I] more scruples.[/INDENT]

[QUOTE=kladner;495900][URL="https://www.thenation.com/article/brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached/"][U]Brett Kavanaugh Should Be Impeached[/U][/URL] -John Nichols, The Nation

Here is an egregious Constitutional Crisis. We've already seen that Mitch McConnell doesn't give a rat's patootie about his legal obligations. His only concern is, and has been for years, to stack the Federal Judiciary so as to complete the Republican/Koch/ALEC coup against the Constitution and the People. [b]I can only hope[/b] that there are some members of the GOP who have[I] just a few[/I] more scruples.[/QUOTE]
(added emphasis mine)

Thinking of the Republicans brings to mind the following description of what awaits those who try to remain neutral in a moral crisis. It's not a "special place in hell" as often described. It's more like being stuck in the waiting room for all eternity...
[quote]"Through me the way is to the city dolent;
Through me the way is to eternal dole;
Through me the way among the people lost.
Justice incited my sublime Creator;
Created me divine Omnipotence,
The highest Wisdom and the primal Love.
Before me there were no created things,
Only eterne, and I eternal last.
[b]All hope abandon, ye who enter in![/b]"
These words in sombre colour I beheld
Written upon the summit of a gate;
Whence I: "Their sense is, Master, hard to me!"
And he to me, as one experienced:
"Here all suspicion needs must be abandoned,
All cowardice must needs be here extinct.
We to the place have come, where I have told thee
Thou shalt behold the people dolorous
Who have foregone the good of intellect."
And after he had laid his hand on mine
With joyful mien, whence I was comforted,
He led me in among the secret things.
There sighs, complaints, and ululations loud
Resounded through the air without a star,
Whence I, at the beginning, wept thereat.
Languages diverse, horrible dialects,
Accents of anger, words of agony,
And voices high and hoarse, with sound of hands,
Made up a tumult that goes whirling on
For ever in that air for ever black,
Even as the sand doth, when the whirlwind breathes.
And I, who had my head with horror bound,
Said: "Master, what is this which now I hear?
What folk is this, which seems by pain so vanquished?"
And he to me: "This miserable mode
Maintain the melancholy souls of those
Who lived withouten infamy or praise.
Commingled are they with that caitiff choir
Of Angels, who have not rebellious been,
Nor faithful were to God, but were for self.
The heavens expelled them, not to be less fair;
Nor them the nethermore abyss receives,
For glory none the damned would have from them."
And I: "O Master, what so grievous is
To these, that maketh them lament so sore?"
He answered: "I will tell thee very briefly.
These have no longer any hope of death;
And this blind life of theirs is so debased,
They envious are of every other fate.
No fame of them the world permits to be;
Misericord and Justice both disdain them.
Let us not speak of them, but look, and pass."[/quote]-- Dante Alighieri, [u][b]Inferno[/b][/u], Canto III

Very apt!

[URL]https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/18/1796815/-David-Brock-a-different-but-crucial-perspective-on-Kavanaugh[/URL]
Former hard right operative, David Brock, shares his personal experience with Kavanaugh.[INDENT][QUOTE]I used to know Brett Kavanaugh pretty well. And, when I think of Brett now, in the midst of his hearings for a lifetime appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, all I can think of is the old "Aesop's Fables" adage: "A man is known by the company he keeps."
[B]And that's why I want to tell any senator who cares about our democracy: Vote no.[/B]
[B]Twenty years ago, when I was a conservative movement stalwart, I got to know Brett Kavanaugh both professionally and personally.[/B]
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]But I don't need to see any documents to tell you who Kavanaugh is — because I've known him for years. And I'll leave it to all the lawyers to parse Kavanaugh's views on everything from privacy rights to gun rights. [B]But I can promise you that any pretense of simply being a fair arbiter of the constitutionality of any policy regardless of politics is simply a pretense. He made up his mind nearly a generation ago — and, if he's confirmed, he'll have nearly two generations to impose it upon the rest of us.[/B][/QUOTE][/INDENT]

One Sexual Predator on the SCOTUS is Enough
 

[URL]https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/17/1796538/--One-Sexual-Predator-on-the-SCOTUS-is-Enough-Sign-on-LA-Freeway[/URL]

I love that the safety features of LA overpasses greatly facilitate the posting of signs.

[QUOTE=kladner;496385]I love that the safety features of LA overpasses greatly facilitate the posting of signs.[/QUOTE]Crazy Angelenos.

They have done some crazy things out there.
[url]https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/guerrilla-public-service/[/url]
[url]https://ankrom.org/freeway_signs.html[/url]

The artistic duplication of a Cal Trans sign, which passed inspection, is amazing.

In [url=https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/498008486551506945]an August 14, 2014 tweet[/url], [i]Il Duce[/i] said,[quote]We need a President who isn't a laughing stock to the entire World. We need a truly great leader, a genius at strategy and winning. Respect![/quote]
Right. Like [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8az6ubM6Us]this[/url].

A great guy. In all the human history there was only one guy that beats him. That guy was called "[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC5UTUAxgpE"]comical ali[/URL]".

[QUOTE=LaurV;496824]A great guy. In all the human history there was only one guy that beats him. That guy was called "[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC5UTUAxgpE"]comical ali[/URL]".[/QUOTE] The slave Okello, in [i]Aguirre, the Wrath of God[/i] is in the running. At the end of the movie, as the men on a raft drifting down the river are dying of fever and getting picked off by the natives, he, while seeing a hallucinatory ship in the trees, reacts to an arrow hitting him in the leg thusly:[quote]That is no ship. That is no forest.[/quote] [arrow hits him] [quote]That is no arrow. We just imagine the arrows because we fear them.[/quote]

Traitor Jeff Flake
 

Not surprisingly, Senator Flake's contact site is "down for maintenance." How convenient. My attempted contact follows.
Your shameful complicity in the Kavanaugh railroading
[QUOTE]Dear Sir,
Feel free to ignore my opinion as I am not your constituent. However, yours is one of the key votes in the rigged confirmation hearings on Judge Kavanaugh. This affects not just your constituents, but all citizens, who will be subjected to this person's Opinions for decades to come.

Due Process is decidedly not specified in the Advice and Consent process. Your specious appeal to this principle is a cowardly evasion of your responsibility to the nation, and to all women.

You are leaving office. Show a bit of courage. Prove your claims of concern for sexual assault survivors, or prove that you are just as contemptible as this nominee.

Stand up for Real Justice, Sir.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=kladner;497017]Not surprisingly, Senator Flake's contact site is "down for maintenance." How convenient. My attempted contact follows.
Your shameful complicity in the Kavanaugh railroading[/QUOTE]

But, but...he asked real nicely for one whole [I]week[/I] of investigation! That's totally good enough for a naked partisan who thinks being investigated over credible allegations of sexual assault is revenge on behalf of the Clintons.

You know, just like what happened to Neil Gorsuch, right? /s

[QUOTE=kladner;497017]Not surprisingly, Senator Flake's contact site is "down for maintenance." How convenient. My attempted contact follows.
Your shameful complicity in the Kavanaugh railroading[/QUOTE]
Perhaps there were enough attempted contacts to crash the site
:-D

It sounds like Senator Flake has taken a page from Ron Paul's playbook. Senator Paul is notorious for yapping about "principled" objections, then just voting with the party.

However, as you note, Senator Flake is not running for re-election, so in his case the usual threats of loss of committee positions etc would be nugatory.

His chance to show moral courage would have been voting against bringing the nomination to the floor. That ship has now sailed.

[QUOTE=wombatman;497024]But, but...he asked real nicely for one whole [I]week[/I] of investigation! That's totally good enough for a naked partisan who thinks being investigated over credible allegations of sexual assault is revenge on behalf of the Clintons.

You know, just like what happened to Neil Gorsuch, right? /s[/QUOTE]
I revise my opinion of Senator Flake, provisionally, in light of today's developments. The "cornered in the elevator" moment seems to have struck deep. It remains to be seen if the senator wishes to, and can resist, the forces of damnation and hellfire, which are surely raining down on him at this moment for his apostasy. I hope that he has been truly moved, and isn't just putting on a show. This hold-out move for further investigation could truly derail the railroading of Kavanaugh onto the SCOTUS. I hope this stiffens the spines of "Wavering Democrats," and uneasy "Moderate Republicans," especially those of the female persuasion of either party.
EDIT: And I agree that "Senator Flake".gov is probably experiencing some pretty serious traffic.
I do applaud the result his tactic has produced. A week of FBI investigation, if sincere, could dig up a lot of details which don't come out in signed statements. Flake did throw that much sand in the gears. MacTurtle and Cornhole were ready to push it through the Senate on Monday.
Note: While I did not get to send the missive, it did remain extant on the Contact form long enough for me to copy the text. It lived through a few Refresh Page cycles, too. Perhaps it left some trace in the system. :razz: :whee:

[QUOTE=kladner;497038]I revise my opinion of Senator Flake, provisionally, in light of today's developments. The "cornered in the elevator" moment seems to have struck deep. It remains to be seen if the senator wishes to, and can resist, the forces of damnation and hellfire, which are surely raining down on him at this moment for his apostasy. I hope that he has been truly moved, and isn't just putting on a show.[/QUOTE]

Well, in his official explanation, he said some milquetoast thing about "the process" and didn't mention the elevator bit at all. Now, it may be that he doesn't want people to know that he was influenced in that way, as to prevent future incidents. But who knows.

[QUOTE=wombatman;497065]Well, in his official explanation, he said some milquetoast thing about "the process" and didn't mention the elevator bit at all. Now, it may be that he doesn't want people to know that he was influenced in that way, as to prevent future incidents. But who knows.[/QUOTE]
It is true that the normal sort of process has been tossed in the weeds since the Garland nomination. The cover story is more true than Flake probably intended.

[QUOTE=kladner;497071]It is true that the normal sort of process has been tossed in the weeds since the Garland nomination. The cover story is more true than Flake probably intended.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. With that said, it's unlikely the investigation is going to do anything but provide cover for the GOP's officially "undecided" members to vote for Kavanaugh. The White House has limited the FBI to only the first two women (Dr. Ford and Deborah Ramirez) who made accusations of Kavanaugh. Swetnick, the woman who claims to both have knowledge of and be a victim of gang rape perpetuated by Kavanaugh and his friends at beach week (which Kavanaugh's official teenage calendar has on it) will not be included in the investigation. In addition, the White House limited the FBI to only certain people who can be interviewed.

So despite all the proclamations of the FBI having free reign and all that, this is very much a sham investigation. Sadly, it seems like we'll have to hope that Avenatti (who is representing Swetnick) can blow it all up like he did with Stormy Daniels.

[QUOTE]Agreed. With that said, it's unlikely the investigation is going to do anything but provide cover for the GOP's officially "undecided" members to vote for Kavanaugh.[/QUOTE]
That is exactly my concern, as well. It might cover for Wavering Democrats, too.

[QUOTE=wombatman;497114]Agreed. With that said, it's unlikely the investigation is going to do anything but provide cover for the GOP's officially "undecided" members to vote for Kavanaugh.[/QUOTE][b][i]Finally![/i][/b] -- a government operation that will stick to its intended purpose, and not expand due to "mission creep." Perhaps [i]Il Duce[/i] is actually making headway against the bureaucratic state :whistle:

A High-End Legal Ratf*cker Is Still a Ratf*cker
 

Nothing I can add to this [STRIKE]profane[/STRIKE] obscene masterpiece. It is all F words. No goddamns. (but there is a 'hell' or two.)
[URL]https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a23570618/brett-kavanaugh-republican-ratfcker-supreme-court/[/URL]
-Charles Pierce
[QUOTE]So here's my thing. I believe most of what has been alleged about Brett Kavanaugh from the people who knew him back in the day. His demeanor before the committee last week made him look like every privileged lace-curtain Irish inebriate with whom I grew up. I believe everything Dr. Christine Blasey Ford said about him, not because I oppose his nomination, but because she was human and he was a wind-up rage doll. Those charges and that temperament are enough to keep him off the Supreme Court. Hell, they're enough to keep him out from behind the counter at Costco.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=kladner;497326]Nothing I can add to this [STRIKE]profane[/STRIKE] obscene masterpiece.[/QUOTE]

The world /used/ to be able to trust the US of A to be a stable player.

No problem. There are many ready and able to fill the vacuum.

[QUOTE=chalsall;497328]The world /used/ to be able to trust the US of A to be a stable player.

No problem. There are many ready and able to fill the vacuum.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. I think we'll see a multi-lateral arrangement. China, Russia, and India seem like the big dawgs, especially the first two. Then we'll see how parts of Europe may want to "revise" their alignments, if the US doesn't blow up the world to maintain "supremacy" over rubble.

[URL="https://inveritateblog.com/2018/10/02/judging-the-judge/"]Here's [/URL]what a bishop has to say in favour of Brett Kavanaugh. He makes various points, but this one leaves me gobsmacked:

[QUOTE]Moral theology — indeed the law of God — requires us to not think any evil of him beyond what is evident. If there is insufficient evidence to make a certain judgement of guilt, then we must hold him guiltless. If there is sufficient evidence to cause suspicion of guilt, then we may lawfully suspect him. To think evil of someone without sufficient evidence is a sin of rash judgement, [I]and it is a mortal sin if the matter is serious.[/I] This matter is certainly serious.
In this case, however, it is Judge Kavanaugh’s word against Dr. Ford’s word. Moral law requires us, in that parity of contradictory testimony, to take the word of the superior, which in this case would be that of Judge Kavanaugh.
[/QUOTE]The article contains no indication of what leads Bishop Sanborn to the conclusion that Judge Kavanaugh is "superior" to Dr. Ford. My mind boggles.

[QUOTE=Brian-E;497416][URL="https://inveritateblog.com/2018/10/02/judging-the-judge/"]Here's [/URL]what a bishop has to say in favour of Brett Kavanaugh. He makes various points, but this one leaves me gobsmacked:

The article contains no indication of what leads Bishop Sanborn to the conclusion that Judge Kavanaugh is "superior" to Dr. Ford. My mind boggles.[/QUOTE]
My mind is bogged in The Slough of Despond.

[QUOTE=Brian-E;497416][URL="https://inveritateblog.com/2018/10/02/judging-the-judge/"]Here's [/URL]what a bishop has to say in favour of Brett Kavanaugh. He makes various points, but this one leaves me gobsmacked:

The article contains no indication of what leads Bishop Sanborn to the conclusion that Judge Kavanaugh is "superior" to Dr. Ford. My mind boggles.[/QUOTE]
Hmm. The most obvious reason is, he's male. It's in the Bible! In Timothy 12, in a letter from Paul, it says[quote]12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.[/quote]

At the time of the founding of the republic, women were treated as being morally inferior to men. Married women were treated like dependent children or slaves. Womens' rights regarding inheritance, property ownership, contracts, standing to file lawsuits, etc etc etc were extremely limited. And, of course, women were not allowed to vote. Widows were not allowed sole custody of their own children. In fact, being a widow was to be in a very bad situation.

Even in this day and age, there are Americans who think, on religious grounds, that women should not be allowed to serve on juries, since that could put them in a position of authority over a man (i.e. deciding the guilt or innocence of a male defendant).

Brett Kavanaugh went to confession and now he's been absolved of all his sins
 

[URL]https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brett-kavanugh-fbi-investigation-confession-christine-ford-supreme-court-nominee-a8570021.html[/URL]
[QUOTE]Bless me, Father, for I have, uh… just bless me, OK?
I bless you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

How long has it been since your last confession, my son?

Uh, wow, that feels like an attack, Father. I could ask you the same question.

Pardon?

Are you going to answer the question or not, Father? How long has it been since [I]your [/I]last confession?

I don’t know why you’d ask me that, son. I think we best move on. What is it that you came here today to confess?

Confess? Who says I have anything to confess, Father?

Well, you did voluntarily walk into a confessional this morning, didn’t you?

I don’t like what you’re implying, Father. I have my calendar right here, and it shows exactly where I’ve been all morning. You can see it clearly says I had skis with Judge, Tom, PJ, Bernie and Squi this morning.
[/QUOTE]