US Politics Thread 2021-24 [Archive] - Page 15

Rockstar

06-24-22, 11:45 AM

A Regressive Supreme Court Judgement.

6 males voting on this Wade v Roe abortion law, sounds fair by American standards, next thing they'll do is turn a black criminal into a national hero...... whaaat!, they already have. :o

If you yank women (womb walkers) are going to let 6 male judges tell you what you can and can't do with your bodies then it's more fool you time. :o

Roe v Wade has absolutely nothing to do with protecting a women’s right. It has EVERYTHING to do with protecting abortion providers right to practice. Not only that but if this idiot democrat talking below was telling even a kernel of truth it seems they’re more interested in harvesting bodies..

https://youtu.be/_xD8cPgcZ3E

Maybe instead acting like a bunch of liberal terrorists and butchers. They can start work towards actually giving a sheet about the woman and infants instead of protecting male abortion providers right to harvest bodies in the name of science and money.

https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-offers-critique-roe-v-wade-during-law-school-visit

“My criticism of Roe is that it seemed to have stopped the momentum on the side of change,” Ginsburg said. She would’ve preferred that abortion rights be secured more gradually, in a process that included state legislatures and the courts, she added. Ginsburg also was troubled that the focus on Roe was on a right to privacy, rather than women’s rights.

“Roe isn’t really about the woman’s choice, is it?” Ginsburg said. “It’s about the doctor’s freedom to practice…it wasn’t woman-centered, it was physician-centered.”

Ostfriese

06-24-22, 11:48 AM

A Regressive Supreme Court Judgement.

6 males voting on this Wade v Roe abortion law, sounds fair by American standards, next thing they'll do is turn a black criminal into a national hero...... whaaat!, they already have. :o

If you yank women (womb walkers) are going to let 6 male judges tell you what you can and can't do with your bodies then it's more fool you time. :o

Nah, 597 U.S. ____ (2022), page 3, already shows where the road will lead to:
"[...]we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell."
Link (https://i.imgur.com/l4iksZx.jpeg)

Griswold: Griswold v. Conneticut (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut), 1965 decision allowing married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restrictions.

Lawrence: Lawrence v. Texas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas), 2003 decision ruling that sanctions of criminal punisment for those who commit sodomy (aka sexual intercourse with a same-sex partner) are unconstitutional.

Obergefell: Obergefell v. Hodges (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obergefell_v._Hodges), 2015 decision that granted the fundamental right to marry to same-sex couples.

MaDef

06-24-22, 11:48 AM

all that decision does is kick that "right" back to the individual States ( where it was before Roe V. Wade). Even Former Justice Ginsberg thought the decision was an overreach.

Ostfriese

06-24-22, 11:56 AM

all that decision does is kick that "right" back to the individual States ( where it was before Roe V. Wade). Even Former Justice Ginsberg thought the decision was an overreach.

While this is correct you should acknowledge that it will create major differences between the different states in regards to abortions. 20 states will have very restrictive laws within days or weeks, with more than half of those even denying abortions to the victims of rape.

20 other states will continue to grant access to abortions, more than half of those will even expand access one way or another.

Dowly

06-24-22, 01:44 PM

Makes sense to me, how else would you replace all the kids killed in mass shootings? :hmmm:

u crank

06-24-22, 02:19 PM

Makes sense to me, how else would you replace all the kids killed in mass shootings? :hmmm:

Don't worry about it. The unending stream of illegals crossing the southern border more than make up for it.

Skybird

06-24-22, 02:30 PM

Global life is a comedy. On this the same day the US has this verdict, the German Bundestag ends §219 StGB that made it illegal for doctors to inform patients that they do abortions, and the methods used for that.

The ECH has ruled in December last year already that the German practice of allowing abortions, but making it a criminal offence if a doctor informs patients about it, is in violation of basic human rights of women.

August

06-24-22, 03:28 PM

A FEW MORE THOUGHTS ON DOBBS: First, it’s a big win for the rule of law — by which I mean not so much the opinion as that the justices stood firm in the face of unprecedented threats ranging from Chuck Schumer’s “pay the price” language to mobs and an actual armed assassin showing up at their homes. A Supreme Court that can be bullied is a Supreme Court that will be bullied. Unlike Roberts’ flip in the ObamaCare case, the majority here held firm, which will discourage bullying in the future.
Second, the likely result is that a few states will ban abortion entirely, a few will permit it for the entire term, and for most it’ll look something like Europe, with abortion easy to get for the first 12 weeks or so, and much harder after that. (The Mississippi law in question here was actually more liberal than many, perhaps most, European laws).
States won’t be able to ban interstate travel for the purpose of getting an abortion because interstate travel is a separate constitutional right. Congress will not be able to guarantee a right to abortion because its 14th Amendment power to enforce the rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment doesn’t apply to abortion, which the Court has found isn’t protected under the 14th Amendment. It will not be able to either protect abortion or ban it under its commerce power because abortion isn’t interstate commerce, (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=45301) and is a traditional subject of state regulation.
It’ll take a few years to shake out, but we’re likely to wind up with what we would have had by 1976 or so if Roe had never been decided — a spectrum of laws around the country that will be adjusted over time based on experience and the views of the electorate. Though, of course, the norm may be stricter than it would have been without Roe, which called into being a huge pro-life movement that probably wouldn’t have existed otherwise.
UPDATE: It’ll be interesting to see if this reduces the flow of immigrants from blue states to red. That’ll be a measure of how much people actually care. To be honest, I kinda hope it does slow the flow.

https://instapundit.com/527664/

Skybird

06-24-22, 05:23 PM

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung finds that the dispute has not been ended, but has just been ignited. Nothing good for the polarized and unable to find compromises US will come form this. Just deeper, wider trenches.

--------------
The U.S. Supreme Court orders a return to the past on the issue of abortion. This did not bring fewer abortions, but more suffering for women.

The end of liberal abortion rights in the United States is no longer a surprise. A first draft of the ruling had already been leaked in May, and it was predictable that this unprecedented clash would tend to solidify views at the Supreme Court. Anything less would have exposed the justices to accusations of caving in, reinforcing the already widespread view of a politicized panel.

Even though the first shock wave hit the country weeks ago, the final decision is an earthquake. First of all, it is remarkable that the Supreme Court overturns a leading judgment that is almost fifty years old and has been confirmed several times, for no clearly apparent reason. In the Anglo-Saxon world, precedents have a high, quasi-legislative significance - adjustments usually require a significant change in circumstances.

There is no question of this in the case of abortion. The procedure is safer and much less frequent than in 1973, when the Supreme Court ordered liberalization in Roe v. Wade. Moreover, public opinion has changed surprisingly little in recent decades. A clear majority of the public supports the right to abortion.

Of course, the Supreme Court has repeatedly revised its jurisprudence. One of its most famous rulings desegregated schools in 1954 ("Brown v. Board of Education") and was a departure from a decision handed down nearly six decades earlier that explicitly allowed the practice and is considered one of the most egregious in the court's history. But in each case, the changes meant an expansion of individual rights, not a restriction as in the current ruling.

In much of the country, the consequences are dramatic. Half of the states are likely to ban abortions in the future, forcing unwanted pregnant women to travel long distances or into illegality. It is doubtful that the conservatives' hopes will be fulfilled and that there will be fewer abortions. For the 1950s and 1960s, when the procedure was banned nationwide, the number of abortions is estimated to be at least the same as today, with a population half as large at the time.

Women who want to end a pregnancy find a way - but may carry a much higher risk. Officially, about 200 women died as a result of illegal abortions in 1965. At the time, these accounted for 17 percent of all deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth. With legalization in 1973, these figures immediately collapsed and are now vanishingly small. The Supreme Court's ruling is therefore not only a return to the past in terms of women's rights, but also in terms of health policy.

After all, one might think that the decades-long bitter dispute over the abortion issue has now been settled. In the future, the decision will be made by the political bodies of the individual states and thus ultimately by the population. Where the people want liberal rules, abortions will continue to be legal - where they do not, the procedure will be banned.

In the deeply divided United States, which is incapable of compromise, this may be seen as the democratic solution. But even this illusion is likely to burst - culture war issues have become too important for mobilizing both ideological camps. Conservatives will therefore not rest until abortions are banned throughout the country, while progressives are already working on ways to circumvent bans. The abortion controversy is not over. It is only now really being ignited.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (http://www.DeepL.com/Translator) (free version)

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

MaDef

06-24-22, 06:16 PM

While this is correct you should acknowledge that it will create major differences between the different states in regards to abortions. 20 states will have very restrictive laws within days or weeks, with more than half of those even denying abortions to the victims of rape.

20 other states will continue to grant access to abortions, more than half of those will even expand access one way or another.

Which I'm fine with, the "one size fits all" governing model that the federal government operates under doesn't really work very well for a lot of things.

August is right, some states will ban it, some will become more lax, the majority of the states will fall somewhere in the middle.

As a bonus, the "left" has collectively blown a gasket over this decision and I bet very few of them actually read the decision or even the dissenting opinion, they'll just go along with whatever their talking heads tell them.

Rockstar

06-24-22, 06:19 PM

The general conscensus in the United States is most believe abortions should be made available. Other than the militant Democrats threatening the lives of the Justices of the SCOTUS. Or the governor of Virginia approving the abortion of third trimester or born babies. Most Americans also believe there must be some restrictions too. Though States like Virginia and California might think it’s OK. Most others do not and will legislate accordingly.

Only twenty 26 states are known to have restrictions on abortion the line seems to be drawn when one can get an abortion.. Out of that five will revert to an outright ban already on the books once R v Wade is done away with. The individual State will have to get it together and change what needs to be changed but it will be done with the woman AND the unborn child in mind. Not the bottom line of a physicians business on how many bodies they can harvest and sell for parts.

Buddahaid

06-24-22, 06:38 PM

Let the women decide and the men stay out of it.

Rockstar

06-24-22, 07:03 PM

Keep the men out of it is one way to prevent a pregnancy too :D

August

06-24-22, 07:19 PM

Just remember, flies spread disease, so keep yours closed.

Rockstar

06-24-22, 09:39 PM

Rep. Andy Levin offers an exemplary Democratic Party response to political adversity
ROB BESCHIZZA 12:47 PM FRI JUN 24, 2022

https://i0.wp.com/boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/FWCpdrJUYAAfFIS.png :har::har::har:

Rep. Andy Levin's (D-Michigan) response to today's Supreme Court ruling brims with confidence in his party's ability to engage practically and purposefully with its political adversaries. If we need more, though, here's Nancy Pelosi reading some inspirational poetry.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/06/dobbs-decision-nancy-pelosi-poem-response.html

Jeff-Groves

06-24-22, 10:17 PM

Oh Christ!!! The Cross State Boarder Abortion Wars are about to start.
Good thing we got new Gun Laws!!!
And what about the coming pandemic of pregnant Fem... Wom... Persons?
(Are We still allowed to say pregnant?)
:o

Ostfriese

06-25-22, 12:10 AM

Don't worry, going to another state for an abortion costs money which most women who want an abortion don't have. Those who cross state borders for an abortion are usually affluent enough that you actually want them to come.

Nobody right in his mind shoots people bringing in money, not even the IRA was so foolishly stupid. But then, the IRA weren't christian fundamentalists...

Dowly

06-25-22, 01:40 AM

:hmmm:

Or maybe the USA simply wants to retain its #1 spot in maternal mortality..?

mapuc

06-25-22, 07:52 AM

Rockstar

06-25-22, 01:42 PM

Almost everywhere I read things like it's a restriction of woman's right-

Well what about the unborn babies right !?

I know there are being discussed on when is the embryo end when is it a human

I don't know since I'm not an expert on this subject.

This could be why a woman can have an abortion up to week 12 here in Denmark and Sweden.

Maybe it's nothing but an embryo up to week 12.

My personal view-standpoint.

I really don't have any-I only hope that no unborn baby-not embryo is killed.
When it comes to Rape and incest-Then the woman shall have the right to an abortion.

If I had a girlfriend and she became pregnant and wanted an abortion-I would be truly sad..Not forcing her to keep it-But hope she will.

Markus

What most Europeans read in their local headlines and here as well. Is the U.S. just outright banned abortions. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact if most people got off their high horse and looked for themselves. They would find most State restrictions are very similar to some European laws on abortion. Liberal media will tell you Florida banned abortion. They didn't, under normal circumstances it is allowed up to 15 weeks, sound familiar? It should especially to those living in Europe.

Like I said earlier most people here think there should be an option for the woman however most people also think there should be limitations. But it is now up to the states to set those limitations. I think only five states have outright bans. But I'm sure with time that will change too.

States like Virginia and California see no problem aborting a baby at the third trimester and even hint at new born. But they do promise to keep the infant comfortable until its terminated. :roll:

Ostfriese

06-25-22, 03:58 PM

Like I said earlier most people here think there should be an option for the woman however most people also think there should be limitations. But it is now up to the states to set those limitations. I think only five states have outright bans. But I'm sure with time that will change too.

Thirteen states used trigger laws to implement what effectively are abortion bans (Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wyoming). In some states this became effective immediately, some have a short grace period (a few days), but all thirteen will have a restrictive abortion law within 30 days. All these ban abortions in the first and second trimester. Half of the states (seven) don't even allow abortions in case of rape or incest.
Alabama, West Virginia and Arizona have similar laws in the pipe and/or blocked by courts, which very likely will change within weeks.

Georgia, Ohio and South Carolina have implemented "heartbeat bills" (all currently blocked by courts), which translates into "abortions are illegal after the sixth week of pregnancy", which in turn effectively means an abortion ban, because only a very small amount of women discover their pregnancies within that time, let alone with time to spare to arrange for an abortion.
Don't even try to claim that this is "an option for the woman".

That's nineteen states in my count.

Catfish

06-25-22, 04:24 PM

I think after this decision the US has complete and utterly become a medieval country again. But nothing a revolution cold not correct :03:

Rockstar

06-25-22, 04:29 PM

Thirteen states used trigger laws to implement what effectively are abortion bans (Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wyoming). In some states this became effective immediately, some have a short grace period (a few days), but all thirteen will have a restrictive abortion law within 30 days. All these ban abortions in the first and second trimester. Half of the states (seven) don't even allow abortions in case of rape or incest.
Alabama, West Virginia and Arizona have similar laws in the pipe and/or blocked by courts, which very likely will change within weeks.

Georgia, Ohio and South Carolina have implemented "heartbeat bills" (all currently blocked by courts), which translates into "abortions are illegal after the sixth week of pregnancy", which in turn effectively means an abortion ban, because only a very small amount of women discover their pregnancies within that time, let alone with time to spare to arrange for an abortion.
Don't even try to claim that this is "an option for the woman".

That's nineteen states in my count.

I think you can add Texas to the 6 week time line too.

"A small amount of women discover"...? :har::har::har: We've been through that argument before here. So' I'll ask again. Am I to assume that you and these small amount of women are still unaware how babies are made? Maybe after your night of drunkin' debauchery you might consider 'Plan B'.

Dowly

06-25-22, 05:01 PM

Am I to assume that you and these small amount of women are still unaware how babies are made? Maybe after your night of drunkin' debauchery you might consider 'Plan B'.
You sure are assuming that people getting abortions are just using it as a form of 'morning after pill', so they can go have more wild sex orgies.

I shouldn't have to tell you how unbelievably stupid that is, but here we are.

Contraceptives can fail and pregnancy tests can show false negatives, six weeks is a very short time for someone who is not expecting to be pregnant.

Due to this ruling, women will suffer, women will die and lives will be destroyed. And for what? Something something states' rights? Bible thumping?

Rockstar

06-25-22, 06:26 PM

You sure are assuming that people getting abortions are just using it as a form of 'morning after pill', so they can go have more wild sex orgies.

I shouldn't have to tell you how unbelievably stupid that is, but here we are.

Contraceptives can fail and pregnancy tests can show false negatives, six weeks is a very short time for someone who is not expecting to be pregnant.

Due to this ruling, women will suffer, women will die and lives will be destroyed. And for what? Something something states' rights? Bible thumping?

What the hell? Everyone is going to die, suffer, lives destroyed? At what point does that happen? Jesus Christ lighten up Francis

Plan B has a 95% success rate if taken within a day of intercourse. Being every adult ought to be aware how babies are made it stands to reason a pregnancy after intercourse should not come as a surprise or something to be "discovered". For chrissakes its not a treasure hunt. If you’re really worried then go get a check-up and abortion within six weeks, no suffering, no deaths, no lives ruined. I am just absolutely astonished how unbelievably stupid people are that they can’t figure that out. But here we are.

MaDef

06-25-22, 06:49 PM

For chrissakes its not a treasure hunt.LOL, it sure felt that way trying to get into MaryLou's panties back in the day.

Bubblehead1980

06-25-22, 10:56 PM

As a reformed right winger(my saving grace is I was not nor am I a religious type) I can translate some statements I have seen on here, social media etc. Almost like these people are parroting talk radio and Fox News lol.

Statement: "The Supreme Court did not ban abortion, they just sent it back to the states."

Translation from Wingnut speech and splainin' into English:

“Really, it is okay to violate a persons autonomy as long it’s the state government doing it … not the federal government...and they have a vagina .” lol

Remember that time in history when “states rights” was used to justify the violation of autonomy of black people (and others)? I.e slavery. Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Furthermore, these are same people screaming, fighting against mandates last year over the injection. I was one of them, I put my career and a lot on the line refusing to be required to take the injection and we ultimately won. Also been vindicated (as knew we would since) by respected entities such as New England Journal of medicine. Was never against the injection, simply being forced was wrong , just as it is wrong to prevent a woman from terminating a pregnancy is she desires.

Now, unlike many others on that side of the issue, I am not contradicting myself. As I said then, body autonomy is a right and allowing states to decide if they can violate women's autonomy is wrong. The so called originalists on the court, went full on activist in order to push their personal religious views into public policy. They lost all moral and intellectual high ground. I nearly went blind today reading to obtuse ignorance in the majority opinion today.

nikimcbee

06-26-22, 12:11 AM

LOL, it sure felt that way trying to get into MaryLou's panties back in the day.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.cinemablend.com%2Ffilter%3Asca le%2Fquill%2F7%2F6%2F8%2F3%2F3%2Fd%2F76833d8bde8ed 024859a1ae60403c266ddb8f15c.jpg%3Fmw%3D600&f=1&nofb=1

nikimcbee

06-26-22, 12:14 AM

As a reformed right winger

So what changed?

Just curious.

Ostfriese

06-26-22, 12:41 AM

"A small amount of women discover"...? :har::har::har: We've been through that argument before here.

You mean: "a bunch of male boomers without any understanding and knowledge about women have discussed this."

Contraceptives fail (and Judge Thomas has already made clear that they are on his target list), also pregnancy tests fail (especially during the very early phases). And yes, that includes those tests undertaken by doctors and medical personell. They are based on hormone levels, and those are subject to natural fluctuations. Even after six weeks the levels of the tested hormone quite often are well within the range that is common for non-pregnancies.
Detection with other means (like ultrasound) by other means is also difficult during the very early phases, because the heap of cells is hard to differentiate from a woman's body that early on.
It's quite interesting to see someone that uninformed calling others "stupid people" :D

And as much as you want to lie to yourself about it: an abortion is not a haircut. You don't waltz into a shop, leave your baby/hair behind and leave as if nothing has happened. An abortion leaves a severe strain on both body and mind with long lasting effects (which is the reason why the vast majority of women who had an abortion never even considers having a second one).

Following your approach ("blame the women!") would mean that all women would have to do was to say "no". Ask any woman you want how well that works...

MaDef

06-26-22, 12:56 AM

em2nought

06-26-22, 02:07 AM

What a gift to the democrats.

Dowly

06-26-22, 06:07 AM

What a gift to the democrats.
And there's that, yeah. It seems GOP is always so concentrated on getting something done that when they do achieve it, they have no idea what to do with it.

I'm fully expecting a 'brexit regret' effect when people in the strictest red states start to realise what this means for them. After that, it gets worse when they realise that this will have the largest impact on them only; liberals in blue states will be largely unaffected by this. Hell, blue states will most likely strenghten their abortion right laws.

Rockstar

06-26-22, 08:47 AM

Hell, blue states will most likely strenghten their abortion right laws.

Bingo, most already have laws and have gone so far as wanting to add it to their State's Constitution so it can't be used as a political weapon in the future. But are those laws protecting providers or the woman? I'd wager others will soon follow regardless of political party. It will take time but I think it'll eventually happen. Most people do want the option made available but they also want limitations.

Not even Finland gives the woman the absolute right to an abortion. There are certain criteria which must be met and approved by one or two doctors and must be done at a state run facility. Otherwise I suppose she has to travel to Germany.

Kptlt. Neuerburg

06-26-22, 09:14 AM

Dowly

06-26-22, 09:54 AM

Not even Finland gives the woman the absolute right to an abortion. There are certain criteria which must be met and approved by one or two doctors and must be done at a state run facility. Otherwise I suppose she has to travel to Germany.Not sure why you're bringing this up. The issue isn't limitless abortion, but the other extreme where a state can now take that choice away from women and force them to carry a child. Uncle Billy Bob raped his 12yo niece? Congrats, you're going to be a mom!

As for Finland, anyone can get an abortion up until 12 weeks. After that, up to 24 weeks, depending of criteria.

Rockstar

06-26-22, 10:35 AM

Not sure why you're bringing this up. The issue isn't limitless abortion, but the other extreme where a state can now take that choice away from women and force them to carry a child. Uncle Billy Bob raped his 12yo niece? Congrats, you're going to be a mom!

As for Finland, anyone can get an abortion up until 12 weeks. After that, up to 24 weeks, depending of criteria.

But over here it is about limitless abortion. People don't like limitless abortions in their states. Many think what Virgina allows is utterly disgusting barbaric and inhuman and they don't want it in their State.

"Depending on criteria" like I said even in Finland a woman does not have an absolute right to do whatever, whenever she pleases. She will likely have to travel to another country to achieve her goal if she fails to meet the criteria. The fact is, your State does have limitations which was my point. Right or wrong isn't for me to decide whats best for Finland, that's your job. As an American I couldn't care less how you govern your nation it's not even a blip on my RADAR.

According to CNN Alabama has what CNN called the most restrictive anti-abortion laws in the nation.. ANTI-ABORTION!

In Alabama, the following restrictions on abortion were in effect as of June 24, 2022:

A patient must receive state-directed counseling that includes information designed to discourage the patient from having an abortion, and then wait 48 hours before the procedure is provided.
Health plans offered in the state’s health exchange under the Affordable Care Act can only cover abortion in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest.
The use of telemedicine to administer medication abortion is prohibited.
The parent of a minor must consent before an abortion is provided.
Public funding is available for abortion only in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest.
A patient must undergo an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion; the provider must offer the patient the option to view the image.
Abortion is banned, except in cases of life endangerment and health of the patient.
The state requires abortion clinics to meet unnecessary and burdensome standards related to their physical plant, equipment and staffing.

It's apparently obvious that your Billy Bob scenario, claims of lives destroyed, death, suffering is a bit extreme and uncalled for.

mapuc

06-26-22, 10:48 AM

Isn't there members here who is female.

I would love to hear their opinion on this subject-So far it has only been us men who have discussed it.
(Have read a lot among my Danish and Swedish friends on FB-But no Americans)

Markus

Moonlight

06-26-22, 11:07 AM

I'm wondering if a pregnant woman who didn't want a baby at that time will file a lawsuit against the male who impregnated her and set off a chain reaction of similar unplanned baby lawsuits across the USA, even if it's consensual intercourse that doesn't mean she wants to get bloody pregnant does it, I think some one's going to be paying for this accidental pregnancy and it won't be her.

Do you have laws over there that protects the woman from being violated (not sure if that's the right word) in this way, I'm looking at this and thinking those bleeding heart lawyers will be jumping all over this one in there quest to make some extra money.

It's time to invest in one of these new fangled sex dolls me thinks just in case something like this pops up. "pun is not intentional" :O:

Dowly

06-26-22, 11:15 AM

But over here it is about limitless abortion. People don't like limitless abortions in their states. Many think what Virgina allows is utterly disgusting barbaric and inhuman and they don't want it in their State.And how will overturning Roe v Wade help with restricting "limitless" abortion? The only thing this ruling allows now is for states to ban abortion if they so choose. Other states could do the other extreme, with or without Roe v Wade.

"Depending on criteria" like I said even in Finland a woman does not have an absolute right to do whatever, whenever she pleases. She will likely have to travel to another country to achieve her goal if she fails to meet the criteria. The fact is, your State does have limitations which was my point. Right or wrong isn't for me to decide whats best for Finland, that's your job. Anyone can get an abortion at under 12 weeks. No criteria needs to be met. I also didn't claim Finland had limitless abortion, nor have I ever said anything to support limitless abortion so again I'm not sure why you are bringing this up.

As an American I couldn't care less how you govern your nation it's not even a blip on my RADAR.He says, after bringing it up himself.

According to CNN Alabama has what CNN called the most restrictive anti-abortion laws in the nation.. ANTI-ABORTION!

In Alabama, the following restrictions on abortion were in effect as of June 24, 2022:

A patient must receive state-directed counseling that includes information designed to discourage the patient from having an abortion, and then wait 48 hours before the procedure is provided.
Health plans offered in the state’s health exchange under the Affordable Care Act can only cover abortion in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest.
The use of telemedicine to administer medication abortion is prohibited.
The parent of a minor must consent before an abortion is provided.
Public funding is available for abortion only in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest.
A patient must undergo an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion; the provider must offer the patient the option to view the image.
Abortion is banned, except in cases of life endangerment and health of the patient.
The state requires abortion clinics to meet unnecessary and burdensome standards related to their physical plant, equipment and staffing.

It's apparently obvious that your Billy Bob scenario, claims of lives destroyed, death, suffering is a bit extreme and uncalled for.See Lousiana, no exceptions for rape or incest.

Rockstar

06-26-22, 11:32 AM

And how will overturning Roe v Wade help with restricting "limitless" abortion? The only thing this ruling allows now is for states to ban abortion if they so choose. Other states could do the other extreme, with or without Roe v Wade.

What is Roe v Wade?

Anyone can get an abortion at under 12 weeks. No criteria needs to be met. I also didn't claim Finland had limitless abortion, nor have I ever said anything to support limitless abortion so again I'm not sure why you are bringing this up.

He says, after bringing it up himself.No criteria, whenever they want huh?

Granted things may have changed since April 2021 when this article was written.

Recent figures from the Finnish Institute of Health and Welfare (THL) have revealed that Finland has the lowest rate of induced abortions among Nordic countries.

It also has the strictest abortion laws, being the only Nordic country where women need to acquire the signature of at least one doctor (in some cases two) to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.

If the pregnancy has proceeded past 13 weeks, special permission from the National Supervisory Authority for Welfare and Health (Valvira) must be obtained.

In 2019, Finland reported 7.7 induced abortions per every thousand women (aged 15–49). The corresponding figure in Sweden, which has the highest number of abortions among Nordic countries, was 16.4 per every thousand women.

As of 2019, Finland had 8,700 induced abortions per year. It also accounted for the highest proportion of drug-induced abortions (97.7 per cent) among Nordic countries. Drug-induced (pharmaceutical) abortions were first introduced in the country in 2000.

According to Anna Heino, special planning officer at THL, the difference in abortion rates between countries can be attributed to various factors, including legislation and cultural differences.

Finland’s current legislation regarding termination, which first came into force in 1970, has been accused of being outdated. Last year, a citizen’s initiative seeking to reform Finland’s abortion laws received enough signatures to be sent to the parliament for consideration.

See Lousiana, no exceptions for rape or incest.
Dude, I don’t know where you’re getting your intel from but your claim is absolute rubbish, made up fantasy, nothing could be further from the truth. Louisiana has no such restrictions preventing abortion in cases of rape or incest.

Dowly

06-26-22, 12:22 PM

What is Roe v Wade?
You should find out, it's kinda important to the discussion we are having.

No criteria huh?

Granted things may have changed since April 2021 when this article was written.Let's try this a third time: Anyone can get an abortion up until 12 weeks. You can go to a doctor and say you don't want the baby, and that is enough.

Dude, I don’t know where you’re getting your intel from but your claim is absolute rubbish, made up fantasy, nothing could be further from the truth. Louisiana has no such restrictions preventing abortion in cases of rape or incest."A pregnancy that results from rape or incest is also not eligible."
https://lailluminator.com/2022/06/24/louisianas-trigger-law-to-restrict-abortion-goes-into-effect-with-supreme-court-ruling/

"There are no legal exceptions for rape or incest,"
https://eu.theadvertiser.com/story/news/2022/06/24/abortion-louisiana-illegal-now-after-supreme-court-ruling/7694143001/

"No exceptions for victims of rape or incest are included."
https://www.wwno.org/law/2022-06-24/what-to-know-about-louisiana-abortion-rights-after-supreme-court-overturns-roe-v-wade

Rockstar

06-26-22, 12:50 PM

You should find out, it's kinda important to the discussion we are having. Oh don't you worry, I have a decent grasp on what Roe v Wade was. I asked because I was wondering if you did.

Let's try this a third time: Anyone can get an abortion up until 12 weeks. You can go to a doctor and say you don't want the baby, and that is enough. Yes and provided they have a doctors working at a state run hospital signature approving it and in some instance permission from the State. Woman are not allowed to go to a private clinic to obtain an abortion.

What works in California or Virginia and many other States here would be impossible to do in Finland. Yet here you are preaching to us :roll:

"A pregnancy that results from rape or incest is also not eligible."
https://lailluminator.com/2022/06/24/louisianas-trigger-law-to-restrict-abortion-goes-into-effect-with-supreme-court-ruling/

"There are no legal exceptions for rape or incest,"
https://eu.theadvertiser.com/story/news/2022/06/24/abortion-louisiana-illegal-now-after-supreme-court-ruling/7694143001/

"No exceptions for victims of rape or incest are included."
https://www.wwno.org/law/2022-06-24/what-to-know-about-louisiana-abortion-rights-after-supreme-court-overturns-roe-v-wadeI don't know if the people who wrote those articles have an agenda, didn't take the time to read, don't know how to read or are just plain stupid. But I think you're embarrassing yourself when you post some links like. Makes me wonder if you're some kind of card carrying member of Qanon or Blue Annon?

I suggest you check the Louisiana State Legislation Website.

https://legis.la.gov/Legis/Law.aspx?d=965011

RS 40:1061.18
https://legis.la.gov/Legis/App_Themes/Legis/Images/print.gif (https://legis.la.gov/Legis/LawPrint.aspx?d=965011)
§1061.18. Abortion sought due to rape or certain acts of crime against nature; reporting and certification

A. Whenever an abortion is being sought pursuant to R.S. 40:1061.6 to terminate a pregnancy resulting from an alleged act of rape, prior to the abortion all of the following requirements shall be met:
(1) The rape victim shall report the rape to a law enforcement official unless the treating physician certifies in writing that in the physician's professional opinion, the victim was too physically or psychologically incapacitated to report the rape.
(2) The victim certifies that the pregnancy is the result of rape, which certificate shall be witnessed by the treating physician.
B. Whenever an abortion is being sought pursuant to R.S. 40:1061.6 to terminate a pregnancy resulting from an alleged act of crime against nature as defined by R.S. 14:89(A)(2), prior to the abortion all of the following requirements shall be met:
(1) The victim of crime against nature as defined by R.S. 14:89(A)(2) shall report the act to a law enforcement official unless the treating physician certifies in writing that in the physician's professional opinion the victim was too physically or psychologically incapacitated to report the act.
(2) The victim certifies that the pregnancy is the result of crime against nature as defined by R.S. 14:89(A)(2), which certificate shall be witnessed by the treating physician.

August

06-26-22, 01:20 PM

I also wanted to ask this, if Roe V. Wade was a ruling made by the SCOTUS does that actually make the ability for women to get an abortion a "constitutional right"? Was that right ever codified into law in either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights? Because if it wasn't then it's not a constitutional right at all.

Roe v Wade held that the right to abortion was protected under the 14th Amendment. That was rather a stretch though and it should have been codified into law by Congress soon after the ruling but they never did.

Dowly

06-26-22, 01:57 PM

Yes and provided they have a doctors working at a state run hospital signature approving it and in some instance permission from the State. Woman are not allowed to go to a private clinic to obtain an abortion. Both the signature and the procedure can be obtained at a private clinic.

What works in California or Virginia and many other States here would be impossible to do in Finland. Yet here you are preaching to us :roll:YOU are the one who brought Finland in to this, not me. I haven't made any comparisons to Finland or any other country.

I don't know if the people who wrote those articles have an agenda, didn't take the time to read, don't know how to read or are just plain stupid. But I think you're embarrassing yourself when you post some links like. Makes me wonder if you're some kind of card carrying member of Qanon or Blue Annon?

I suggest you check the Louisiana State Legislation Website. How embarrassing... I suggest you check the trigger law that was signed by the governor, RS 40:1061.18 is removed.

I don't know if you have an agenda, didn't take the time to read, don't know how to read or are just plain stupid. But I think you're embarrassing yourself when you post some links like. Makes me wonder if you're some kind of card carrying member of Qanon or Blue Annon?

Rockstar

06-26-22, 02:20 PM

Both the signature and the procedure can be obtained at a private clinic.

YOU are the one who brought Finland in to this, not me. I haven't made any comparisons to Finland or any other country.

I say what I say just as nobody asked you to say anything U.S. law. Deal with it.

How embarrassing... I suggest you check the trigger law that was signed by the governor, RS 40:1061.18 is removed.

I don't know if you have an agenda, didn't take the time to read, don't know how to read or are just plain stupid. But I think you're embarrassing yourself when you post some links like. Makes me wonder if you're some kind of card carrying member of Qanon or Blue Annon?

Here ya go buddy

https://gov.louisiana.gov/assets/docs/2022session/CortezLtr20220618SigningStatementSB342.pdf

MaDef

06-26-22, 02:48 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMgGwFX2KEs

I also wanted to ask this, if Roe V. Wade was a ruling made by the SCOTUS does that actually make the ability for women to get an abortion a "constitutional right"? Was that right ever codified into law in either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights? Because if it wasn't then it's not a constitutional right at all.

Did you not read my post? Even the Supreme Court that initially ruled on Roe v Wade stated that abortion was not an absolute right. And no, it was never codified, which triggers the 10th Amendment:The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Bubblehead1980

06-26-22, 03:02 PM

So what changed?

Just curious.

Ha, no problem. I get that a lot, especially last few days regarding the Dobbs decision.

Well, it has been a process, for sure. I'll start by saying I did not convert into another political extreme or to another "side", I dislike both major US political parties equally, wings of the same bird. I just reformed my far right views to the reasonable center, some say left or center, some say right of center. I really hate the labels and "team" mentality in politics, its not a football game. Speaking of which...never mind, I won't get started on bread and circuses. Basically, I clash with liberals on "woke" nonsense, my crazy ideas like there are only two genders lol or 2nd Amendment rights. I clash with right wingers on things like a living wage, public benefits our society lacks but other comparable nations have, etc.

In hindsight, I can say my switch started in law school as being in a environment where intelligent people who could challenge my beliefs and philosophy, along with opportunity to truly study law and gaining a new view on politics through this, as law and politics are heavily intertwined. The opportunity for instruction from and to interact with intelligent, talented, and well regarded professors who offered a real intellectual challenge influenced me as well, forced some introspection. One of my constitutional law professors and mentors clerked for Justice Potter Stewart when he was fresh out of law school and had a amazing career since. Clinic at the Innocence Project, Legal Aid, and working at the Public Defenders office, further opened my eyes to a lot of things I had been blind to or even obtuse about. Also allowed me to reexamine some of my own experiences up to that point.

Another contributor to my "reform" would be that I had a house mate who was from Spain and through him, met a girl from Netherlands, we ended up dating a while. This provided a opportunity to spend some time in Europe as a adult vs a vacation as a child/teen, opened my eyes a lot. Basically, it became apparent over time that the average American does not have the same quality of life as the average citizen in many Western European countries. We're just so far behind on many key indicators. One of the most common ones I hear be it from Europe or even Asia (my neighbor from Vietnam for example). Why do Americans not have universal healthcare?

More I considered things, I saw that my beliefs were inconsistent with progress for the people of my country and a huge part of why we are so far behind. My right wing beliefs were just empowering what is essentially a nation of corporate feudalism.

All of this cause further introspection about myself, my beliefs, friends, family, the US in general. This was going on around time Trump ran for President. I had my reservations, strong ones, but I have a strong dislike for
"established" candidates of either "major" party. Neo-cons and Neo-liberals are a massive part of the problem. I was most open to Bernie Sanders (he would have won in 2016, prob 2020 as well) because we needed a new way. The status quo in this country is not and has not been working for a long time. With Bernie gone, I opened up to Trump, felt he would shake things up and he did, in some ways it was a good thing, a great thing. However, he proved to be rather incompetent and showed his fascist tendencies as time went on, especially at the end. There was really talk about seizing voting machines and martial law.

Then I noticed something disturbing in the Trump years...people I respected, cared for, who I had been politically aligned for most part...turned out to be quite racist, bigoted, sexist, and misogynistic. I was shocked at some things
I was hearing and seeing. These are educated, intelligent, successful people, but they held these beliefs. I was shocked. This happened across the country, we saw the real underbelly of the right wing, the veil was lifted.

Believe this or not, but I will share. I won't mention names, but through a friend of mine (very successful dentist) , I met a rather influential Republican politician, they are neighbors. One Saturday evening while I was visiting (staying there for a weekend), he walked over to my friends with a nice bottle of bourbon. Lets just say from talking to him, with his guard down, he's a racist, classist, and sexist piece of crap. I could not believe what I was hearing, well I could, but still shocking. Yet, in public he uses the coded language of the right wing, that they all use and push policies that do not help people.

Close to home, came along the most dangerous person in politics right now, Ron DeSantis, the governor of my home state. There is a solid chance he will be President one day and it is terrifying to be honest. That man is a right wing authoritarian, semi fascist, possibly full blown modern fascist, just has not shown all of his cards yet. DeSantis is Trump, but actually highly intelligent and competent, makes him dangerous. My home state was already a corrupt authoritarian leaning hellhole, he has just made it worse.

DeSantis started with the "Anti-Riot" law which is nothing but a cop serving(he is a huge bootlicker, a sign of a authoritarian/fascist) , authoritarian attack on free speech, especially against minorities. That law was passed using racial animus over violent protests across the nation. The law was not needed, already had laws on books. This was done so the tools were present to intimidate people from protesting, because basically if you are there on the scene and the cops called it a riot (which they always do) , and you get arrested (of course a high chance of conviction) and then convicted, there are pretty draconian consequences. Thankfully, the law
was ruled unconstitutional, but the fact he championed this and signed it into law, is not forgivable. To be fair, he stood up to the hysteria and nonsense about COVID, especially the injection mandate. Not even sure it was genuine though, believe it was just politics for him.

My final push to the center of the spectrum was the COVID pandemic, the recession that has followed, which has showed just how weak and vulnerable our nation actually is, how vulnerable our population is. I was fortunate, all it did was give me chance to work from home most of the time and then a lot of free time when I decided to take some time off. However, it really harmed a lot of people beyond being ill, just put people further behind in life. What was our governments response? A $300 tax credit, some extra SNAP money, and two checks for $1200 and one for $600? LOL just disgusting and pitiful. We do not have a strong safety net that a modern country should have. We pay a lot in taxes but essentially nothing in return. Just a massively inflated "defense" budget. Right Wing/Republicans always oppose measures to help the people, to have a real safety net, and reform. They use the buzzword "socialism", which scares a lot of the ignorant masses who do not have the knowledge and/or intelligence to distinguish.

Now, we have supreme court loaded with religious zealots with no reservation about implementing their religious views on the population. They have said that women are unequal and states can violate their body autonomy at their discretion. One of them (Thomas) even said they should reconsider other rights gained by substantive due process. A black man who is on that court thanks to substantive due process and allowed to marry a white woman, because of substantive due process. Cognitive dissonance much?

In summation, I had some experiences that opened my mind/eyes, caused me to reexamine some beliefs and principles. Sadly, America is a sinking ship and there is no saving her. I have friends who have left the country and are quite happy. I am in the process of deciding where I will go, hope to be out before next election. Tough one, as will miss family and friends. I am trying to convince my mother to leave as well, but 62 years old, grandchildren are here, doubt she will. Father, I would not even attempt lol. Thus, next chapter of my life will be lived as a expatriate.

Rockstar

06-26-22, 03:10 PM

Btw , SB 342 does not go into effect until August 1st

Bubblehead1980

06-26-22, 03:46 PM

The original court back in 73 even stated in their ruling that the right to abortion is not absolute and must be balanced against the government's interests in protecting women's health and prenatal life.

You said it yourself, you refused the shot mandate due to Federal government overreach, this decision at it's core is just the flip side of those mandates.

I'll be the first to say the 73 decision had its flaws. The terms compelling government interest is BS, always a excuse used to justify violating rights of the people. That was a flaw in the decision, body autonomy is absolute.
In the end, court held the right to abortion is protected under 14th amendment. Body autonomy is a privacy issue and privacy is a constitutional right. True, not enumerated but heavily implied and not far fetched. Really 3rd and 4th amendments are all about privacy, to prevent government intrusion. Not overreach to prevent states, which had shown and continue to show, they are willing to do so.

I fought for my own body autonomy and that of others, from the government and private entities trying to use that mandate as a shield and we won. Women deserve the same autonomy over their bodies, period.

Bubblehead1980

06-26-22, 04:58 PM

Buddahaid

06-26-22, 05:26 PM

Also, while we were distracted by abortion, the same authoritarian minded, intellectually dishonest justices undermined constitutional rights against self incrimination. They ruled you can not sue law enforcement for violating miranda rights. Alito authored the opinion and was so bold to state :

“a violation of Miranda does not necessarily constitute a violation of the Constitution.” What is wrong with this man? These people?

Just never ever talk to law enforcement, many innocent people have inadvertently talked themselves into prison.

Yep, just one more pile of dung added to the heap building a police state. The reading of your Miranda rights will become just another thing that gets "forgotten" all too frequently to trap people into self incrimination. You still have those rights so never talk to the police except to say you want a lawyer.

Dowly

06-26-22, 08:26 PM

Here ya go buddy

https://gov.louisiana.gov/assets/docs/2022session/CortezLtr20220618SigningStatementSB342.pdf
Thanks! Are we done with this side quest now?

ET2SN

06-26-22, 09:14 PM

Its a dumb argument.

Suppose SCOTUS decides to ban appendendectomies or cancer treatments?
We're mortal, eventually something is going to kill us. Why should we try to prevent that? Besides, it was probably our fault. :yep:

Just as another reminder, we're not perfect.
Suppose a woman who is pro-life has a miscarriage. How much time does she get in jail? It was probably her fault, so take that into account.

August

06-26-22, 10:16 PM

Its a dumb argument.

Suppose SCOTUS decides to ban appendendectomies or cancer treatments?

I don't get the connection. SCOTUS has not banned anything leastwise abortions.

nikimcbee

06-26-22, 10:59 PM

@ Bubblehead, thanks for the explanation.:Kaleun_Salute:

Catfish

06-27-22, 08:15 AM

@Bubblehead, thanks that was some worthwhile reading!

MaDef

06-27-22, 08:20 AM

I'll be the first to say the 73 decision had its flaws. The terms compelling government interest is BS, always a excuse used to justify violating rights of the people. That was a flaw in the decision, body autonomy is absolute.
In the end, court held the right to abortion is protected under 14th amendment. Body autonomy is a privacy issue and privacy is a constitutional right. True, not enumerated but heavily implied and not far fetched. Really 3rd and 4th amendments are all about privacy, to prevent government intrusion. Not overreach to prevent states, which had shown and continue to show, they are willing to do so.

I fought for my own body autonomy and that of others, from the government and private entities trying to use that mandate as a shield and we won. Women deserve the same autonomy over their bodies, period.so when exactly does the baby's rights kick in?

This all or nothing attitude from the "pro-choice" crowd is becoming tiresome. Tell you what, how about a compromise, I'll agree to unfettered access to abortions provided you agree to unfettered access to keep and bear arms.

MaDef

06-27-22, 08:31 AM

Also, while we were distracted by abortion, the same authoritarian minded, intellectually dishonest justices undermined constitutional rights against self incrimination. They ruled you can not sue law enforcement for violating miranda rights. Alito authored the opinion and was so bold to state :

“a violation of Miranda does not necessarily constitute a violation of the Constitution.” What is wrong with this man? These people?

Just never ever talk to law enforcement, many innocent people have inadvertently talked themselves into prison.
Does the phrase "ignorance of the law is no excuse" resonate? The same principle can be applied to your rights, do they even teach American civics in school anymore?

Buddahaid

06-27-22, 11:07 AM

Does the phrase "ignorance of the law is no excuse" resonate? The same principle can be applied to your rights, do they even teach American civics in school anymore?

Does ambitious lying detectives grilling a suspect ring any bells?

Rockstar

06-27-22, 02:58 PM

Thanks! Are we done with this side quest now?

What side quest the one where you were claiming death, lives ruined and destroyed end of the world stuff?

Or the one where you were claiming the Louisiana law protecting rape and incest victims was removed?

The link I posted from Louisiana State Legislature shows quite clearly no existing abortion laws have changed. If you look at the Effective Date of the bill that was recently signed anyone who took the time read it will note there is no effective date.

Normally in the State of Louisiana the effective date occurs no earlier than the 1st of August of the year the bill was signed.

I could be wrong but my crystal ball tells me the act will be fought in court and quickly amended or round filed before it actually becomes law.

Thanks for stopping by.

MaDef

06-27-22, 04:22 PM

Does ambitious lying detectives grilling a suspect ring any bells?
Frazier V. Cupp (1969)
I'll ask just one more time is American civics taught in school anymore?

Dowly

06-27-22, 08:43 PM

@Rockstar The Louisiana law took effect immediately.

Bubblehead1980

06-27-22, 08:54 PM

so when exactly does the baby's rights kick in?

This all or nothing attitude from the "pro-choice" crowd is becoming tiresome. Tell you what, how about a compromise, I'll agree to unfettered access to abortions provided you agree to unfettered access to keep and bear arms.

I am laughing a little, because are making a lot of assumptions because of my stance on a issue, that you really should not. Heads up, I am pro-second amendment and quite tired of the non-sense trying to take away firearms , lets not get sidetracked, no debate there.

This is not a partisan issue really, it is about the principle and right to body autonomy. Rights of the "baby" , "kick in" at viability outside the womb, which was 24 weeks, third trimester under Roer. That is reasonable, but its not enough for the religious zealots, intent on imposing their "moral" view on people.

Yes, it is a all or nothing when it comes to a individuals right to body autonomy, the right to govern their own reproduction. Quite hypocritical to claim to be for liberty and freedom, then to restrict half the population, or let the states decide if they want to restrict half the population's rights. Same principle we had to fight on the injection mandate last year, body autonomy, its one of the few black and white issues out there. So called pro-lifers almost fetishize the unborn and value a non viable fetus more than a living breathing human being already alive.

Rockstar

06-27-22, 09:01 PM

Then in the top line of the bill it would have clearly stated IMMEDIATELY or shown a DATE. But it didn’t it was left BLANK and under those circumstances a bill in Louisiana will NORMALLY go into effect no earlier than 1 August the same year it was signed (if it lasts that long).

Until such time it actually becomes LAW. This link which I posted earlier https://legis.la.gov/Legis/Law.aspx?d=965011 found on Lousianna’s State Legistlation official government website is still the current law of the State.

Looking at the news the courts already blocked the new bill from taking effect in later months.

IMO the State of Lousianna is heavily populated with pro life and loyal Catholics. I’m thinking the drafters of the bill (Republican and Democrat politicians alike) knew damn well it would never happen. But they still get to look good in front of voters as tuff on abortion while the courts tear the bill to shreds. It's just more political kabuki theatre and some people fell for it.

Bubblehead1980

06-27-22, 09:28 PM

Frazier V. Cupp (1969)
I'll ask just one more time is American civics taught in school anymore?

Ha, yes, it is taught law school and undergrad, along with subsequent case law, where I assure one gets it get a much more thorough and correct discussion than a high school civics class. Terrible decision btw, it has left a lot of innocent people in jail and prison, because they naively trusted/beieved law enforcement. Poor, uneducated, juveniles, and immigrants are at risk the most.

Recent case of Vega v. Tekoh was not about "reasonable" police deception with a suspect, it was about miranda rights, illegal interrogation, and ability to sue under Section 1983 when police conduct themselves in such a terrible manner.

With their holding, we now have a country where a individual who is denied Miranda warnings and whose compelled statements are introduced against them in a criminal trial, cannot sue the police officer who violated their rights. Denying those whos rights are violated the ability to seek justice under a key civil rights statute, the court has widened the gap between people’s ability to hold law enforcement accountable for violating their constitutional rights. Also, it it removes another deterrent to police misconduct, much like qualified immunity. A major root cause of the problems with law enforcement in the US is majority of cases law enforcement are rarely held accountable for misconduct, even murders. The government protects its soldiers in most cases. and they certainly get far too much leeway and benefit of the doubt.

From Justice Kagan's excellent dissent:

“Today, the Court strips individuals of the ability to seek a remedy for violations of the right recognized in Miranda. The majority observes that defendants may still seek ‘the suppression at trial of statements obtained’ in violation of Miranda’s procedures. But sometimes, such a statement will not be suppressed. And sometimes, as a result, a defendant will be wrongly convicted and spend years in prison. He may succeed, on appeal or in habeas, in getting the conviction reversed. But then, what remedy does he have for all the harm he has suffered? The point of § 1983 is to provide such redress—because a remedy ‘is a vital component of any scheme for vindicating cherished constitutional guarantees.’ The majority here, as elsewhere, injures the right by denying the remedy.”

Bubblehead1980

06-27-22, 09:59 PM

Does the phrase "ignorance of the law is no excuse" resonate? The same principle can be applied to your rights, do they even teach American civics in school anymore?

Ignorantia juris non excusat, is nonsense and not in line with reality in a country such as the USA. This is a country with a large population of uneducated, poor, immigrants, etc . Not everyone plays on the same level so to speak, which is a point of miranda, to advise people of their rights.

Protections that cops and government officials enjoy, such as qualified immunity and in the recent case, which as mentioned in previous post, prevents individuals from suing law enforcement for violating their miranda rights, are a problem for our society. I assure you if police would face real civi penalties for violating miranda etc, law enforcement culture and actions in this country would change fast.

How any citizen can agree with this, is staggering.

MaDef

06-27-22, 11:31 PM

I am laughing a little, because are making a lot of assumptions because of my stance on a issue, that you really should not. Heads up, I am pro-second amendment and quite tired of the non-sense trying to take away firearms , lets not get sidetracked, no debate there.I made no assumptions, you missed the point. Ask yourself what the right to bear arms and the right to abortion have in common, when you figure it out you will understand the point I was making.

This is not a partisan issue really, it is about the principle and right to body autonomy. Rights of the "baby" , "kick in" at viability outside the womb, which was 24 weeks, third trimester under Roer. That is reasonable, but its not enough for the religious zealots, intent on imposing their "moral" view on people. If you want true body autonomy (love these dumb terms you kids come up with), I suggest you learn to become a hermit. If the Rights of the baby only kicks in at 24 weeks, how do you reconcile the fact that they can become victims of homicide at any age of gestation as codified under title 18 of the U.S. code (unborn victims of violence act)? How exactly do you square that with your moral code.

Yes, it is a all or nothing when it comes to a individuals right to body autonomy, the right to govern their own reproduction. Quite hypocritical to claim to be for liberty and freedom, then to restrict half the population, or let the states decide if they want to restrict half the population's rights. Same principle we had to fight on the injection mandate last year, body autonomy, its one of the few black and white issues out there. So called pro-lifers almost fetishize the unborn and value a non viable fetus more than a living breathing human being already alive. Talk about zealousness.

MaDef

06-28-22, 12:03 AM

Ignorantia juris non excusat, is nonsense and not in line with reality in a country such as the USA. This is a country with a large population of uneducated, poor, immigrants, etc . Not everyone plays on the same level so to speak, which is a point of miranda, to advise people of their rights.

Protections that cops and government officials enjoy, such as qualified immunity and in the recent case, which as mentioned in previous post, prevents individuals from suing law enforcement for violating their miranda rights, are a problem for our society. I assure you if police would face real civi penalties for violating miranda etc, law enforcement culture and actions in this country would change fast.

How any citizen can agree with this, is staggering.

Well that answers the question of civics classes in school, they probably replaced it with equity inclusion workshops.

Bubblehead1980

06-28-22, 03:56 AM

I made no assumptions, you missed the point. Ask yourself what the right to bear arms and the right to abortion have in common, when you figure it out you will understand the point I was making.

If you want true body autonomy (love these dumb terms you kids come up with), I suggest you learn to become a hermit. If the Rights of the baby only kicks in at 24 weeks, how do you reconcile the fact that they can become victims of homicide at any age of gestation as codified under title 18 of the U.S. code (unborn victims of violence act)? How exactly do you square that with your moral code.

Talk about zealousness.

Ha, "dumb terms you kids come up" lol ohhhh man, that says a lot.

Well for one, you are talking about a statute regarding violence against/death of a fetus by 50+ federal criminal acts vs a medical procedure covered under Roe, which which specified age of viability at 24 weeks.

However, the statute was crafted to be and deemed acceptable in legal challenges as language of statute even "protects" abortion rights.

mapuc

06-28-22, 03:48 PM

Reading between the lines-Gives me the picture of a spoiled child.

Washington: Former US president Donald Trump tried to take the steering wheel from his Secret Service limousine driver in an attempt to join the crowd marching on the US Capitol last year, a top aide in his administration testified Tuesday.

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/donald-trump-tried-to-grab-steering-wheel-to-go-to-capitol-on-riot-day-top-aide-us-capitol-hill-riots-capitol-hill-attacks-3109708

Markus

August

06-28-22, 03:53 PM

A statute is a written law passed by a legislative body. Roe v Wade is not a statute and that was it's fatal weakness.

The Congress needs to stop abrogating it's responsibility to write the laws in this country. Whether it is handing off war powers to the Executive branch or relying on flawed court interpretations they just are all to eager to avoid doing their job to our detriment.

Roe should have been codified into law years ago. There were several opportunities to do so which would I believe have been successful. Maybe now they will be forced to act.

Rockstar

06-28-22, 04:12 PM

Reading between the lines-Gives me the picture of a spoiled child.

https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/donald-trump-tried-to-grab-steering-wheel-to-go-to-capitol-on-riot-day-top-aide-us-capitol-hill-riots-capitol-hill-attacks-3109708

Markus

… according to Cassidy Hutchinson, who said the story was relayed to her by another White House official.

So she wasn’t a witness to any of it but instead was relaying information she heard from a friend of a friend. I’m thinking the childish minds are the ones who believe stories like this.

Ever look at presidential limo? There is absolutely no way in hell anyone, even the president can make contact with the driver compartment let alone grab the wheel.

When does it end.

mapuc

06-28-22, 04:19 PM

So she wasn’t a witness to any of it but instead was relaying information she heard from a friend of a friend. I’m thinking the childish minds are the ones who believe stories like this.

Ever look at presidential limo? There is absolutely no way in hell anyone, even the president can make contact with the driver compartment let alone grab the wheel.

When does it end.

I guess you right-I should have been thinking of these thing before posting..but then I do not know how the Presidents limo looks like inside.

Is it false hearsay ?

Markus

Jeff-Groves

06-28-22, 04:20 PM

"who said the story was relayed to her by another White House official"

In a Court of law? Isin't that hearsay and inadmissable?

Judge Judy won't listen to testemony like that!

mapuc

06-28-22, 04:36 PM

Here is what the Danish newspaper Ekstra Bladet wrote:

Former US President Donald Trump became enraged and tried to grab the wheel of the White House limousine he was sitting in when he was told he would not be driven up to Congress when it was stormed on 6 January 2021.

So says a member of the ex-president's then-staff during a hearing on the deadly stampede.

- I'm the real president. Drive me up to the convention building now, Trump is reported to have said, according to Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony.

The 25-year-old Hutchinson was an aide to Trump's former chief of staff Mark Meadows.

She told the hearing about meetings with Mark Meadows in the days leading up to January 6 - including a specific meeting with Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani on January 2.

- A lot is really happening, Cass, but maybe it's going to get pretty bad on January 6, Meadows told me, the testimony from Hutchinson states.

- That night was the first time that I remember being scared and nervous about what was going to happen on January 6, she adds.

Hutchinson also says that Trump demanded to be taken to Congress after an event on January 6. She says the president himself tried to grab the wheel of the limo when he was told he would not be driven up there.

According to the former Meadows aide, Trump was also told that people gathering at a shopping mall early on January 6 were carrying guns, but the president told them to let them in anyway so they could march up to Congress.

- They haven't come to hurt me, Trump is reported to have said of the armed rebels.

- I don't give a damn if they have guns, Trump said, according to Cassidy Hutchinson.

The president said security officials could take the magazines out of the activists' weapons.

- Let my people in. They can march to Congress from here, the president said, according to Hutchinson.

It's unclear whether Hutchinson can add new evidence to the case. However, it was expected in advance that her testimony would shed new light on how the situation was around Trump both before and after the storm at Congress.

The hearings will include a focus on how the then-president, late in his term, pressured top Justice Department officials on a daily basis to help him illegally maintain power.

According to then-White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, Trump was so angered to hear his attorney general tell the AP news agency that there was no evidence of voter fraud that he threw his lunch plate against the wall, shattering the china and sending the ketchup running down the wall.

This also came out during the hearing.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

AND it was this I based my comment on -Not the English article I posted.
I didn't read the English article accurate, ´cause I thought it would say the same.

Markus

Buddahaid

06-28-22, 05:08 PM

"who said the story was relayed to her by another White House official"

In a Court of law? Isin't that hearsay and inadmissable?

Judge Judy won't listen to testemony like that!

It's not a trial.

Jeff-Groves

06-28-22, 05:28 PM

It's not a trial.

Ah. I forgot.
It's a lynching.
:har:

August

06-28-22, 08:33 PM

Secret Service agents willing to testify that Trump didn't lunge at steering wheel during Capitol riot: source

Two Secret Service agents are prepared to testify before Congress that then-President Trump did not lunge at a steering wheel or assault them in an attempt to go to the Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot, a source close to the Secret Service tells Fox News.

and

(Head of the presidential security detail Agent Bob) Engel and the limousine driver, an unnamed Secret Service agent, are prepared to testify before the Jan. 6 committee that the president didn't lunge at the steering wheel. The Jan. 6 committee and the Secret Service are in discussions about whether one or both men will appear on camera.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/secret-service-agents-testify-trump-lunge-steering-wheel-capitol-riot

Does this make Hutchinson a perjurer? I think it does. :hmmm:

Jeff-Groves

06-28-22, 09:02 PM

Does this make Hutchinson a perjurer? I think it does. :hmmm:

But it's not a trial so I guess it's left to what they decide the truth to be.

Kind of like the end of the Templers eh?

Rockstar

06-28-22, 09:06 PM

Does this make Hutchinson a perjurer? I think it does. :hmmm:

I read a CNN article that said she actually demonstrated how Trump grabbed the wheel. It makes her the leading lady in Blue Anon kubuki show.

“ According to Hutchinson”. :har::har::har:

Adam Schiff also says their is overwhelming evidence. Still waiting for the evidence from the last Blue Anon kubuki show I suppose the Committee is going after all the low hanging fruit first like they did last time. “any day now”. :har::har::har:

August

06-28-22, 09:10 PM

But it's not a trial so I guess it's left to what they decide the truth to be.

Yeah just ask the 50 or so Jan 6th protesters who have been languishing in jail in solitary confinement without trial let alone a conviction for a year and a half now.

This in a nation that claims to guarantee the right of it's citizens to a fair and speedy trial. :hmmm:

Jeff-Groves

06-28-22, 09:16 PM

This in a nation that claims to guarantee the right of it's citizens to a fair and speedy trial. :hmmm:

Where do you think PayPal got it's terms of usage from?

Buddahaid

06-28-22, 09:51 PM

Secret Service agents willing to testify that Trump didn't lunge at steering wheel during Capitol riot: source

and

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/secret-service-agents-testify-trump-lunge-steering-wheel-capitol-riot

Does this make Hutchinson a perjurer? I think it does. :hmmm:

She was relating what she was told about the steering wheel limo, not what she witnessed, so no.

August

06-28-22, 10:23 PM

She was relating what she was told about the steering wheel limo, not what she witnessed, so no.

The person she said told her that is Agent Engel and he is denying it happened so maybe yes.

MaDef

06-29-22, 07:59 AM

"who said the story was relayed to her by another White House official"

In a Court of law? Isin't that hearsay and inadmissable?

Judge Judy won't listen to testemony like that!

This isn't about the law, this is about public opinion & the 2024 Presidential election.

Rockstar

06-29-22, 08:05 AM

BOONDOGGLE

August

06-29-22, 08:08 AM

Ever look at presidential limo? There is absolutely no way in hell anyone, even the president can make contact with the driver compartment let alone grab the wheel.

A salient point being happily ignored. QFT.

Besides, it's not like it's a long journey. Trump could have just gotten out of the Limo and he would not have had far to walk.

mapuc

06-29-22, 08:40 AM

I'm still thinking on what Rockstar said to that Trump in no way could reach the steering wheel.

After this I made some search to see how this limo. looks like inside and I must say there's a space between the front-Where the driver sits and some other guy sit on the passanger seat.

I doubt that they would allow the President to sit there or in the space between the driver and the room where the President sit with his fellow passangers

Markus

August

06-29-22, 09:25 AM

Another J6 Trump 'Bombshell' Outed as a Hoax!

On Tuesday, the liberal media soiled themselves over the so-called bombshell story that on January 6, 2021, President Trump grabbed the steering wheel of the presidential limo and then lunged at a Secret Service agent because he wanted to join the protesters at the Capitol.

The story came courtesy of Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to Trump’s chief of staff, Mark Meadows.

“So when the president had gotten into the vehicle with Bobby, he thought that they were going up to the Capitol. And when Bobby had relayed to him, ‘We’re not, we don’t have the assets to do it, it’s not secure, we’re going back to the West Wing,’ the president had a very strong and very angry response to that. Tony described him as being irate. The president said to him something to the effect of, ‘I’m the f—ing president, take me up to the Capitol now.’ To which Bobby responded, ‘Sir, we have to go back to the West Wing.’ He then reached up front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, he said, ‘Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel. We’re going back to the West Wing, we’re not going to the Capitol.’ Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel.”

Any reasonable person would conclude this story was dubious. The liberal media, however, not so much. CNN gleefully described it as a bombshell, (https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/28/politics/trump-blindsided-january-6-hearing/index.html) yet, like so many other Trump bombshells, it appears this incident didn’t happen at all, and is yet another hoax to add to the pile of bogus anti-Trump stories.

According to Peter Alexander, the chief White House correspondent for NBC News, sources close to the Secret Service dispute the story.

“A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel,” Alexander tweeted Tuesday evening.
Trump’s former acting director of national intelligence, Richard Grenell, slammed the committee for allowing this testimony to not be challenged.
“So a junior staffer was pressured by @Liz_Cheney to lie under oath,” he tweeted. “Why wasn’t there a single committee member asking her if she had proof? This performance collapsed in an hour.”

Soon after Alexander revealed that his sources challenged the story, Hutchinson’s lawyer, Jody Hunt, quickly attempted to walk back her testimony.

“Ms. Hutchinson testified, under oath, and recounted what she was told,” Hunt tweeted. “Those with knowledge of the episode also should testify under oath.”

How many more bogus bombshells are we going to get from these hearings?

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/06/28/another-j6-trump-bombshell-outed-as-a-hoax-n1609052

Otto Harkaman

06-29-22, 09:30 AM

Just looking for headlines - doesn't matter if truth just sways opinion for that moment.

Still thinking of the poor Afghanistan family blasted by drone just to make a momentary headline so Biden could attempt to save face in our retreat.

Times Investigation: In U.S. Drone Strike, Evidence Suggests No ISIS Bomb
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/10/world/asia/us-air-strike-drone-kabul-afghanistan-isis.html

Deadly US drone strike in Kabul did not break law, Pentagon says
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59157089

Rockstar

06-29-22, 09:56 AM

More proof this committee was formed simply to prey upon the minds of the stupid a.k.a. Card carrying members of blue anon conspiracy theorists a.k.a democrat voters. Someone said this isn’t a trial. Well, they’re right it’s a sham, a boondoggle.

The Jan. 6 Committee Is Lying

Klukowski called out the Jan. 6 Committee’s fraud over the weekend in a public statement that began: “The January 6 Committee falsely accused me on Thursday of being a go-between in a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. That accusation is false both in its broad outlines and its details. Since the Committee first contacted me, I have cooperated without hesitation, provided it with hundreds of documents, and sat for many hours of recorded depositions. The information produced from those efforts fully contradicts the Committee’s statements regarding my actions, yet the Committee has chosen to keep such information to itself rather than share it with the public.”

The former DOJ lawyer then detailed in his public statement four false accusations levied against him by the Jan.6 Committee. First, Klukowski exposed Rep. Liz Cheney’s false portrayal of him as being sent by John Eastman to work under Clark. While Cheney fraudulently told the country that Klukowski “was specifically assigned to work under Jeff Clark,” Klukowski provided the committee documents establishing that his transfer to “the Civil Division of the DOJ was in the works since July 2020, long before Jeff Clark was the acting head of that Division.”

In an interview with The Federalist over the weekend, Klukowski stressed that during questioning by the Jan. 6 Committee—which exceeded more than 12 total hours—he made clear that he had been working on the transfer since mid-summer, hoping to move to the DOJ civil division to obtain more litigation experience, and that the transfer had been preliminarily approved in September 2020. Klukowski added that he also provided the committee detailed information that would allow them to confirm his testimony.

“I told the committee that I spoke with Camellia Delaplane, then a DOJ liaison to the White House who handled personnel placement, and provided the House Committee the date, September 10, 2020,” Klukowski told The Federalist. “I also suggested the committee review our email exchanges confirming my testimony, since they clearly had access to that information.”

Public Record Confirms Klukowski’s Account

Not only did Kloser confirm Klukowski’s account, as did the various documents accessible to the Jan. 6 Committee concerning the timing and purpose of the transfer, the public record confirms Klukowski sought litigation experience in the civil division. Specifically, in the brief 36 days that Klukowski served in the civil division—a fact Cheney presented as suspicious—Klukowski argued and won two federal appeals (completely unrelated to election issues) in the Ninth Circuit, including a complex and important case involving abstention.

Klukowski also denounced the committee for falsely suggesting he was working with Eastman to convince Vice President Mike Pence that Pence had the power to reject electors from various states based on “ongoing disputes” over the election. The committee spun that narrative by highlighting “an email recommending that Mr. Klukowski and Dr. Eastman brief Vice President Pence and his staff,” apparently on that theory.

However, as Klukowski detailed in his public statement, he “never briefed or advised Vice President Pence, or his staff, regarding any matter, including the 2020 election or the January 6 joint session of Congress,” and any “outside suggestion that [he] do so was not made with my involvement.” Klukowski went further, though, noting that “had anyone, including the Vice President, asked, I would have expressed my view that I disagreed with John Eastman’s theory on the powers of the Vice President at the January 6 joint session of Congress.”

During his weekend interview with The Federalist, Klukowski countered the Eastman theory, stating that “the opinion of Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas in Bush v. Gore explains what the Constitution has to say about how electors are appointed in presidential elections. Consistent with that opinion, my view has always been that December 14, 2020, was the deadline for appointing all such electors.”

In the statement Klukowski issued in response to the committee’s Thursday hearing, he stressed that he had told the committee those views in his “sworn testimony,” and had provided the committee “documents reflecting my expression of such views.”

A Mountain of Lies

Klukowski also took issue with the committee’s portrayal of him as an author of the letter, when in fact his role as Clark’s “subordinate was to commit his dictations and outline to writing and fill in legal citations at the direction of my then-boss over the course of a single day.” Klukowski said he had no knowledge that any of the statements included in the letter were false, nor that Rosen and Donoghue did not intend to sign the letter.

Nor was there anything in the content of the letter that suggested it represented part of a plan to execute Eastman’s theory to reject the electors. Again, Klukowski stressed that he “provided all of this information to the committee during [his] depositions.”

“I was concerned the committee might make cynical assumptions during its investigation of January 6,” Klukowski told The Federalist, “but, I was stunned that the committee would make claims about me for which it had a mountain of evidence establishing, for certain, those statements were false.”

Klukowski added that his deposition testimony—which easily ran in the hundreds of pages—would fully expose the committee’s presentation as fraudulent. Klukowski, however, told The Federalist that he does not have a copy of the transcript, which is why he called on the Jan. 6 Committee to release it to the public.

mapuc

06-29-22, 10:13 AM

Rockstar

06-29-22, 10:16 AM

I feel a bit ashamed

I believed what it was said in this Danish article and I shook my head thinking what a spoiled child he is.

And now the entire story seems very untrue-So ashamed I am :oops::oops:

Markus

Don’t be ashamed Markus. The ones who ought to be ashamed are the ones who still believe the nonsense regardless of facts.

mapuc

06-29-22, 10:53 AM

Don’t be Markus ashamed. The ones who ought to be ashamed are the ones who still believe the nonsense regardless of facts.

Here is how Trumps limousine look like as seen through x-ray

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4273134/Inside-Trump-s-new-car-dubbed-Beast.html

Markus

August

06-29-22, 10:58 AM

Here is how Trumps limousine look like as seen through x-ray

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4273134/Inside-Trump-s-new-car-dubbed-Beast.html

Markus

But it was "bombshell" testimony!

em2nought

06-29-22, 11:19 PM

But it was "bombshell" testimony!

The bombshell must be that Trump is one of the Fantastic Four in disguise. The one with that stretchy arm because that limo is long. :D

https://mlpnk72yciwc.i.optimole.com/cqhiHLc.WqA8~2eefa/w:600/h:1044/q:75/https://bleedingcool.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/ff-summer.jpg

August

06-30-22, 07:24 AM

In a nutshell...

https://i.imgur.com/nDa9dhz.jpg

Torvald Von Mansee

06-30-22, 09:12 PM

It'll be funny when fascism comes to the United States and "conservatives" start suffering, too.

But hey, you really stuck it to those liberals!!

Otto Harkaman

06-30-22, 10:47 PM

^ ?

What are these fascists going to do that is so terrible :huh:

em2nought

06-30-22, 10:54 PM

^ ?

What are these fascists going to do that is so terrible :huh:

They're going to try to make us into liberals. :har:

Buddahaid

07-01-22, 12:30 AM

^ ?

What are these fascists going to do that is so terrible :huh:

Make you work long hours for low wages without health insurance in company towns.

Otto Harkaman

07-01-22, 12:49 AM

Make you work long hours for low wages without health insurance in company towns.

Amazon is Fascist?

Rockstar

07-01-22, 11:03 AM

^ ?

What are these fascists going to do that is so terrible :huh:

Mandate experimental drug use on humans and deny medical care to those that refuse. Mandate lockdowns destroying small business. Push pills which cause suicidal, homicidal and violent thoughts then wonder why violence is so rampant. Piss away tax payer money on committees and kangaroo courts turning our judicial system into a three ring circus that preys upon the weak minded turning them into useful idiots

u crank

07-01-22, 07:42 PM

Mandate experimental drug use on humans and deny medical care to those that refuse. Mandate lockdowns destroying small business. Push pills which cause suicidal, homicidal and violent thoughts then wonder why violence is so rampant. Piss away tax payer money on committees and kangaroo courts turning our judicial system into a three ring circus that preys upon the weak minded turning them into useful idiots

“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”

― Eric Hoffer

Rockstar

07-01-22, 10:55 PM

Amazing how all the little Nazi facist moonbats turned on their neighbors. They’re nothing but a bunch of frighten little Nazi moonbat women on the rag, mindless sheep, cows and worms.

mapuc

07-02-22, 05:56 AM

And they stil believe it..

Yesterday I could see a Danish newspaper having posted an article on their FB page -Her testimony have sent shockwave through the society.

As an answer I posted the link-Which I also have posted here.

With the text-Now it's up to you to decide whether Trump can or can not reach the Steering Wheel-By looking at this picture of Trumps Presidential Limousine.

They still believe it-Those who couldn't stand his guts.

Markus

Buddahaid

07-02-22, 08:32 AM

Amazing how all the little Nazi facist moonbats turned on their neighbors. They’re nothing but a bunch of frighten little Nazi moonbat women on the rag, mindless sheep, cows and worms.

My, my. Resorting to all those right wing misogynistic cliches now and calling people Natzis.

Jeff-Groves

07-02-22, 11:28 AM

It will be OK.
https://www.youtube.com/clip/Ugkx293n7RQaAZF4_5LiLjX74cwSVtc0F-mc

Buddahaid

07-02-22, 12:26 PM

It will be OK.
https://www.youtube.com/clip/Ugkx293n7RQaAZF4_5LiLjX74cwSVtc0F-mc

Metropolis distopia. :haha:

Rockstar

07-02-22, 06:21 PM

My, my. Resorting to all those right wing misogynistic cliches now and calling people Natzis.

Naw, I picked up moonbat many years ago when I would frequent FARK. It used to be a lot of fun before it became an echo chamber. Now it’s just filled with angry moonbats :)

But ya got to admit there were many, even here, who called for anyone that refused to get vaccinated should then be denied medical care. Seem to me to be a bunch of frightened little fascist girls happy to endanger another’s life just to get their own way.

Gorpet

07-02-22, 09:28 PM

Naw, I picked up moonbat many years ago when I would frequent FARK. It used to be a lot of fun before it became an echo chamber. Now it’s just filled with angry moonbats :)

But ya got to admit there were many, even here, who called for anyone that refused to get vaccinated should then be denied medical care. Seem to me to be a bunch of frightened little fascist girls happy to endanger another’s life just to get their own way.

Well i haven't heard about Moon Bat's. In a long time and in my time they were the Moon Black Bats. They would keep your sisters and your wives from getting home to their children. It was called Jungle Fever and all the fascist girls are still here today. Oh i know that this will cause some peoples brain's to pop.To bad get over it's true and i'm not going answer.

August

07-02-22, 10:28 PM

My, my. Resorting to all those right wing misogynistic cliches now and calling people Natzis.

Weren't you just calling half the country a bunch of nazis just last week?

Gorpet

07-02-22, 10:49 PM

Weren't you just calling half the country a bunch of nazis just last week?

Well if you don't use pronouns to name your kids . Your a What Buddahaied and if any one here that doesn't change their name to an acceptable pronoun. They must be canceled well hell the future will be bright.And i just have to ask this is your country a part of Nato and is your country a part of the European Union ?

Gorpet

07-02-22, 11:37 PM

Metropolis distopia. :haha:

Metropolis, Yes every kinder gardener in north america must watch this movie.Because they can see a black an white film about how a hive works.Hell it's their future.
These young people believe in Politicians and where the hell is Greta ? The Ukraines and Russia are destroying large portions of Earth , These two countries with all there gun powder exhaust in the air and their bombs hitting the skin of Earth. Jet's, Cruises missiles , tanks , dead bodies stinkin the air and rotting the ground where the hell is Greta to tell the United States and Joe Biden who started this war Blah Blah Blah.Ya see she is in hiding cause she is a puppet. She doesn't believe in her cause. Greta could stop this damn war if only she could find the courage of her beliefs and confront Joe Biden and his World Order.

All the citizens of the Nato Alliance for the first time in their lives must suffer, Yes forget about the Chinese that loosed the walking dead upon the earth. It's Putin and the Russians, did the world forget that Joe and the American Democrats with their mouthy **** started this new war in Ukraine.

So will we as the citizens of Nato allow our Politicians to drag us into another war. We don't have leaders, What we have is Elite class of people who want to rule this planet. Yes i said that this planet. When was the last time you as a citizen voted on anything or anyone ? that is because they appoint people. And it's good if you are the apointete. Democracy in it's finest.And the new thing is when i get appointed f-- you caint get me out.I can drive drunk,I can now grope anybody i want, And depending on my position in the community i could make your life a living hell. I, yes I could control your local police force.I don't give a **** who that commander is .I was appointed you fools and i have watched Braveheart it is a hollywood movie. I was Appointed you asses that means others like me we believe in , Scientology is the way forward. We are Humans way above Joe Biden, Nancy and her lover Schumer and your Future rest in different hands. Our Hands

Buddahaid

07-03-22, 10:25 AM

Weren't you just calling half the country a bunch of nazis just last week?

Yes, and you crapped all over me about it so I just passed the favor along.

Rockstar

07-04-22, 03:47 PM

When a certain group of people turn on their neighbors demanding they be vaccinated with experimental drugs against their will then threatening them with total loss of health care if they refuse. I think associating them with Nazis and the Joseph Mengele school of medicine was IMO well deserved.

Catfish

07-04-22, 03:54 PM

u crank

07-04-22, 04:56 PM

i'd say fence them in and wait.

That sounds almost .... German.

:D

Rockstar

07-04-22, 06:32 PM

^ If someone catches the bubonic plague, infects others and some deniers will not let themselves be vaccined because FREEDOM or whatever, and rather let others and themselves die, i'd say fence them in and wait. It will regulate itself via Darwin. Freedom ends when you kill others.

The problem with your argument there is no vaccine for Bubonic Plague it’s currently treated with antibiotics. Also the transmission is not from human to human it’s between animal namely rat fleas and human

regardless of those facts I suppose I’d still get called a denier and fenced in :03:

There were many prominent and qualified people who questioned the last vaccine too. And instead of discussion, instead of people being able to rely on their own doctors advice. They got the party line and very unscientific medical advice of fanboy bandwagon opinions ignored and called deniers and threatened with denial of medical care if they didn’t follow the party line to get juiced up with the party approved experimental drugs.

Whether you got the vaccine or not that decision only affected you and no one else.

Catfish

07-05-22, 01:30 AM

Whether you got the vaccine or not that decision only affected you and no one else.
Wrong.
And this has nothing to do with any "party" line, but with reason.
If vaccinated you will infect less others or even none, which is what i am talking about. The less carriers there are, the less infections will take place, meaning the virus is not able to increase its numbers, lowering the overall viral pressure on the population.

A lot of diseases and viruses have been dealt with in a way that they mean no harm to humans anymore, often by mass vaccinations.
Viruses do not "die out" entirely, but with only few hosts to multiply (=low viral pressure) the risk of infection is almost nil.

If you still catch the virus after a vaccination, symptoms will be less grave or even non-existent, with the usual few exceptions. Side effects (that have never been swept under the carpet) usually indicate that the vaccine works.

Low probability of long-term side effects after coronavirus vaccination (https://www.fhi.no/en/news/2022/lav-sannsynlighet-for-langtidsbivirkninger-etter-koronavaksinasjon/)

No vaccine ever had or has has a 100 percent probability or guarantee of helping everyone of course. If your immunosystem has already problems from other causes, like Guillain-Barrée or MS or else it will be wise to ask a doctor first.

OT re bubonic plague
Regarding fleas and rats and humans they are probably related close enough :D
"In the U.S., there is currently no bubonic plague vaccine.
In other locations, a vaccine is available [only] to people who have a high exposure to the plague because of their jobs."
Probably not worth the production when there is no plague and it can be cured with antibiotics alone. If diagnosed early enough.
Do you oppose taking antibiotics, too, and why?

August

07-05-22, 08:03 AM

No vaccine ever had or has has a 100 percent probability or guarantee of helping everyone of course.

Except that those experimental covid vaccines don't really help much at all from what I can see. They don't stop transmission of the disease, they don't prevent sickness or death and in spite of active political suppression there is a growing body of medical evidence that their side effects have hurt or killed those they were supposedly meant to save.

On another note why do Germans always advocate rounding up innocent people and putting them into cages? :hmmm: Are Concentration Camps something that is built into your national psyche?

Catfish

07-05-22, 09:20 AM

Except that those experimental covid vaccines don't really help much at all from what I can see. They don't stop transmission of the disease, they don't prevent sickness or death [...]
Evidence says otherwise. "Experimental", well any new vaccine is "experimental". They mostly prevent from getting sick by the virus, and also from transferring. If you get infected you will mostly develop more harmless symptoms, if at all.
There are a few outliers being blown up by populist media, believe it if you want.

[...] and in spite of active political suppression there is a growing body of medical evidence that their side effects have hurt or killed those they were supposedly meant to save.
"politic suppression", "a growing body of medical evidence", really?"
I give a rat's anus for political opinions when it comes to science.
So you speak of evidence where? Plausible and fact-checked, please, and with a statistical impact of significance.
On another note why do Germans always advocate rounding up innocent people and putting them into cages? :hmmm: Are Concentration Camps something that is built into your national psyche?
Ah so the poor innocent people who deny science and get sick want to be free and spread the disease.
Godwin's law and the nazis again, sorry no. Ever heard of a word named quarantine?

August

07-05-22, 09:53 AM

Ah so the poor innocent people who deny science and get sick want to be free and spread the disease.
Godwin's law and the nazis again, sorry no. Ever heard of a word named quarantine?

It wasn't a mere quarantine you were advocating when you said "fence them in and wait" and I don't want to hear that crap about godwins law. You toss the nazi label around quite freely and your recommended final solution to those who reject your drugs is so much like the methods of your forefathers as to justify the comparison.

"Spritze Macht Frei" should be your logo.

u crank

07-05-22, 10:07 AM

. Ever heard of a word named quarantine?

The question that immediately arises is what else would you allow your government to "quarantine" your fellow citizens for? And who would get to decide who and why? One can easily see how that kind of power could be abused in the name of 'public safety'. Can you or anyone else guarantee that it won't happen?

Rockstar

07-05-22, 03:40 PM

Wrong.

Really. Are you telling me you still believe in the party line the vaccine will prevent you from getting infected? Vaccinated or not you can still get infected and still pass on the virus, ANY virus, to another human being. We have also found that healthy humans especially the young faired well against the COVID virus and acquired a natural immunity. But lock them up, fire them, deny them health care too until they get vaccinated was a based solely on a headline, a political narrative.

And this has nothing to do with any "party" line, but with reason.
If vaccinated you will infect less others or even none, which is what i am talking about. The less carriers there are, the less infections will take place, meaning the virus is not able to increase its numbers, lowering the overall viral pressure on the population.

A lot of diseases and viruses have been dealt with in a way that they mean no harm to humans anymore, often by mass vaccinations.
Viruses do not "die out" entirely, but with only few hosts to multiply (=low viral pressure) the risk of infection is almost nil.

You’ e been lead astray if you still think that. I said before I’ll say it again. This kind doesn’t ever die out they mutate too fast to keep up with. And COVID is no different it has mutated into a nothing burger just as those medical professionals who were called deniers said it would.

On other hand Polio and other like viruses which are pretty stable can be reduced by vaccine.

If you still catch the virus after a vaccination, symptoms will be less grave or even non-existent, with the usual few exceptions. Side effects (that have never been swept under the carpet) usually indicate that the vaccine works.. SEE ABOVE. Your decision to vaccinate or not too vaccinate especially against flu affect you and you alone.

When I got my first COVOD vaccine I had a severe reaction. The mandate Nazis told me it’s because I must have been infected before. Still I refused the second shot because it affected the entire left side of my body and heart health. Come to find out later it was most likely administered incorrectly and injected into my blood stream. Damn good thing I didn’t listen to the mandate Nazis.

No vaccine ever had or has has a 100 percent probability or guarantee of helping everyone of course. If your immunosystem has already problems from other causes, like Guillain-Barrée or MS or else it will be wise to ask a doctor first.

OT re bubonic plague
Regarding fleas and rats and humans they are probably related close enough :D
"In the U.S., there is currently no bubonic plague vaccine.
In other locations, a vaccine is available [only] to people who have a high exposure to the plague because of their jobs."
Probably not worth the production when there is no plague and it can be cured with antibiotics alone. If diagnosed early enough.
Do you oppose taking antibiotics, too, and why?

BUBONIC PLAGUE once understood was reigned in not by a vaccine but by preventative measures such as pest control and knowledge. It still happens but so rare people die mostly because it is mis-diagnosed or not thought of as a cause.

What bothers me is with all the information available from real honest goodness scientists, virologist and medical professionals. The only thing the usual suspects could think to do was to start rounding people up in camps, and punish them by denying them health care, and their livelihood if they don’t follow the fear. That’s not reason.

Rockstar

07-05-22, 10:18 PM

Democrats :roll: Honestly you couldn’t make this up if you tried :har:

https://twitter.com/GeorgeTakei/status/1533996491383181318

George Takei
@GeorgeTakei
Crazy thought, but those 20 million AR-15s now in this country could sure arm a lot of Ukrainians.
10:17 PM · Jun 6, 2022·Twitter for iPhone

Jun 6
Replying to
@GeorgeTakei
Nice to finally see you understand purpose of 2nd amendment defend from foreign invaders.

https://youtu.be/7i8lSIuafwg

Buddahaid

07-05-22, 11:20 PM

em2nought

07-06-22, 12:24 AM

Democrats :roll: Honestly you couldn’t make this up if you tried :har:

Jun 6
Replying to
@GeorgeTakei
Nice to finally see you understand purpose of 2nd amendment defend from foreign invaders.

https://youtu.be/7i8lSIuafwg

...or domestic enemies. :hmmm:

Rockstar

07-06-22, 12:34 AM

...or domestic enemies. :hmmm:

Riiiight :roll: that does seem to be the current narrative these days doesn’t it? Let’s create a national police force because, you know, boogie man.

Catfish

07-06-22, 01:56 AM

Really. Are you telling me you still believe in the party line the vaccine will prevent you from getting infected?
"Party line" again, nope. :doh:
You still can get infected but most will either show no symptoms or much less than the non-vaccinated. Also the interval of being able to infect others is reduced.
Vaccinated or not you can still get infected and still pass on the virus, ANY virus, to another human being.
GF'nDam no one denies this, but there are less people passing it on, so decreasing the viral pressure and its chances to multiply.

WTF has this to do with "politics". You can drink your hydroxychloroquine or whateverthisis and it will only affect you alright.
I am not aware that there is a law forcing you to get vaccinated?

This kind doesn’t ever die out they mutate too fast to keep up with. And COVID is no different it has mutated into a nothing burger just as those medical professionals who were called deniers said it would.
I wrote it does not "die out". It can mutate into a lot of new forms, harmless variants if lucky. The omicron variant alone has three new strains, numbers are going up again because of a general "relaxation", but it is not yet clear if those or all future mutating forms will be harmless.
On other hand Polio and other like viruses which are pretty stable can be reduced by vaccine.
Right. And?
When I got my first COVOD vaccine I had a severe reaction. The mandate Nazis told me it’s because I must have been infected before. Still I refused the second shot because it affected the entire left side of my body and heart health. Come to find out later it was most likely administered incorrectly and injected into my blood stream. Damn good thing I didn’t listen to the mandate Nazis.
So you blame incorrect appliance on the vaccine?
What bothers me is with all the information available from real honest goodness scientists, virologist and medical professionals. The only thing the usual suspects could think to do was to start rounding people up in camps, and punish them by denying them health care, and their livelihood if they don’t follow the fear. That’s not reason.
So a cruise ship's passengers and crew are infected with whatever. What do you propose?

Catfish

07-06-22, 02:03 AM

The question that immediately arises is what else would you allow your government to "quarantine" your fellow citizens for? And who would get to decide who and why? One can easily see how that kind of power could be abused in the name of 'public safety'. Can you or anyone else guarantee that it won't happen?
What else? Isn't it enough to propose some self-quarantining as long as the test is positive? Do you run around and meet friends when you have the flu?
Is there anyone who has seriously proposed to incarcerate infected people?
What about isolation of infectious cases in a clinic, isn't that reasonable?

em2nought

07-06-22, 02:24 AM

Riiiight :roll: that does seem to be the current narrative these days doesn’t it? Let’s create a national police force because, you know, boogie man.

The fellows wanting to create that post Jan 6th force are the domestic enemies I'm talking about. :03:

u crank

07-06-22, 07:42 AM

What else? Isn't it enough to propose some self-quarantining as long as the test is positive? Do you run around and meet friends when you have the flu?
Is there anyone who has seriously proposed to incarcerate infected people?
What about isolation of infectious cases in a clinic, isn't that reasonable?

Self-quarantine yes. I have self quarantined four times in the last two years. I've had Covid and I am triple vaxed. There is a difference between that and the punitive mask, vax and shutdown the economy rules that have been imposed. Again I'll ask the question .. how far would you let it go before you say that is enough? Here in Canada we have seen this government over reach and it is ugly. People who simply donated money to anti vax protesters had their bank accounts frozen. That same government imposed the Emergency Measures Act, some thing that is only supposed to be used in a time of war to shut down that protest. I don't know about you but I definitely think that is a line that should not have been crossed. Covid is a perfect opportunity for the authoritarian bent in some countries to rear it's ugly head. It's a brave new world.

MaDef

07-06-22, 07:59 AM

So a cruise ship's passengers and crew are infected with whatever. What do you propose? Immediate air strike using AGM-158C LRASM.:03:

Catfish

07-06-22, 08:42 AM

Immediate air strike using AGM-158C LRASM.:03:
:haha:
That sounds almost .... German American. :D
corrected :O:

Self-quarantine yes. [...] There is a difference between that and the punitive mask, vax and shutdown the economy rules that have been imposed.
Yes there definitely is a difference and i am against forcing people to do something, but i still think those three keywords mentioned make sense.
[...] Covid is a perfect opportunity for the authoritarian bent in some countries to rear it's ugly head. It's a brave new world.
Freezing bank accounts goes too far. But I doubt that Trudeau seriously wants to declare himself a dictator or something, it looks more like he overreacted to a situation that threatened to become overwhelming.
Remember what happened in Italy short after the outbreak.

u crank

07-06-22, 09:56 AM

Freezing bank accounts goes too far. But I doubt that Trudeau seriously wants to declare himself a dictator or something, it looks more like he overreacted to a situation that threatened to become overwhelming.

No because he is quite happy with the power that he already has. These protesters were definitely not his supporters. By using the Emergency Measures Act (formerly known as the War Measures Act) he treated these citizens as enemies of the state. I was never more ashamed to be a Canadian. Yea, a bit of an overreaction to put it mildly. I have no use for the little jerk.

Rockstar

07-06-22, 10:32 PM

Speaking of adverse reactions. Maybe this is what happens when people following the fear inject themselves with experimental drugs

https://youtu.be/7f45S6vmQgA

Rockstar

07-08-22, 08:04 PM

Otto Harkaman

07-09-22, 05:31 AM

Joe Biden sold nearly ONE MILLION oil barrels from emergency reserves to state-owned Chinese gas giant that Hunter's private equity firm had $1.7B stake in

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10997159/Biden-sold-Strategic-Petroleum-Reserve-Chinese-state-owned-firm-linked-Hunter-Biden.html

em2nought

07-09-22, 05:46 AM

Buddahaid

07-09-22, 11:01 AM

Rockstar

07-09-22, 01:24 PM

US refineries are running at 95% capacity making gas. This sale will lower oil prices and eventually pump prices.

The sales to Europe and China are done in part as an effort to stop rising prices. But it’s a temporary band-aid because it only works if we continue selling our strategic reserves. Strategic reserves are there for a reason, like umm, national emergencies. We could end up shooting ourselves in the foot. All because a certain political party sees no problem placing our national security in jeopardy so they can look good before mid-terms

Gulf Coast refineries are operating at 97.9 percent. Continually running at or near peak to meet demand isn’t healthy either. One accident and the price of oil will shoot right through the roof unlike anything you’ve ever seen before. And Europe and China will have our oil. Our problem doesn’t have jack to do with price gouging, oil companies are not re-investing in new refinery’s and rigs because government regulation gets in the way. That and what’s the point in investing in the future when you’re being run out of business by so called green energy.

Rockstar

07-09-22, 07:13 PM

What if we did as the Brits do, and expected our presidents to resign?

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/3549217-what-if-we-did-as-the-brits-do-and-expected-our-presidents-to-resign/

I’m not going to play coy here, so let’s get right to it: I have in mind our current president and the one who came right before him.
Republicans never had confidence in Joe Biden but now, if you believe the leaks to the press, even a lot of Democrats have had enough. It’s not sex scandals they’re concerned about, as it was finally in Johnson’s case; it’s Biden’s ability to lead the country, his competence and, yes, questions about his mental state.

Buddahaid

07-09-22, 09:15 PM

MaDef

07-09-22, 09:55 PM

if that happened it would be jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. Biden is bad enough. Putting Harris in charge is enough to give me nightmares.

Buddahaid

07-09-22, 10:07 PM

Sweet dreams.....
https://archive.org/details/78_goodnight-irene_gordon-jenkins-and-his-orchestra-and-the-weavers-hudie-ledbetter-al_gbia0182942b

Bubblehead1980

07-09-22, 10:47 PM

“END OF QUOTE / REPEAT THE LINE”.

wth :wah: This reminds me of The legend of Ron Burgundy :haha:

https://youtu.be/Ynxc4KHqAuQ

Edit: in case you didn’t know Ron Burgundy

https://youtu.be/X3zfP14pLxc

lmao you read my mind. The entire time I was waiting for "Go F*ck Yourself America" as Burgundy told San Diego.

Skybird

07-10-22, 05:20 PM

NZZ quotes Kamela Harris with having said on CBS that Biden plans for a second term.

I thought I did not read this right.

Rockstar

07-10-22, 05:34 PM

His desire to run again has been known for a awhile here. IMO he can if wants too but I don’t think anyone other than the most ardent fanboy would vote for him. Everyone knows our ‘appointed’ and ‘unelected president’ is Susan Rice. She’s setting foreign policy Biden is just used as a prop.

mapuc

07-10-22, 05:36 PM

Rockstar

07-10-22, 07:29 PM

Oh look a refinery explosion in Medford, OK. Watch the prices fizz.

http://www.okenergytoday.com/2022/07/medford-gas-plant-explosion-and-fire-forces-evacuations/

Otto Harkaman

07-10-22, 08:20 PM

August

07-10-22, 08:38 PM

Heard in the news that Steve Bannon, Donald Trump's former adviser, has apparently changed his mind and will now testify before Congress

Now everyone is expecting him to reveal some juicy stuff.

Markus

No, that's not what happened Markus. Trump wrote Bannon a rather nice letter encouraging him to testify and removing his claim of executive privilege. He didn't just change his mind.

The letter:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22082943-president-trump-letter-07092022pdf

Rockstar

07-11-22, 10:53 AM

Jobless claims edge up to highest since January; planned layoffs soar; trade deficit hits 2022 low

Layoffs destroy peoples lives and small business. But believe it or not it’s a great way to help stem inflation.

At least that’s what the elected democrat from California and inside traders Nancy and her husband Paul Pelosi who spent 4th of July on a beach in Italy think.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/07/jobless-claims-edge-up-to-highest-since-january-trade-deficit-hits-2022-low.html

Initial filings for unemployment benefits totaled 235,000 for the week ended July 2, a gain of 4,000 from the previous period.

The U.S. imbalance for goods and services declined to $85.5 billion, from $86.7 billion in April.

Another report indicated that companies announced 32,517 layoffs in June, a 57% jump from a month ago and the highest total since February 2021.

mapuc

07-11-22, 11:08 AM

No, that's not what happened Markus. Trump wrote Bannon a rather nice letter encouraging him to testify and removing his claim of executive privilege. He didn't just change his mind.

The letter:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22082943-president-trump-letter-07092022pdf

Nor in the studio or in the field where the news program reporter was sending from USA did they mentioned any letter(Can't remember hearing it).

I say thank you for having enlighten me. Now I know a bit more than my fellow Danes.

Edit
Made another search and found an another Danish newspaper mentioned it..BUT no mention of any letter. Now I wonder can it be true !?
End edit

Edit 2
I made an another search and found this (Did Trump send a letter to Steve Bannon)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/annakaplan/2022/07/11/trump-didnt-invoke-executive-privilege-for-steve-bannon-lawyer-told-fbi/?sh=4356dc3f3df2
End edit 2

Markus

Aktungbby

07-11-22, 11:15 AM

It's a brave new world. ...brave new dystopian world...:hmmm:

Otto Harkaman

07-11-22, 12:56 PM

Energy expert sounds alarm on Biden selling oil to China: 'Worthy of congressional investigation'

Daniel Turner says it's 'pretty remarkable' Biden chose the one Chinese firm with ties to Hunter to sell U.S. oil to

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/energy-expert-sounds-alarm-biden-selling-oil-china-worthy-congressional-investigation

Gas down twenty cents how long will this fantastic lowing of prices last?

Buddahaid

07-11-22, 01:31 PM

You really need to look beyond Fox sensationalism to foment outrage.
https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.32E34BY

Buddahaid

07-11-22, 01:33 PM

Unforeseen consequence of abortion banning.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62124366

Rockstar

07-11-22, 01:52 PM

You really need to look beyond Fox sensationalism to foment outrage.
https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.32E34BY

Claims that US oil reserve exports harm consumers are misleading. I don’t see anyone here or on social media arguing how it harms consumers and as you say “to foment rage”. Not even the fox business report Otto linked to argues that. Weirder yet after actually reading the link you posted even those French fact checkers don’t even argue over claims of the sale harming consumers.

I think we can all agree such a stunt may lower prices a bit. But that will only last as long as we have strategic oil reserves to sell. After that’s gone what’s the next gimmick Democrats will use to appease mid term voters? I always thought the whole idea behind strategic oil reserves is to prepare in the event of a national emergency. But when it’s sold for the purpose of political party gain to appease voters and the personal gain, nepotism, supporting the crackhead son of the current President. It places our own national security in jeopardy.

Rockstar

07-11-22, 02:00 PM

Unforeseen consequence of abortion banning.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62124366

That’s actually kinda funny.

August

07-13-22, 07:38 AM

An Open Letter Denouncing the Attacks on Justice Clarence Thomas

White progressives do not have the moral authority to excommunicate a black man from his race because they disagree with him.
And those – regardless of background – who join in the charade or remain silent are guilty of enabling this abuse.
We, the undersigned, condemn the barrage of racist, vicious, and ugly personal attacks that we are witnessing on Clarence Thomas – a sitting Supreme Court justice. Whether it is calling him a racist slur, an “Uncle Tom” or questioning his “blackness” over his jurisprudence, the disparagement of this man, of his faith and of his character, is abominable.
Regardless of where one stands on Justice Thomas’ personal or legal opinions, he is among the pantheon of black trailblazers throughout American history and is a model of integrity, scholarship, steadfastness, resilience, and commitment to the Constitution of the United States of America. For three decades Justice Thomas has served as a model for our children. He has long been honored and celebrated by black people in this country and his attackers do not speak for the majority of blacks.
He is entirely undeserving of the vitriol directed at him. Character assassination has become too convenient a tool for eviscerating those who dare dissent from the prevailing agenda, especially when it is a black man who is dissenting.
This is not about the content of the court’s decisions or Justice Thomas’ personal views; some of the undersigned agree with his judicial decisions and some do not. We speak out – as black people and Americans – to condemn these attacks and support Justice Thomas, because to remain silent would be to implicitly endorse these poisonous schemes as well as his destruction.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/07/13/an_open_letter_denouncing_the_attacks_on_justice_c larence_thomas_147879.html

ET2SN

07-13-22, 01:54 PM

Nothing to see here, move along, move along.. :haha:

NEW YORK (AP) — New York City residents are accustomed to warnings about all kinds of potential threats — severe weather, public health, mass shootings.

But a new PSA on surviving a nuclear attack has rattled some cages.

Released this week by the city’s emergency management agency, the 90-second video advises citizens to stay indoors and wash off any radioactive dust or ash. It opens on a computer-generated street, devoid of life. Damaged skyscrapers can be seen in the background.

Looking into the camera, a spokesperson says: “So there’s been a nuclear attack. Don’t ask me how or why. Just know that the big one has hit." :O:

Many New Yorkers were left asking, “Why now?”

Christina Farrell, the city's emergency management deputy commissioner, said the video isn’t tied to any specific threats. She said it's about raising awareness of something most people haven't given much thought.

“There’s no overarching reason why this is the time we sent this out,” Farrell told The Associated Press on Tuesday. “It’s just one tool in the toolbox to be prepared in the 21st century."

She said the agency's goal is to empower people regarding a scary subject, and despite the mixed reactions to the video, “people have thanked us that we are approaching this topic.”

“I don’t know if there’s ever the perfect moment to talk about nuclear preparedness,” she added, saying city officials have discussed implementing nuclear guidelines for quite some time. New York’s emergency response program, Ready New York, has been around since 2003.

Mayor Eric Adams has said he doesn't believe the video was alarmist, telling reporters Tuesday “I’m a big believer in better safe than sorry.”

:o

MaDef

07-14-22, 07:30 AM

Maybe they should bring back Bert the duck to help them sell it.:03:

Oubaas

07-14-22, 11:32 AM

"Better safe than sorry." That mayor is hilarious.

I'll pretty much guarantee him that he's going to be sorry regardless of anything if the world's power-drunk idiots start lobbing nukes at each other.

Your taxes paid for that PSA and pay the salaries of the people who did it, New York.

"Huh. That looks like a bit of radiation on my skin, probably from that swarm of one hundred megaton ICBMs that just hit the city. I'll just go inside and wash it off. Everything will be fine. Or I could just wait until that one hundred megaton Poseidon autonomous torpedo that's sitting underwater in New York harbor detonates. That should wash it off." :haha:

Rockstar

07-14-22, 02:30 PM

Anyone remember “The Atomic Cafe” (1982)? If you never, your time would be well spent watching this one. Good for more than just a few moments of shock, horror, and laughs. If you thought the New York PSA was silly you ain’t seen nothing yet. lol

https://youtu.be/lF0r1OdDIME

Catfish

07-14-22, 03:16 PM

^ was earlier, this was shown in german schools in the 197ies, and even in their teenage years pupils wondered what the hell producers of such rubbish were thinking :doh:
(the threat was existent, but methods to prevent radiation and fallout? Idiots.)

ET2SN

07-14-22, 03:26 PM

Or I could just wait until that one hundred megaton Poseidon autonomous torpedo that's sitting underwater in New York harbor detonates. That should wash it off." :haha:

The strange part about the Poseidon was that everyone concentrated on "Tsunami" when they really should have looked up "Base Surge". Otherwise, the Poseidon is a bit of a joke. :yep:

Buddahaid

07-15-22, 08:41 PM

"Lost, Not Stolen" report.
https://lostnotstolen.org//wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Lost-Not-Stolen-The-Conservative-Case-that-Trump-Lost-and-Biden-Won-the-2020-Presidential-Election-July-2022.pdf

Rockstar

07-15-22, 10:26 PM

On July 1st the Atlanta FED GDP Tracker pointed to negative growth which indicated we are ‘technically’ in a recession.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/01/atlanta-fed-gdp-tracker-shows-the-us-economy-is-likely-in-a-recession.html

the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow measure, which tracks economic data in real time and adjusts continuously, sees second-quarter output contracting by 2.1%. Coupled with the first-quarter’s decline of 1.6%, that would fit the technical definition of recession.

15 days later we got bookies taking bets on the odds of something that’s already happened. Ante up :har::har::har::har:

Odds of US Recession Within Next Year Near 50%, Survey Shows

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/odds-us-recession-within-next-113500717.html

em2nought

07-16-22, 12:36 AM

Thanks Brandon! :D

MaDef

07-16-22, 08:16 AM

On July 1st the Atlanta FED GDP Tracker pointed to negative growth which indicated we are ‘technically’ in a recession.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/01/atlanta-fed-gdp-tracker-shows-the-us-economy-is-likely-in-a-recession.html

15 days later we got bookies taking bets on the odds of something that’s already happened. Ante up :har::har::har::har:

Odds of US Recession Within Next Year Near 50%, Survey Shows

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/odds-us-recession-within-next-113500717.html

Anybody that didn't see a recession possibility with Gov. mandated shutdowns coupled with the corona-virus "relief" packages is an idiot.

Trump started the ball rolling with the first "relief" package, and Biden has done nothing but exacerbate the problem with his EO's and His "Green Policy" directives since he took office.

It is also my firm belief that had Trump remained in office, He would have addressed the rising inflation head-on and instead of 9% (and rising) inflation, it would be at a more manageable 3-5%.

Buddahaid

07-16-22, 09:34 AM

https://youtu.be/LhhoQbzupug

Kleptocracy.

Rockstar

07-16-22, 01:18 PM

Anybody that didn't see a recession possibility with Gov. mandated shutdowns coupled with the corona-virus "relief" packages is an idiot.

Trump started the ball rolling with the first "relief" package, and Biden has done nothing but exacerbate the problem with his EO's and His "Green Policy" directives since he took office.

It is also my firm belief that had Trump remained in office, He would have addressed the rising inflation head-on and instead of 9% (and rising) inflation, it would be at a more manageable 3-5%.

Trump? Brandon? Not likely since the problem child called FED reports to and is directly accountable to the Congress, not the President.

MaDef

07-16-22, 09:10 PM

You may want to rethink that statement.

Although an instrument of the US Government, the Federal Reserve System considers itself "an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or by anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the board of governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms

Rockstar

07-16-22, 09:33 PM

You may want to rethink that statement.

I have no need to rethink it, especially when I just cut pasted the statement directly from federal reserve.gov website. Though I also agree with what you said, but what you posted is only part of the story.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm

Skybird

07-17-22, 04:33 PM

The Tagesspiegel writes:

Biden's Middle East Journey:
The Meaningless States of America

U.S. President Joe Biden came to the Middle East as a supplicant and was treated as such. America's weakness is evident.

They were pithy words. "Let me be clear that the United States will remain an active, engaged partner in the Middle East," Joe Biden announced at the Gulf Cooperation Council summit in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The U.S. president coupled his message with a clear announcement: "We're not going to walk away and leave a vacuum to be filled by China, Russia or Iran."

That sounds like determination and a return to a region that the U.S. has paid little attention to. However, it is probably too late for that. The vacuum that the superpower has created in the Middle East with its turn to the Pacific region - it has long since been filled by its geostrategic rivals.

Both Moscow and Beijing are expanding their influence day by day. Weapons are supplied, gas and oil distributed, and anti-Western alliances forged. America remains merely an extra.

The basic tenor of Biden's trip is a stark reminder of Washington's dilemma: The U.S. president came as a supplicant. The actual destination of his tour was not Israel, but oil-rich Saudi Arabia.
The monarchy does not want to be lectured on human rights by America

The kingdom is in demand as an energy supplier, as a country that could provide the U.S. with a cheaper price for gasoline and thus Biden with a success by increasing production volumes. But the Gulf monarchy rebuffed the 79-year-old. There were vague declarations of intent, but no concrete commitments.

The Saudi heir to the throne shows how America's weakness can be turned into strength elsewhere. Until recently, Mohammed bin Salman was rightly pilloried as the man responsible for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Biden himself had called him a pariah.

While this is not forgotten, it is basically forgiven. Saudi Arabia is too important as a producer of black gold. The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine turned the desert state into a sought-after partner again in the blink of an eye. One that is very aware of its importance. On the subject of human rights, the crown prince coolly told his guest from Washington that "imposing values" would be counterproductive.

Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin and China's ruler Xi Jinping do not even ask such questions, which are annoying for bin Salman. This makes them both pleasant negotiating partners for the Saudi crown prince. Especially since the three gentlemen are united by their autocratic attitudes.

And Biden? Will quickly be a thing of the past in the Middle East. On Tuesday, Putin, someone who is really powerful in the region, will travel to Tehran. There, it will be a matter of weapons and alliances. For America, there will be no more than a place on the spectator bench.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

MaDef

07-18-22, 07:58 AM

I have no need to rethink it, especially when I just cut pasted the statement directly from federal reserve.gov website. Though I also agree with what you said, but what you posted is only part of the story.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm
As did you, however that isn't really the point, what is relevant, is that the President of the United States sets the tone for the economy. EO's, and policy have a direct impact on the economy.

August

07-18-22, 07:21 PM

More fun news:

Group offering bounties for Supreme Court justice sightings takes aim at Congressional Baseball Game

An activist group that offered cash to anyone who saw the conservative Supreme Court justices is now planning on crashing this year's Congressional Baseball Game. The group, ShutDownDC, went as far as to say the charity game, set for July 28 at Nationals Park, could get nixed if enough people show up. The group shared a link for people to sign up. The link sends users to another activist group's website, the Now or Never collective, which is organizing the protest due to Congress's inaction on climate change.
"The monsters tearing apart our country deserve no peace," ShutDownDC wrote on social media. "If 100s of us turn out to the Congressional Baseball Game this month and risk arrest, there's a real chance we could shut the whole thing down."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/activist-group-threatens-disrupt-congressional-baseball-game

This is the same annual Congressional softball game between the two political sides BTW that was targeted by that crazy Bernie Sanders activist who shot Steve Scalise and several others. How long before this happens again?

em2nought

07-18-22, 09:23 PM

If somebody on the right side tried that it would be deemed terrorism. :arrgh!:

Bubblehead1980

07-18-22, 09:40 PM

More fun news:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/activist-group-threatens-disrupt-congressional-baseball-game

This is the same annual Congressional softball game between the two political sides BTW that was targeted by that crazy Bernie Sanders activist who shot Steve Scalise and several others. How long before this happens again?

Sadly, it probably will. Which "side" it comes from, who knows.

August

07-19-22, 12:01 AM

Sadly, it probably will. Which "side" it comes from, who knows.

Political violence always comes from the left from what I have seen lately so it might not be as hard to figure it out.

Otto Harkaman

07-19-22, 09:44 AM

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/07/18/22/60417629-0-image-a-2_1658180242298.jpg

Bubblehead1980

07-19-22, 10:10 PM

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/07/19/abortion-capitol-police-arrest-17-congress-members-supreme-court/10100320002/

Do not care about their political affiliations, they are fighting the good fight. Non violent civil disobedience means that sometimes you take the ride.

Bubblehead1980

07-19-22, 10:18 PM

Political violence always comes from the left from what I have seen lately so it might not be as hard to figure it out.

Always? That is just not factual. Oklahoma City? Olympic Park? Abortion Clinic bombings and shootings? Pittsburgh , Poway (CA) Synogogue mass shootings? Halle, Germany , January 6th, etc.etc.

Neither "side" is free of radicals and violence.

Rockstar

07-19-22, 10:37 PM

Shouldn’t these protests be in front of each of the States Capitols though? Besides showmanship vying for media attention and boondoggles what’s the point of members of the U.S. Congress protesting in front of The Supreme Court of the United States?

Bubblehead1980

07-19-22, 10:39 PM

Shouldn’t these protests be in front of State Capitols though?

Both, actually.

Rockstar

07-20-22, 07:42 AM

I can understand people wanting to protest. But members of the U.S. Congress protesting in front of the U.S. Supreme Court? Shouldn’t we be investigating this as a coupe attempt or an act of open revolt against civil authority or a constituted government? :har: if anything ‘we the people’ should be protesting at the steps of BOTH state and federal legislators. Not the SCOTUS.

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions,” - Chuck Schumer

“We will not surrender our rights without a fight—a fight to victory!” - L. Lightfoot

“Seriously, shout out to whoever the hero was within the Supreme Court who said ‘f-ck it! Let’s burn this place down,'” - Ian Millhiser

“I know that there’s an outrage right now, I guess, about protests that have been peaceful to date, and we certainly do continue to encourage that, outside judges’ homes, and that’s the president’s position.” - Jen Psaki (To be clear, it is a criminal offense to picket or parade near a residence of a federal judge for the purpose of influencing the outcome of a judicial proceeding. It is not a defense that the behavior is nonviolent.)

August

07-20-22, 07:54 AM

mapuc

07-20-22, 07:59 AM

A friend who's a politician in the Danish Parliament wrote this on his wall

There are many indications that neither Trump nor Biden will run again.

It paves the way for Nikki Haley (Republican, former UN ambassador) and Gretchen Whitmer (Democrat, Michigan's governor). Good for the United States.
But also bad news for Iran if Nikki Haley wins the presidential election. Haley spoke strongly against a new agreement with Iran. In a speech in D.C. she warned against entering into a new agreement with Iran. I agree!

No deal is better than a bad deal. Iran has come a long way in enriching uranium. The black priests are only a few months away from being able to manufacture their first atomic bomb. A new nuclear deal will not cancel the nuclear race. On the contrary.

Haley said the next president would cancel an agreement if one comes.
"Just saying, sometimes it takes a woman."
Interesting little addition: She is running in 2024.
Have talked to several Democrats here. They are very confident Gretchen Withmer will line up. She is more popular than Vice President Kamala Harris.
It will be exciting and historic!

So what do you say is my friend Naser Khader right or is he wrong ?

Markus

Rockstar

07-20-22, 10:00 AM

Naw I think the current federal standard for revolting is that the guards have to open the doors and start shoeing them in.

Whoever controls the courts controls the state - Aristotle

Democrats attempting to intimidate the courts even POTUS calling for protests on the property of the judges is one way to do that I guess.

I don’t understand, it is our elected State representatives job, NOT the SCOTUS not even the POTUS or AOC. Yet here we are, another dog and pony show with members of the United States Congress willfully distracting everyone from those people whose job it is to lawfully legislate these changes.

Sure whatever the cause fight the good fight, nobody ever said it would be easy and there are no guarantees. But jesushkeerist at least have the mind to direct those efforts towards the right people, it’s why they’re there.

Catfish

07-20-22, 03:46 PM

Whoever controls the courts controls the state - Aristotle
This is "probably" (lol) the reason why Trump installed his yes-men and women, and look how well they act. Civil war next? :03:
Democrats attempting to intimidate the courts even POTUS calling for protests on the property of the judges is one way to do that I guess.
I do not quite understand what the bloody democrats have to do with it :D

Rockstar

07-20-22, 05:43 PM

This is "probably" (lol) the reason why Trump installed his yes-men and women, and look how well they act. Civil war next? :03:

I do not quite understand what the bloody democrats have to do with it :D

That’s because you apparently don’t quite understand how justices are appointed to the SCOTUS either. A president can only nominate a person. The final say lies with the Senate and guess what? No matter if they were Republican or Democrat they all voted yea and confirmed the nominations. Yet we have certain congressional democrats playing games at the steps of the Supreme Court for a few minutes of divisive airtime. Wouldn’t it be something if they could act like grown-ups for a change and suggest to people let their voice be heard at steps of the State legislators instead of acting like a bunch of little vindictive hypocrites “fomenting hate” in an attempt to control the court through intimidation telling people to break the law and trespass the private properties of the justices? :roll:

Gorpet

07-21-22, 03:28 AM

You can argue all you want.The USA is well on it's way to a One Party Rule.It is astounding that none of the American Politicians children are not having interracial relationships.Their children are not demanding in public they want to change their bodies and have augmentation by drugs or surgery to be Free. And break the chains of their parents but they can't.The children of the Politician will never be free.They will never experience the life of mere mortals.They can't they live a life in bondage, hidden away amongst the conclaves of their rich parents .Living in a world of Bubbles and Roman theology.

Maybe it's time to find these children and young adults and liberate them.Only if mere mortals will be willing to accept their Arrogance and the fact they think their Po Po doesn't smell.

Gorpet

07-21-22, 07:28 AM

This is "probably" (lol) the reason why Trump installed his yes-men and women, and look how well they act. Civil war next? :03:

I do not quite understand what the bloody democrats have to do with it :D

Your not an American.Tell ya what come over here and pick any state you want to live in.That the Democrats are in charge of, If you want to live and work in their city's well, your gonna get a progressive education. Now if you think you will live out in the suburbs and believe it will be safer well your gonna get the leveling up education.Now i don't care what your beliefs are but when you get a beat down in Democrat Utopia USA. You better have a lot of physical injury insurance and family who will take care of you if you live. For the rest of your life. It's the Democrats who want to defund the very people who are willing to put on a civilian police uniform because they in their hearts and mind believe they will do some good. You see they believe!

mapuc

07-21-22, 07:45 AM

^ Is it USA we are talking about or former Soviet ?

Markus

Gorpet

07-21-22, 08:01 AM

^ Is it USA we are talking about or former Soviet ?

Markus

At some point in the future the Party in charge will have to kill both sides to bring stability back to what's left and assume total control.It's the past repeating itself. Just a new set of names to add to a data chip .

u crank

07-21-22, 02:16 PM

For the first time since winning the White House the RCP approve/disapprove average has hit 20.

Joe is in trouble and his popularity will not help Dems in November.

President Biden Job Approval

Approve36.8
Disapprove57.5

Disapprove +20.7

https://www.realclearpolitics.com

em2nought

07-21-22, 09:33 PM

So is Sleepy Joe gonna declare a climate emergency ala the dictator up north and his War Powers Act used against truckers? :hmmm:

August

07-22-22, 08:34 AM

Somebody just tried to shank a Congressman but because he was a Republican the perp was released from jail within hours on personal recognizance.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/alleged-lee-zeldin-attempted-attacker-charged-felony-immediately-released-just-congressman-predicted

Buddahaid

07-22-22, 08:48 AM

I drunk Iraq war vet who walked across the stage unmolested. Strange and not very determined.

Dowly

07-22-22, 09:12 AM

I drunk Iraq war vet who walked across the stage unmolested. Strange and not very determined.
Yup. Naturally, FOX doesn't show the close-up video that has the guy going for the microphone, not Zeldin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpSUTTDwNUQ

But you know, can't let a good chance for some fake outrage slip by!

August

07-22-22, 09:27 AM

Yup. Naturally, FOX doesn't show the close-up video that has the guy going for the microphone, not Zeldin.But you know, can't let a good chance for some fake outrage slip by!

Yeah because stabbing a microphone is a real big thing over here. :roll:

Dowly

07-22-22, 09:32 AM

He makes zero effort at stabbing Zeldin, this is clear from the video I posted. You can choose to believe what you want.

Rockstar

07-22-22, 09:56 AM

He makes zero effort at stabbing Zeldin, this is clear from the video I posted. You can choose to believe what you want.

As to why he was released, I don’t know. But what IS clear in the video is the person most certainly had a deadly weapon in his right hand and even balled his fist as if preparing to thrust it. He fulfilled the criteria for the use of deadly force to be used against him. He had the ability, he had the opportunity, and he placed the victim in jeopardy. Any reasonable person would be lead to believe the representatives life was in danger.

Only complete dumbass would say he just wanted to talk on the microphone. And he sure as hell didn’t walk up there to shake hands with the candidate as that’s pretty hard to do when you’re holding a knife in your hand.

Buddahaid

07-22-22, 10:05 AM

Calling people names now Rockstar?

Dowly

07-22-22, 10:05 AM

Rockstar

07-22-22, 10:09 AM

Calling people names now Rockstar?

If the shoe fits wear it.

Dowly

07-22-22, 10:12 AM

If the shoe fits wear it.You must have quite a collection of perfectly fitting shoes. :D

Buddahaid

07-22-22, 10:14 AM

If you break forum rules get brigged.

Rockstar

07-22-22, 10:24 AM

I'm not arguing against him having a weapon, but whether his intent was to actually attack Zeldin. As you say, he had the ability and the opportunity to do so, yet he didn't use them. Like Buddahaid said, he was drunk. Maybe he had the bright idea to try to "look tough" by brandishing his weapon while confronting Zeldin?

The guy had ample opportunity to cause harm, but didn't. Even when Zeldin grabbed his right arm, his left hand was still free yet he did nothing but stood there mouthing off.

So everyone’s reaction of scrambling, grabbing limbs attempting to defend themselves and the candidate against someone assaulting them with a deadly weapon was unwarranted because the guy with the knife didn’t use it ‘yet’?

When someone approaches uninvited with knife in hand coupled with verbal threats. No reasonable person is going wait around for them to use it. A reasonable person will perceive that as a real threat to cause serious bodily injury or death. At least that’s what my training taught me.

What that guy did is not justifiable, nor is it normal acceptable behavior.

mapuc

07-22-22, 10:29 AM

This reminds me of the criminal laws in Sweden. a part called uppsåt=premeditation. Was it the guys premeditation to inflict harm to this other guy ?

Markus

Rockstar

07-22-22, 10:39 AM

This reminds me of the criminal laws in Sweden. a part called uppsåt=premeditation. Was it the guys premeditation to inflict harm to this other guy ?

Markus

Premeditation over here I think is more about how long someone may have been thinking about or planning a particular crime. But David Jakubonis was reportedly intoxicated when he drew his knife and approached Zeldin. He most likely was caught up in the moment, drinking liquid courage will do that to a person. Up until yesterday, he probably carried that knife in good faith for years. Regardless, what he did was absolutely with a doubt in every way imaginable an immoral and unlawful act. If it wasn’t for the proximity of innocent people he could have been shot and any reasonable person would have seen it as justified because he met the criteria for the use of deadly force. Good call by police and security for not escalating the situation.

As for his release, being he is an Iraq war veteran he might have some psychological issues which need to be addressed in a more professional setting. Holed up in a jail cell might not be the best thing for him. But I don’t really know.

There I said my peace and not once did I mention a political party or a media outlet. :hmph: :)

Rockstar

07-22-22, 10:45 AM

You must have quite a collection of perfectly fitting shoes. :D

Oh the list of how many times I’ve worn perfectly fitted shoes is a long and distinguished one I tellya. :yep:

u crank

07-22-22, 12:48 PM

Did they take this guy away in real handcuffs or the new invisible ones?

:D:D:D

mapuc

07-22-22, 02:29 PM

And now to something else

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.07.15.22277693v1

Markus

MaDef

07-22-22, 04:43 PM

Among all respondents, 18.5% thought it at least somewhat likely that within the next few years, in a situation where they believed political violence was justified, “I will be armed with a gun”; LMAO. I go armed everywhere (and has nothing to do with politics). these idiots are way behind the curve.

August

07-22-22, 05:41 PM

As to why he was released, I don’t know. But what IS clear in the video is the person most certainly had a deadly weapon in his right hand and even balled his fist as if preparing to thrust it. He fulfilled the criteria for the use of deadly force to be used against him. He had the ability, he had the opportunity, and he placed the victim in jeopardy. Any reasonable person would be lead to believe the representatives life was in danger.

Only complete dumbass would say he just wanted to talk on the microphone. And he sure as hell didn’t walk up there to shake hands with the candidate as that’s pretty hard to do when you’re holding a knife in your hand.

They showed the weapon on the news tonight. It was some kind of twin bladed slashing weapon, not something designed for stabbing. It had two double edged blades about and inch or two apart and maybe an inch or two long each and was configured with finger holes that would have made it difficult to knock out of a hand. Someone could do some damage with it, maybe kill if it got at an artery.

Of course had a Democrat been attacked i'm sure that the same people trying to minimize this incident here would have been claiming it was nothing short of an insurrection.

Buddahaid

07-22-22, 05:50 PM

Rockstar

07-22-22, 06:57 PM

They showed the weapon on the news tonight. It was some kind of twin bladed slashing weapon, not something designed for stabbing. It had two double edged blades about and inch or two apart and maybe an inch or two long each and was configured with finger holes that would have made it difficult to knock out of a hand. Someone could do some damage with it, maybe kill if it got at an artery.

Of course had a Democrat been attacked i'm sure that the same people trying to minimize this incident here would have been claiming it was nothing short of an insurrection.

I agree stab or slash it could have been used to cause serious bodily injury even death. Just as those at the scene and the State of New York did, I considered it an assault with a deadly/dangerous weapon too. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand why he was charged with 2nd degree assault.

Reading some media reports it appears he’s got some serious life and mental health issues which needs to be worked out, pronto. However, unless wonder bread is found insane his ‘issues’ are in no way an excuse for assaulting a political candidate with a dangerous weapon. It is wrong on so many levels.

Though he may have been Released on Own Recognizance. I’d wager big money he’s going to be watched and hopefully the court orders some kind of therapy along with his jail time if found guilty. According some reports of his former neighbors thoughts he’s a “heavy drinker” and “a peculiar guy, he has social issues,” the ex-neighbor said. “He would say or do things like an adolescent would do.” “I always had this reservation about him,” the neighbor said. “He always had something not right with him.”

As to your last comment. Unfortunately I can’t help but think that would be the case. Already they’re going full on Baghdad Bob telling us he just wanted to talk in the microphone or the weapon was only a kid’s hello kitty key chain. :D

Me thinks this is what he has been charged with.

New York Penal Law
Sec. 120.05
Assault in the Second Degree

Assault in the second degree. A person is guilty of assault in the second degree when:
1. With intent to cause serious physical injury to another person, he causes such injury to such person or to a third person; or
2. With intent to cause physical injury to another person, he causes such injury to such person or to a third person by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument…

As for his release:If you have been charged with a crime, you may be concerned about whether you will be able to pay bond to get out of jail. People in this situation may be able to obtain a release on their own recognizance, which means that they can get bail without paying bond. A defendant will need to sign a written promise to show up at their scheduled court appearance. They still must be deemed eligible for bail by the judge, and they may need to meet specific requirements to stay out of jail. These may include refraining from certain activities or meeting with a probation officer. If you fail to comply with the requirements, you will be subject to arrest even though you were released without bond.

Buddahaid

07-23-22, 12:27 AM

Thanks for the info. For him to be released means he is deemed not to be an imminent threat to society, and I still want to know where he stands.

Skybird

07-23-22, 06:40 AM

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung comments:

"We have a lot more evidence to show the American people," Republican Liz Cheney declared at the end of Thursday's prime-time televised hearing. In classic Hollywood fashion, she was already stirring up interest for the sequel in September, when the committee investigating the storming of the Capitol a year and a half ago plans to resume public hearings.

That's no accident: lawmakers hired a documentary filmmaker and former TV executive as a consultant to prepare their investigative findings for television audiences. His signature is unmistakable. The first "season," with eight hearings, was as exciting as a thriller, offering drama, catchy dialogue and unexpected stars.

It evoked images that many will not soon forget: a raging Donald Trump hurling his food at the wall in the White House, drunken adviser Rudy Giuliani talking up the president's rash victory speech on election night, the bodyguards of the ever-so-loyal vice president saying goodbye to their loved ones in fear of their lives in the face of an angry mob.

All this is best entertainment - if it were not grim reality. But is it more than an entertaining reappraisal of a traumatic event for the USA? Undoubtedly. The committee has worked out in detail that the former president must have been aware of his electoral defeat and still wanted to take every conceivable path to remain in power. Because none led to the goal, the only option was an escalation on January 6, 2021. Trump knew about his supporters' propensity for violence and fueled it. He watched the attack on the Congress building with satisfaction. Trump's closest allies pleaded with him for hours until he called on the chaos to leave.

The storming of the Capitol was not a protest rally that got out of hand, but the last attempt in a desperate plan. Whether Trump wanted to see it implemented this way or was never able to fully appreciate the implications is an open question. This is essential for any criminal proceedings, and it presents the Justice Department with an extremely delicate decision. Politically, however, the matter is clear: Both cases disqualify Trump for the presidency.

Initial polls now show that this view is gaining support among Republicans as well. Trump's ratings have begun to crumble in recent weeks, with half of party supporters wanting a different candidate for the 2024 election. At the same time, approval is growing for his current most promising opponent, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. Experts attribute this to the hearings, even though Republicans follow them much less than Democrats.

Trump is well aware of this sentiment. He is therefore considering presenting the party with a fait accompli and announcing his new candidacy in the coming weeks, even before the November congressional elections.

That would be a highly unusual move - and a dangerous one for Republicans. The party has the best chance of a landslide victory in the fall. Sentiment is abysmal in the face of high inflation, the economic fallout from the pandemic and the war in Ukraine. Three quarters of the population think the country is moving in the wrong direction, more than at any time in almost a decade.

This also has to do with President Joe Biden, who lacks leadership in domestic politics and appears incapable of acting in the face of a razor-thin Democratic majority. His approval ratings have therefore fallen to a record low.

Republicans are gleefully exploiting this and could rely on the fact that for a majority of the population the price of gasoline is more important than lies about an election soon to be held two years ago. That is, unless Trump moves back to center stage. The former president divides conservatives and unites their opponents, so he is as much a liability to his party as Biden is to Democrats. He alone can screw up a Republican electoral triumph in the fall.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (http://www.DeepL.com/Translator) (free version)

With greetings from Philip K. Dick.

Rockstar

07-23-22, 07:15 AM

Thanks for the info. For him to be released means he is deemed not to be an imminent threat to society, and I still want to know where he stands.

The judicial system is not filled with fortune tellers who can peer into the soul of defendants and deem them to be this or that. That’s not their job or how the courts work, in fact the recent actions of Mr. David Jakubonis demonstrated quite clearly he can be a threat to society, especially after tipping back a few icy cold ones. It appears the rules for obtaining an ROR in New York have just gotten easier is all, and judges SHALL follow those rules. Back in the day a judge may very well have set bail and if it couldn’t be paid, the accused could’ve been kept in custody to ensure they met their court date.

As the lawyer office of Jeremy Saland puts it.

https://www.new-york-lawyers.org/bail-in-new-york-state-qualified-and-non-qualified-offenses.html

While it may be somewhat of a shock to judges, prosecutors and criminal defense lawyers alike, bail in New York is a shell of its former self. Now, depending on the crimes charged, bail may no longer even be a consideration at your arraignment. As such, the vast majority of defendants will be released on the own recognizance, aka, ROR’d, or without monetary conditions. For those matters where the accusation involves a Qualified Offense allowing for a custodial securing order at your arraignment, the court must nonetheless consider the least restrictive measure to ensure your return.

Now, as for where he stands. I’d imagine that’s going to be dependent on how good his lawyer is. From what I’ve read depending on the circumstances he could get 2 to 5 years. IF he shows up for his court date. ;). If he’s found guilty, I think if it’s his first offense, consider his veteran status and mental health issues they might be more inclined to place him on probation and order therapy. However I’d rather see they make an example by awarding the maximum penalty and well publicized to send the message, this kind of crap will not be tolerated.

em2nought

07-23-22, 02:46 PM

For him to be released means he is deemed not to be an imminent threat to society

Like those fentanyl traffickers released without bail. :har:

Skybird

07-27-22, 06:36 AM

Why US inner poltics matter so much for Europe: the NZZ writes:

The greatest danger is that the U.S. will withdraw from Europe, either because it is following a national populist pseudo-isolationism or because it is turning its attention to developments in the Pacific region.

The first danger for Europe results from the fact that Trumpian national populism continues to be the political guideline of the Republican Party. It has not succeeded in breaking free from Trump's grip because his base continues to stand by him unwaveringly. That's the 36 percent who think he actually won the election. At the same time, President Biden failed to unite American society after the political trench warfare of the last twenty years.

It is still deeply divided. Even coming to terms with the storming of the Capitol, when many thought all Americans condemned it, divides society. In Washington, an investigative committee, which includes Democrats and two dissident Republicans, is working through what happened. And although there is now umpteen evidence that Trump thought the storming of the Capitol was right, even wanted to go there himself, and stopped all measures to directly confront the violence, 36 percent of U.S. citizens continue to think he is innocent. That's a solid enough political base to campaign for president again.

Trump as president would be nightmare scenario for Europe

It is therefore not unlikely that Donald Trump will run again as a presidential candidate. Nor is it impossible that he would be elected again. And that is a real nightmare scenario for the EU states. Because they are not in a position to defend themselves for the foreseeable future, they are therefore incapable of deterring military threats from Russia and, if the U.S. withdrew from Europe, they would immediately be open to political blackmail. Therefore, developments in U.S. domestic policy are currently of significance for the European security order that cannot be overestimated.

Things do not look good for the current president. His poll numbers are at an all-time low. The New York Times currently measures 33 percent, Reuters 36 percent approval. But even the 41 percent approval Gallup measures does not bode well for the upcoming congressional elections in November. Even within the Democratic Party, Biden is unpopular, with 64 percent of Democratic voters not wanting him to run for re-election as president. They cite his age and overall political performance as the main reasons.

In the Washington Post, Steven L. Isenberg urged Biden to save the midterm elections by promising to be a one-term president. But part of the whole picture is this: no one in the party is more popular than Biden; Kamala Harris is not yet pushing herself as a candidate.

Trump and Biden tied

Three-quarters of all U.S. citizens think the country is moving in the wrong direction right now. The reason for this is that the economic situation is judged worse and worse, as PEW has determined. Only 20 percent of Democratic voters now see it as good, compared with just 5 percent of Republicans. At the top of the list of problems, are rising prices for daily necessities, gasoline and rents. Three-quarters of Americans are very concerned about rising prices.

Donald Trump's approval ratings are holding at about the same level as Biden's. With these poor scores, the two representatives of their parties are the frontrunners, as all other politicians come off even worse, trailing them by an average of ten to fifteen percent, as calculated by RCP. This is consistent with the approval ratings measured for political institutions by Gallup. While these went down for all institutions, including the church, military and media, they are shockingly low for political institutions.

No trust in government

Just 2 percent of Americans have very high trust in Congress, with over half answering "very little" or "no trust" to the question. Things look a little better when it comes to the presidency. A great deal of trust is placed in 10 percent, and more than half have at least a little trust. Only 11 percent of U.S. citizens have really great confidence in the Supreme Court, which is a direct result of the increasingly sharp politicization of the Supreme Court. In short, Joe Biden's diagnosis was correct. American democracy needs to prove, first, that it can solve problems, and second, to try to overcome political polarization. However, it is failing to do just that. He is credited with the high inflation under which millions of U.S. citizens groan. The national populist Donald Trump can exploit such conditions. He has already proven that once.

If he were to declare NATO obsolete once again or deviate from Biden's committed-defensive line, the alliance would be in trouble. For it is capable of acting only through the U.S.; all others are currently talking at its expense without being able to act autonomously. It is therefore in Europe's interest that no national populist becomes president in the United States. And neither is anyone, to address the second danger, who thinks the U.S. cannot sustain two conflicts at the same time. For then turning toward China would be tantamount to turning away from Europe. The debate currently underway in the U.S. about a realistic China policy - including the status of Taiwan, which Speaker Pelosi plans to visit soon against the urgent wishes of the White House - would be one approach to such a reorientation.

Transatlantic relations must be fostered

In view of these possible developments, the EU states are urgently called upon to make the shaping of transatlantic relations their most important foreign policy task. This has been criminally neglected in Germany for twenty-three years. That the Russian government does not take European governments seriously has been obvious for a long time, even if some people tell themselves otherwise.

Self-deception is normal in governments parallel to the degree of vanity. But the fact that the U.S. government also has to consider whom it takes seriously in Europe is dangerous, especially because the major EU states have long since ceased to be among those that can exert influence. Changing that is the most urgent foreign policy task for anyone who has understood how the European order of states has changed. Obviously, the circle in Germany is very manageable.

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

The crux in a nutshell: the Europeans desperately need the US. But the US do not necessarily need Europe. That defines not equal partnership or friendship. That defines dependency.

MaDef

07-27-22, 08:00 AM

NATO has 30 member countries. If it can't survive 1 member leaving (for whatever reason), then it's really not much of a treaty.

Skybird

07-27-22, 03:51 PM

NATO has 30 member countries. If it can't survive 1 member leaving (for whatever reason), then it's really not much of a treaty.
I forgot. How small was the American share of the combat power of NATO as a whole again?

:03:

Before the US leaves, i would prefer the leave of lets say - Albania. Or Iceland.

You get what I mean, I'm sure.

Catfish

07-27-22, 04:24 PM

Rather Albania than Turkey, look at the maps :shucks:

August

07-27-22, 07:25 PM

I think Trumps problem with some NATO member nations was how they refuse to pay their full share of the alliance costs while they cozy up the very Russians that the alliance is supposed to protect them against.

As one who spent three years of his life protecting German soil from those Russians I can see his point. Why should Americans shed their blood to protect those who won't even pick up their small part of that slack?

MaDef

07-27-22, 10:21 PM

I forgot. How small was the American share of the combat power of NATO as a whole again?

:03:

Before the US leaves, i would prefer the leave of lets say - Albania. Or Iceland.

You get what I mean, I'm sure.

TBH, I'm not really on board with having to bail Europe out of the mess they've placed themselves in. Putin's actions & motive were pretty clear back in 2014 & 2015 when Russia "annexed" Crimea and then again when they Got involved in the Syrian civil war (which while not front and center in the news anymore, is still ongoing). And yet the NATO countries ignored it in favor of cheap gas and oil.

Gorpet

07-28-22, 01:41 AM

He makes zero effort at stabbing Zeldin, this is clear from the video I posted. You can choose to believe what you want.

Dowly, You posted an edited video.Post from the start to the end. What you posted.This Politician has his hand on the guy's forearm so ? How do we know he didn't try to stab him with his Horned Rings.

Dowly

07-28-22, 01:51 AM

Dowly, You posted an edited video.Post from the start to the end. What you posted.This Politician has his hand on the guy's forearm so ? How do we know he didn't try to stab him with his Horned Rings.
Watch the entire video, not just the first few seconds.
As one who spent three years of his life protecting German soil from those Russians I can see his point. Why should Americans shed their blood to protect those who won't even pick up their small part of that slack?
LOL

em2nought

07-28-22, 10:24 AM

Donald Trump's approval ratings are holding at about the same level as Biden's.

Confirmation bias much? Don't believe everything the press wishes were true no matter how many times they repeat it. :D

Rockstar

07-28-22, 02:56 PM

Why US inner poltics matter so much for Europe: the NZZ writes:

Trump as president would be nightmare scenario for Europe

The only nightmare scenario for Europeans is their fear of others telling the truth and calling them out on their hypocrisy, failures, and shifty Putin loving European politics and not contributing financially to the greater good of N.A.T.O. And when they fook up like they usual do they now expect someone else to do the dirty work and clean up their mess. IMO it’s the articles above that keep European population mounted on their high horse.

What Trump thinks of … Emmanuel Macron

“Trump didn’t really like either [Canadian Prime Minister Justin] Trudeau or [French President Emmanuel] Macron, but he tolerated them, mockingly crossing swords with them in meetings, kidding on the straight,” Bolton writes of the 2018 G7 summit in Canada.

At the 2017 NATO summit, Trump accused Macron “of always leaking their conversations, which Macron denied, smiling broadly.” Trump later refused to answer Macron’s question on what the U.S. was planning to do regarding trade with China.

Meanwhile, during negotiations about the Iran nuclear deal in 2019, Bolton says Trump told him, “Everything he [Macron] touches turns to **** (feces).”

The president’s view of the German chancellor appears to reflect both respect for the country she leads and irritation with its foreign and security policy.

“[Trump] had great respect for Chancellor Merkel, noting that his father was German, and his mother Scottish,” Bolton writes in a chapter on the 2017 NATO summit in Brussels.

At the same meeting, Trump “kissed [Merkel] on both cheeks,” before saying “I love Angela,” following a commitment by European NATO members to up defense spending.

But the U.S. president has made no secret of his objection to the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project. “It’s very sad when Germany makes a massive oil-and-gas deal with Russia. We’re protecting all of these countries, and they make a pipeline deal,” Bolton quotes Trump as saying during a meeting with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg. “We’re going to have to do something, because we’re not going to put up with it. Germany is captured by Russia.”

Trump and Biden tied

It’s obvious these pollsters never asked me about this. My answer would have been “who cares, these comparisons serve no purpose and are without a doubt absolutely meaningless”

As for so-called politicization of the SCOTUS. We should ask ourselves what made them suddenly a politicized branch of government. I’d wager it’s simply headlines, childish behavior of certain parties which make these accusations and the mindless mass people who just gooble it all up with doing any of their own due diligence . But if these mindless dumbasses actually took the time to be concerned citizens and watched a Senate confirmation hearing in its entirety, read the bios and history of the candidate and read the opinions of the justices all of which is public domain. They might find out those headlines and accusations by congressional party members are just leading them around by the nose.