Amazingly, my remark about Biden / Trump and Clinton / Trump has been 100% ignored.
Instead, the remark with the least meaning has been attacked and analyzed 8 ways to Sunday. Musta struck a nerve there or something.
I presume because no one wants to admit to their justification for still supporting Biden, which is still the only justification I have seen put forth for continuing to support Biden.
I'm done on this.
Poor you. It's almost like you aren't being taken seriously.
So Kurt is defending his 3 nominees...and Trump's not.
In an interview Sunday, Trump said on NBCâs Meet the Press that he thought a Republican primary rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, had made a âterrible mistakeâ by signing a law that bans abortion at six weeks, before most women know they are pregnant. His rambling remarks also suggested support for a federal ban on abortion: âWhatâs going to happen is youâre going to come up with a number of weeks or months. Youâre going to come up with a number thatâs going to make people happy ⦠I would sit down with both sides and Iâd negotiate something, and weâll end up with peace on that issue for the first time in 52 years.â
In Trump world...suggesting he's the guy who can fix this...after throwing gasoline on the fire... is just another day in the office.
Can we NOW agree it wasn't an accomplishment...when the guy who did it denies responsibility?
Depends where you stand. Both pandering to/appeasing the reactionary religious right and fans of FedSoc is an accomplishment of sorts. Cui bono?
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Sep 21, 2023 - 3:47pm
kurtster wrote:
And it went downhill from there.
Amazingly, my remark about Biden / Trump and Clinton / Trump has been 100% ignored.
Instead, the remark with the least meaning has been attacked and analyzed 8 ways to Sunday. Musta struck a nerve there or something.
I presume because no one wants to admit to their justification for still supporting Biden, which is still the only justification I have seen put forth for continuing to support Biden.
Oh and law, seeing as how this pointless debate seemed to start with your disapproval of Ketanji Brown Jackson's response during her confirmation hearing.
Hard to define a real start, but I think it was in response to the picture that summed up Trump's unequivocal failures. Which wasn't a real surprise to anyone, of course, but putting them all together sometimes is a good reminder of the magnitude of his failed single term.
You are correct sir as to the beginning.
kurtster wrote:
Steely_D wrote:
Yeah, ok.
But as y'all say that Biden kept Trump out of the WH, we say that Trump kept Hillary out of the WH ...
Oh, and that SCOTUS thing was pretty good, too.
And it went downhill from there.
Amazingly, my remark about Biden / Trump and Clinton / Trump has been 100% ignored.
Instead, the remark with the least meaning has been attacked and analyzed 8 ways to Sunday. Musta struck a nerve there or something.
I presume because no one wants to admit to their justification for still supporting Biden, which is still the only justification I have seen put forth for continuing to support Biden.
So Kurt is defending his 3 nominees...and Trump's not.
In an interview Sunday, Trump said on NBCâs Meet the Press that he thought a Republican primary rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, had made a âterrible mistakeâ by signing a law that bans abortion at six weeks, before most women know they are pregnant. His rambling remarks also suggested support for a federal ban on abortion: âWhatâs going to happen is youâre going to come up with a number of weeks or months. Youâre going to come up with a number thatâs going to make people happy ⦠I would sit down with both sides and Iâd negotiate something, and weâll end up with peace on that issue for the first time in 52 years.â
In Trump world...suggesting he's the guy who can fix this...after throwing gasoline on the fire... is just another day in the office.
Can we NOW agree it wasn't an accomplishment...when the guy who did it denies responsibility?
The federal judge overseeing Donald Trumpâs frivolous $500 million civil lawsuit against his former attorney Michael Cohen ordered that the disgraced ex-president must show up to be deposed on October 3rd at the time and location of Cohenâs choosing.
On Tuesday, we reported that Cohen had filed a new motion to compel Trump to provide the location and time for the October 3rd deposition.
Trump refused.
Consequently, Cohen and his legal team now hold all the cards, and the judge has given them free range to depose Trump for a maximum of 9 hours, Cohen revealed Thursday on the MeidasTouch Networkâs Political Beatdown podcast.
...
Michael Cohen said that Trump is bringing in another attorney and plans to invoke the Fifth Amendment during the deposition so as to not incriminate himself in a separate case in which he is currently involved.
Cohen noted how unusual it is for anyone to invoke the Fifth in a civil case, let alone the plaintiff who brought the case. âSo again, I want to sort of talk about for a split second the unusual nature of this type of a scenario. Have you ever really heard of somebody taking the Fifth in a civil case that they are the plaintiff on? And the answer is no. The answer is no. I don't even know how one could think of another scenario outside of this where something like this would even happen.â
While the Fifth Amendment guarantees that no person âshall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,â taking the Fifth in civil litigation has different implications. A witness's invocation of the Fifth Amendment in civil litigation may give rise to an adverse inference âwhen independent evidence exists of the fact to which the party refuses to answer.â
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Sep 21, 2023 - 2:21pm
kurtster wrote:
I thought that the action itself was a success. A goal stated and a goal achieved. In the old days, stating a goal and achieving it was considered a successful action. You want to discuss the merits of the results of achieving that goal.
During Trump's campaign he made the SCOTUS and appointing judges in general a centerpiece, a high priority goal. He stated why, he even posted a list a candidates. It was very purposeful and transparent. And he succeeded in achieving that goal. He said what he was going to do and delivered the goods. That is a big deal in politics most would say. You ignore that act of in itself and want to go further in order to minimize that achievement is my conclusion.
He filled a ton of vacancies that went neglected and unfilled during Obama's years. It is the SCOTUS and the other vacancies. Sorry I forgot to include all the long standing vacancies that were also part of the plan. But then again, I was only responding to a trolling meme, not going much deeper than the meme itself. Yet you and others want to make a big deal out of it. Sheeessshhhhhhhhhh uz.
Anymore questions
Sheeeeeshhhhh, yourself. Youâre not the victim here.
I never spoke of anything other than the three Supreme Court appointments. Trump did inherit one vacancy. As I explained â apparently to deaf ears â one cannot credit a President simply for filling Supreme Court vacancies that arise during his term. Nominating a candidate to fill a vacancy is part of the job. The quality of the nominees is what matters. You keep saying that he stated what he was going to do and did it without saying what it is that he said he was going to do other than fill vacancies.
Oh and law, seeing as how this pointless debate seemed to start with your disapproval of Ketanji Brown Jackson's response during her confirmation hearing.
Hard to define a real start, but I think it was in response to the picture that summed up Trump's unequivocal failures.
Which wasn't a real surprise to anyone, of course, but putting them all together sometimes is a good reminder of the magnitude of his failed single term.
