The birthers had evidence? No they had allegations... I told you that you don't know the difference.
|
The birthers had evidence? No they had allegations... I told you that you don't know the difference.
Let us rely on the adage, where there is smoke there is fire. But why worry about history, that debate is over and we need a new one
Well thank goodness you have finally developed a respect for evidence!Quote:
The birthers had evidence? No they had allegations... I told you that you don't know the difference.
Quote:
Let us rely on the adage, where there is smoke there is fire. But why worry about history, that debate is over and we need a new one
In the case of Kavanaugh, there was no smoke. Hot air, but no smoke. And in case you want to refer to Dr. Ford's statements, I would remind you of what my esteemed friend, Tal, just stated. "No they had allegations... I told you that you don't know the difference."
You haven't heard of the marauding band of invaders from central America that's going to rape, pillage and plunder?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cac...43/1674330.jpg
I seem to recall that Trump had similar views about the Mexicans some of whom he later said were good people.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Rhetoric is stock in trade for the dunce
Yeah. And of course no democrat president would have engaged in rhetoric. I say that as one of those "deplorables" who is "clinging to" his "guns and religion."
They all engage in rhetoric, no politician is immune to it, I just keep thinking give me my portable bulldozer because the bullslit is getting too thick
Those are true statements though! The dufus spews hate speech.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
That's by a PREPONDERANCE of the EVIDENCE!Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/167/16740/1674014.gif
Yeah. Right. And Kavanaugh was definitely guilty.
Know way to know that at this point. Nice job repubs!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/167/16741/1674147.gif
DHS has identified 270 criminals in the caravan :https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/11/01/...s-fact-caravanQuote:
Q: Do we know who is in the caravan?
A: We continue to be concerned about individuals along the caravan route. In fact, over 270 individuals along the caravan route have criminal histories, including known gang membership. Those include a number of violent criminals – examples include aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, armed robbery, sexual assault on a child, and assault on a female. Mexican officials have also publicly stated that criminal groups have infiltrated the caravan. We also continue to see individuals from over 20 countries in this flow from countries such as Somalia, India, Haiti, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. There is a large segment of this population that we know nothing about and we must be prepared to defend our border and enforce our laws to protect the citizens of our country.
Q: Are there criminals in the caravan?
A: Yes – so far, there are over 270 individuals along the caravan route that have criminal histories, including known gang membership.
On October 29, the Mexican ambassador to the U.S. described some of the caravan members as “very violent:” “Unfortunately, some of the people in the caravan have been very violent against authority, even though they have offered the possibility of entering in compliance with immigration law and refugee status.”
On October 30, Mexico’s Interior Minister Navarrete Prida speaking on Radio Enfoque (Focus) 100.1 FM, confirmed that some criminal groups have infiltrated the caravan: “I have videos from Guatemala that show men dressed in identical clothing, sporting the same haircuts, handing out money to women to persuade them to move to the front of the caravan…We know, for a fact, that some members of the caravan threatened [Mexican] Migration Institute personnel and we have images showing many of them preparing Molotov cocktail
and birther conspiracy was a silly hill to make a stand on.It was a bogus issue . I wrote this in 2008 and it still applies :
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/politi...te-275470.htmlQuote:
regarding Obama's birth certificate ;
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. CodeSec 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth":
- Anyone born inside the United States
- Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
- Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
- Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
- Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
- A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
So even if the evidence shows that he was born outside the US and his Hawaii birth certificate was a fraud ;he would still be qualified .
No but the Chairman's 400 page report released late last week says there was nothing there for any of the allegations .Quote:
And that means ALL the other testimonies they investigated are false?
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo...h%20Report.pdf
Fords was the most "credible " But Ford’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee differed from statements she made to her therapist, the Washington Post reporter who broke the story, and even from her initial letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Ford’s story morphed from a sexual assault by four boys in the mid-1980s, while she was in her late teens, to a sexual assault by one boy at a party attended by five people in 1982, when she was 15.
The location of the assault went from a home near her parents’ country club to a house somewhere between the country club and her home, which was a 20-minute drive away. It is all in his report including stuff the committee learned after the hearings .(like her complete lies about knowledge of polygraph tests ).
or this lie :“I struggled academically. I struggled very much in Chapel Hill and in college. When I was 17 and went off to college, I had a very hard time, more so than others, forming new friendships and especially friendships with boys, and I had academic problems.” But friends from her time at UNC say she had "a fairly active and robust social life” in college His letter added that Chrissy “seemed to have a number of other non-dating male friends, more guy friends perhaps than females,” and that she attended “frat house parties, some crowded and lasting very late in the evening,” as well as “smaller gatherings in male friend’s rooms or apartments.”Ford “did not seem to be afraid to be in rooms or apartments with only one entrance,” ......“This was the case even if very late at night with her and her friend as the only females present.”
Yeah, but she was bound to be telling the truth because, after all, Senator Spartacus found her to be credible.
Sen Sparticus is not clear from liability with the Senate Ethics Committee for admitting disclosure of confidential docs.
Here are the Senate Rules :
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/SMAN-1...N-107-pg52.htmQuote:
5. Any Senator, officer or employee of the Senate who shall disclose the secret or confidential business or proceedings of the Senate, including the business and proceedings of the committees, subcommittees and offices of the Senate shall be liable, if a Senator, to suffer expulsion from the body; and if an officer or employee, to dismissal from the service of the Senate, and to punishment for contempt.6. Whenever, by the request of the Senate or any committee thereof, any documents or papers shall be communicated to the Senate by the President or the head of any department relating to any matter pending in the Senate, the proceedings in regard to which are secret or confidential under the rules, said documents and papers shall be considered as confidential, and shall not be disclosed without leave of the Senate.
https://fox61.com/2018/11/05/nbc-say...ight-football/
Quote:
Fox’s decision was particularly surprising given the network’s close proximity and friendly relationship with the White House.Critics of the network say its hosts and commentators employ some of the same racist rhetoric and scare tactics that were used in the ad.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b09d43e31fd22b
https://reason.com/blog/2018/11/02/s...migrant-killer
How much more do you guys need? You still holding your nose JL?Quote:
So that ad Trump is touting could just as easily say "REPUBLICANS LET HIM STAY" and "WHO ELSE DID SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO LET GO?" Last year,Arpaio was pardoned by the presidentafter being found guilty of contempt of court for flouting a federal order to stop "the unconstitutional racial profiling and detainment of Latino residents."
Given the choice of Trump or the thoroughly incompetent, unqualified, and dishonest Hillary Clinton, it's still one of the easiest decisions of my lifetime, and every time I look at the economy and the Supreme Court, I know it was the right one.Quote:
How much more do you guys need? You still holding your nose JL?
Any political party dumb enough to nominate her deserves to lose.
It's highly likely the economy would be humming along under Hillary. As for blaming liberal judges for ruining your day, that would be a stretch. Looks like you were going to hold your nose no matter who won. That's sad.
Only for you.Quote:
That's sad
I have never had to hold my nose, no matter who the president was. Life goes on. I'm not holding my nose now, just shaking my head. I admit Bush's election had me running for the doors and leaving the rat race behind. He was a lousy business man and had numerous bankruptcies too. He ruined the great economy Clinton left him, and the dufus may well follow his pattern.
I found something good in past repubs though, but I ain't holding my breathe for this dude we have now.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:52 AM. |