Politics - Page 1555 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > Miscellaneous > Off-Topic - Entertainment/News

  #15541  
Old 24.09.2018, 09:26 PM
Dj00ns Dj00ns is offline
Pro
 
Join Date: 20.09.2018
Posts: 88
Default

On this side of the pond, Corbyn is busy setting out his plan to being the Venezeulan economic miracle to the UK.

Labours plans are nothing less than a blueprint for communism by stealth.

Unbelievable.
Reply With Quote
  #15542  
Old 24.09.2018, 10:28 PM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dj00ns View Post
Is he innocent? Hopefully even people in the USA are still innocent until proven guilty. He doesn't even have a chance to clear his name because his accuser has not reported the matter to the police. Doesn't seem as if she intends to, either.

I don't know what you mean by "a position of this level"?

Kavanaugh was the principal author of the Starr Report to Congress which described Bill Clintons sex scandal. This report called for Clinton to be impeached.

He worked for the White House Counsel in 2001. He served as Assistant to the President and White House Staff Secretary in 2003. He has been a Judge since 2006.

Is it that none of these positions was suitably high level or high profile enough to disbar a rapist?

Are there any other roles in the judiciary that should not be occupied by rapists? Or is it just this one?

She was happy for Kavanaugh to try **** cases. Yes? But now, well, the Supreme Court is the straw that broke the camels back. Camel must have a strong back.

I am no fan of Trumps administration, but this is a new low that the other side will simply feel entitled to stoop to now as well. Accusations made without evidence and without process are worthless. They should be. Who would want to live in a country where they weren't?

It's the end justifying the means. Dirty tricks. Using the law for political gain, like some banana republic.

As Tocqueville wrote, if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great. Well, this isn't good.

you lost me at the start of this one, she is the one asking the FBI to investigate the Republicans are the ones who dont want them too.



innocent until proven guilty yes but no one is trying to lock him up, just wanting to look into this matter. if there is a cloud of doubt, would you still place him on this court.



while he wasnt fit for any of those positions either, the Supreme Court appointment is for life (which is pretty silly,) so a step above those other positions. i dont know why she is coming forward now, its pretty tough thing to do but maybe the thought of him taking away rights was enough to bring her forwards.





so what evidence would you like in these he said she said cases?


this is a literal part of the process, he is goes into these committees to see if he is fit for the position (tbf these committees regularly fail to do that.)


what would you like the dems to do with this information?



theres no where left to stoop, the Republicans literally block the hearings for Obamas pick (he picked a fella from the middle of the pack too) and threaten to block it for Clinton and forever.





that quote would make some sense, you know if America was good (its been mixed at best for a while.)
how can anything be good with a man like Trump in charge of it?




also the group that needs to be attacked in this situation is pretty clear because its not just people stating he didnt do it.
not just being like Trump and deciding to mock the victim.

people are literally stating that this crime, if he did it is no big deal and should have no impact on him being appointed to this position.
which is pretty sickening, the things people will turn a blind eye to and message they will send to the world, to get there way.
Reply With Quote
  #15543  
Old 25.09.2018, 10:00 AM
Dj00ns Dj00ns is offline
Pro
 
Join Date: 20.09.2018
Posts: 88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
you lost me at the start of this one, she is the one asking the FBI to investigate the Republicans are the ones who don't want them too.
It's not a federal crime, though, is it? The FBI do not swoop down from helicopters to investigate high school shenanigans like this.

"Asking" a public agency to do something that is not in their remit is grandstanding. Furthermore, a branch of the legal system that acquiesced to such a request would be guilty of abusing due process. Everyone is equal before the law.

As I understand it the FBI conduct background checks to determine whether a candidate poses a threat to national security. Does this accusation sound relevant to that in any way? I don't think so.

Dredging up an ancient incident which occurred when they were both children, which she has not seen fit to report in the 36 years since.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
innocent until proven guilty yes but no one is trying to lock him up, just wanting to look into this matter. if there is a cloud of doubt, would you still place him on this court.
A cloud of doubt about what?

Seriously, what next? Did he push somebody over in the playground? Assault! Unfit for office! Yes, it would be more serious than that. But reaching back into the mans childhood makes me queasy. Would you dredge up something somebody did when they were 16? 13? 10?

What has he done in his long legal career since to justify the notion that he is some kind of crazed sexual predator? Perhaps stuff like that will come out, but this isn't it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
while he wasnt fit for any of those positions either, the Supreme Court appointment is for life (which is pretty silly,) so a step above those other positions. i dont know why she is coming forward now, its pretty tough thing to do but maybe the thought of him taking away rights was enough to bring her forwards.
It doesn't seem like he is innocent until proven guilty in your view.

Firstly, it doesn't matter if it is for life or not. It seems this lady would have been perfectly happy for him to serve as a Judge until the end of his days, and not pipe up.

Secondly, I don't see how the accusation makes him unfit for the post at all. Maybe being dragged through the justice system at the age of 17 would have reformed him. But it seems that he didn't need that, because he turned out okay, didn't he? Unless there are more solid accusations to come, the only aspect of justice that could conceivably remain is revenge, and this is what it seems like.

Victims have a duty to report crimes that are inflicted upon them. Keeping your mouth shut for 36 years is not acceptable and it quite rightly taints their evidence. The Harvey Weinsteins of this world only kept going for as long as they did because their victims did not report the offences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
so what evidence would you like in these he said she said cases?
After 36 years, there isn't going to be any, is there? Not either way, and that is vital. It means that while she can't prove him guilty, he can't prove he is innocent!

But of course he shouldn't have to. That's how the justice system works. Innocent until proven guilty. In this case there is no realistic prospect of a conviction. In which case this guy is not only innocent until proven guilty, he will be innocent in perpetuity. Without a stain on his character. So what is the point of this again?

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
this is a literal part of the process, he is goes into these committees to see if he is fit for the position (tbf these committees regularly fail to do that.)
Sure. Examine his career. His judgements. Any proven crimes he may have committed. But this is gossip.

I don't know how you would feel if you went for a job interview and someone you knew at school turned up and started making accusations against you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
what would you like the dems to do with this information?
Is it true? You and I don't know. The Democrats don't know. It could be false. The Democrats should have encouraged her to report the matter to her local police and otherwise disregarded it. She should have reported it decades ago. Unless there is more to go on, I think you have to treat it as false.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
theres no where left to stoop, the Republicans literally block the hearings for Obamas pick (he picked a fella from the middle of the pack too) and threaten to block it for Clinton and forever.
Oh, yes. It's part of a pattern and the Republicans are not innocent. Each party stoops lower than the other in this race to the bottom.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
that quote would make some sense, you know if America was good (its been mixed at best for a while.)
how can anything be good with a man like Trump in charge of it?
There are always going to be bad people, but for them all to be bad, that is when the spark of goodness is extinguished I think. When your elected representatives despise the system they serve in - have no respect for it whatsoever - that is grim. It reminds me of the sentiment that led to the collapse of the Roman Republic. The way the state was perverted to deliver personal political agendas. Any tactic will do. You could say the prominence of the Supreme Court itself is part of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
people are literally stating that this crime, if he did it is no big deal and should have no impact on him being appointed to this position.which is pretty sickening, the things people will turn a blind eye to and message they will send to the world, to get there way.
If he did it then he would have been convicted of it and then, yes - that might have derailed his entire legal career. But he wasn't. He wasn't even accused of it.

A man has a right to be considered innocent of crimes he has not been convicted of - and in this case not even properly accused of. Contact police. File complaint.

Last edited by Dj00ns; 25.09.2018 at 10:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15544  
Old 25.09.2018, 03:20 PM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dj00ns View Post
It's not a federal crime, though, is it? The FBI do not swoop down from helicopters to investigate high school shenanigans like this.

"Asking" a public agency to do something that is not in their remit is grandstanding. Furthermore, a branch of the legal system that acquiesced to such a request would be guilty of abusing due process. Everyone is equal before the law.

As I understand it the FBI conduct background checks to determine whether a candidate poses a threat to national security. Does this accusation sound relevant to that in any way? I don't think so.

Dredging up an ancient incident which occurred when they were both children, which she has not seen fit to report in the 36 years since.



A cloud of doubt about what?

Seriously, what next? Did he push somebody over in the playground? Assault! Unfit for office! Yes, it would be more serious than that. But reaching back into the mans childhood makes me queasy. Would you dredge up something somebody did when they were 16? 13? 10?

What has he done in his long legal career since to justify the notion that he is some kind of crazed sexual predator? Perhaps stuff like that will come out, but this isn't it.



It doesn't seem like he is innocent until proven guilty in your view.

Firstly, it doesn't matter if it is for life or not. It seems this lady would have been perfectly happy for him to serve as a Judge until the end of his days, and not pipe up.

Secondly, I don't see how the accusation makes him unfit for the post at all. Maybe being dragged through the justice system at the age of 17 would have reformed him. But it seems that he didn't need that, because he turned out okay, didn't he? Unless there are more solid accusations to come, the only aspect of justice that could conceivably remain is revenge, and this is what it seems like.

Victims have a duty to report crimes that are inflicted upon them. Keeping your mouth shut for 36 years is not acceptable and it quite rightly taints their evidence. The Harvey Weinsteins of this world only kept going for as long as they did because their victims did not report the offences.



After 36 years, there isn't going to be any, is there? Not either way, and that is vital. It means that while she can't prove him guilty, he can't prove he is innocent!

But of course he shouldn't have to. That's how the justice system works. Innocent until proven guilty. In this case there is no realistic prospect of a conviction. In which case this guy is not only innocent until proven guilty, he will be innocent in perpetuity. Without a stain on his character. So what is the point of this again?



Sure. Examine his career. His judgements. Any proven crimes he may have committed. But this is gossip.

I don't know how you would feel if you went for a job interview and someone you knew at school turned up and started making accusations against you.



Is it true? You and I don't know. The Democrats don't know. It could be false. The Democrats should have encouraged her to report the matter to her local police and otherwise disregarded it. She should have reported it decades ago. Unless there is more to go on, I think you have to treat it as false.



Oh, yes. It's part of a pattern and the Republicans are not innocent. Each party stoops lower than the other in this race to the bottom.



There are always going to be bad people, but for them all to be bad, that is when the spark of goodness is extinguished I think. When your elected representatives despise the system they serve in - have no respect for it whatsoever - that is grim. It reminds me of the sentiment that led to the collapse of the Roman Republic. The way the state was perverted to deliver personal political agendas. Any tactic will do. You could say the prominence of the Supreme Court itself is part of this.



If he did it then he would have been convicted of it and then, yes - that might have derailed his entire legal career. But he wasn't. He wasn't even accused of it.

A man has a right to be considered innocent of crimes he has not been convicted of - and in this case not even properly accused of. Contact police. File complaint.

the FBI are the ones who do a background check into this matter, they could reopen it and look at this, so its not grandstanding.





really?

so your argument is it happened too long go to matter.

its one of the worst things a person can do, if he is found guilty then, why should he be on any court, let alone a lifetime appointment to the top court.

in some states they wont even let people vote if they have committed a felony, even a non-violent one.





again, i am saying innocent until proven guilty, i feel her words do have weight and he/the republicans are the ones who dont want it looked into.



some nice victim blaming, there are many reasons victims dont come forward, one of the main ones is not being believed.
i really think you are failing to give the weight to how awful this type of crime is and the impact it can have.


are you going to state the exact evidence that stops it being one word vs the other?


this isnt gossip this is the victim of the crime coming forwards.


depends on the sort of job and the sort of crimes, just because someone is found not guilty doesnt mean they are innocent or get treated that way.
hey whose really famous, was found innocent and some people didnt care, how about OJ.


so someone can commit an awful crime, it not be reported at the time and then some time passes and they can just get away with it?


lets say, he did it (as you say neither of us can know) would you still appoint him to this position?
Reply With Quote
  #15545  
Old 25.09.2018, 04:26 PM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dj00ns View Post
On this side of the pond, Corbyn is busy setting out his plan to being the Venezeulan economic miracle to the UK.

Labours plans are nothing less than a blueprint for communism by stealth.

Unbelievable.
McDonald is a proper communist, isn't he? I also couldn't believe he was advocating a referendum on Brexit between two different types of leave. It's like getting a chance to overturn your execution and instead asking for a vote on whether to die by hanging or firing squad.

The far left hate the EU because they see it as a bloc that allows movement of capital and benefits multinationals and limits the possibility for the state (specifically, their state) to control everything. They dream of some kind of state run planned economy Brexit.

The right hate the EU because they see it as sneaking in progressive reforms through the back door, and indeed many of the things that benefit ordinary people are the result of EU regulations. They dream of a regulation bonfire where all the power is given to them to call the shots and there are no pesky rules getting in the way of them doing what they want, which is to benefit themselves at the expense of the majority.

Both camps are deluded, neither vision is appealing.

McDonald says we can't have another vote on Brexit because people have already had a vote. But he wants another general election. But haven't we already had another general election, too? And specifically, one more recently than the referendum? If McDonald thinks people can change their mind about which party to vote for since 2017, when frankly not a lot new has emerged in either party in the last 16 months, then why not on Brexit, when frankly a lot has changed from what voters were told 27 months ago. Answer: because he doesn't actually care about Brexit really, so long as it is his type of Brexit.

Which way would I vote in such a referendum? With my feet, I imagine. The state of British politics today... I can never remember things looking this bleak.
Reply With Quote
  #15546  
Old 25.09.2018, 07:27 PM
lee harris 10's Avatar
lee harris 10 lee harris 10 is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 05.09.2010
Posts: 10,236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dj00ns View Post
On this side of the pond, Corbyn is busy setting out his plan to being the Venezeulan economic miracle to the UK.

Labours plans are nothing less than a blueprint for communism by stealth.

Unbelievable.
scary doesn't do the idea of a Corbyn led government justice.

Corbyn would take the UK back to the 70's and unlike BREXIT would guarantee an almost instant recession massive job losses and the pound plummet but HEY the youth like to sign his name out loud......
Reply With Quote
  #15547  
Old 25.09.2018, 07:30 PM
lee harris 10's Avatar
lee harris 10 lee harris 10 is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 05.09.2010
Posts: 10,236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by European Bob View Post
McDonald is a proper communist, isn't he? I also couldn't believe he was advocating a referendum on Brexit between two different types of leave. It's like getting a chance to overturn your execution and instead asking for a vote on whether to die by hanging or firing squad.

The far left hate the EU because they see it as a bloc that allows movement of capital and benefits multinationals and limits the possibility for the state (specifically, their state) to control everything. They dream of some kind of state run planned economy Brexit.

The right hate the EU because they see it as sneaking in progressive reforms through the back door, and indeed many of the things that benefit ordinary people are the result of EU regulations. They dream of a regulation bonfire where all the power is given to them to call the shots and there are no pesky rules getting in the way of them doing what they want, which is to benefit themselves at the expense of the majority.

Both camps are deluded, neither vision is appealing.

McDonald says we can't have another vote on Brexit because people have already had a vote. But he wants another general election. But haven't we already had another general election, too? And specifically, one more recently than the referendum? If McDonald thinks people can change their mind about which party to vote for since 2017, when frankly not a lot new has emerged in either party in the last 16 months, then why not on Brexit, when frankly a lot has changed from what voters were told 27 months ago. Answer: because he doesn't actually care about Brexit really, so long as it is his type of Brexit.

Which way would I vote in such a referendum? With my feet, I imagine. The state of British politics today... I can never remember things looking this bleak.
after this cheerful post now do the idea of home secretary Dianne Abbott.....
Reply With Quote
  #15548  
Old 25.09.2018, 07:44 PM
lee harris 10's Avatar
lee harris 10 lee harris 10 is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: 05.09.2010
Posts: 10,236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by goodkarma84 View Post
you lost me at the start of this one, she is the one asking the FBI to investigate the Republicans are the ones who dont want them too.



innocent until proven guilty yes but no one is trying to lock him up, just wanting to look into this matter. if there is a cloud of doubt, would you still place him on this court.



while he wasnt fit for any of those positions either, the Supreme Court appointment is for life (which is pretty silly,) so a step above those other positions. i dont know why she is coming forward now, its pretty tough thing to do but maybe the thought of him taking away rights was enough to bring her forwards.





so what evidence would you like in these he said she said cases?


this is a literal part of the process, he is goes into these committees to see if he is fit for the position (tbf these committees regularly fail to do that.)


what would you like the dems to do with this information?



theres no where left to stoop, the Republicans literally block the hearings for Obamas pick (he picked a fella from the middle of the pack too) and threaten to block it for Clinton and forever.





that quote would make some sense, you know if America was good (its been mixed at best for a while.)
how can anything be good with a man like Trump in charge of it?




also the group that needs to be attacked in this situation is pretty clear because its not just people stating he didnt do it.
not just being like Trump and deciding to mock the victim.

people are literally stating that this crime, if he did it is no big deal and should have no impact on him being appointed to this position.
which is pretty sickening, the things people will turn a blind eye to and message they will send to the world, to get there way.
the FBI have already had 2 months to look into this "matter" since they where given the letter in July and there is nothing to investigate.there is 1 person saying something happened but she doesn't know where or when and 5 people she named who have no memory of it.

should they get Dr Ford/Brett Kavanugh in and see if there is any DNA or trace evidence??

in the other allegation its almost the same story with 1 person admitting she was drunk and cant remember most of the events but is sure it was BK who flashed her and no one else backing up her claim or even remember her ever mentioning it until recently.

lets see if Dr Ford and the Dems actually participate in the Thursday hearing or if somehow they decide its unfair and need to delay again.

hopefully Mitch McConnell just decides enough is enough and puts this to the Senate and let a qualified Judge take his seat if the numbers are right.
Reply With Quote
  #15549  
Old 25.09.2018, 07:55 PM
Paul_Dixon's Avatar
Paul_Dixon Paul_Dixon is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 06.11.2006
Posts: 1,487
Send a message via MSN to Paul_Dixon
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lee harris 10 View Post
after this cheerful post now do the idea of home secretary Dianne Abbott.....

No worse or scary then idea of Boris Johnson, Michael Grove in cabinet roles, both sides have there nut cases you would rather not be in power.
Reply With Quote
  #15550  
Old 25.09.2018, 08:16 PM
goodkarma84's Avatar
goodkarma84 goodkarma84 is offline
GOAT
 
Join Date: 15.09.2008
Posts: 27,926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lee harris 10 View Post
the FBI have already had 2 months to look into this "matter" since they where given the letter in July and there is nothing to investigate.there is 1 person saying something happened but she doesn't know where or when and 5 people she named who have no memory of it.

should they get Dr Ford/Brett Kavanugh in and see if there is any DNA or trace evidence??

in the other allegation its almost the same story with 1 person admitting she was drunk and cant remember most of the events but is sure it was BK who flashed her and no one else backing up her claim or even remember her ever mentioning it until recently.

lets see if Dr Ford and the Dems actually participate in the Thursday hearing or if somehow they decide its unfair and need to delay again.

hopefully Mitch McConnell just decides enough is enough and puts this to the Senate and let a qualified Judge take his seat if the numbers are right.

she has provided a therapist’s notes to the Washington Post and took a polygraph.

again this purposefully not understanding why victims dont speak up at the time. and just because some exact details are a bit foggy doesnt mean it didnt happen.



well lets see if the republicans try to do something questionable before or during the hearing.



again you constantly dodge questions but if he did was she said, would you still put him on the court?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 03:33 AM.