(09-06-2018, 09:31 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Because he thinks it will make him look bad. Unless he has a history of releasing documents he believes are improperly classified or we believe this is the first time he has encountered this happening in five years.
You're still assigning motive based on an assumption.
(09-06-2018, 09:31 PM)michaelsean Wrote: The people who released the documents say they informed him last night they would be OKed.
Did they say they informed him that they were clear to release, or that they had been ok'ed to release? Those are two different things. Some of the reporting on this incident that I heard this morning indicated that there was confusion in the communication of that.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(09-07-2018, 01:14 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Any thoughts on this article pointing out that during his confirmation hearings in 2004 and 2006 he perjured himself. Is there a statute of limitations on perjury?
(09-07-2018, 01:50 PM)PhilHos Wrote: A quick Google search says that the statute of limitatoins for perjury at the federal level is 5 years.
Thanks. I guess he can’t be charged then. Should a potential Supreme Court Justice nominee be immediately disqualified for breaking the law, even if they can’t be charged anymore?
I say depending on severity, felony yes, misdemeanor no.
Is perjury a serious offense again? I kid. It’s a Friday.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
(09-07-2018, 03:05 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Thanks. I guess he can’t be charged then. Should a potential Supreme Court Justice nominee be immediately disqualified for breaking the law, even if they can’t be charged anymore?
I say depending on severity, felony yes, misdemeanor no.
You can't be disqualified for breaking the law if you can't tried for breaking the law.
If you can, the whole movie Double Jeopardy falls apart.
(09-07-2018, 03:33 PM)Benton Wrote: You can't be disqualified for breaking the law if you can't tried for breaking the law.
If you can, the whole movie Double Jeopardy falls apart.
Can't have that. Big Hollywood will come down like a ton of bricks on the senate.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
(09-07-2018, 07:59 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: I meant more like an opinion/view disqualified than any type of rule.
I hope not.
Popular opinion among many republicans (including the current potus) at one time was that obama was a radical Christian Muslim terrorist sent here from Kenya as part of their plan to destroy America. Of course, once his background was vetted, many of them backed off those allegations. But if we just disqualified people based off accusations? That’s not good.
Popular opinion among many republicans (including the current potus) at one time was that obama was a radical Christian Muslim terrorist sent here from Kenya as part of their plan to destroy America. Of course, once his background was vetted, many of them backed off those allegations. But if we just disqualified people based off accusations? That’s not good.
What if we disqualified for them for continuing to promote that "opinion" long after Obama was vetted?
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Too bad Nixon’s dead. Maybe the Dems could call him too. The guy who orchestrated the Watergate coverup and then ratted everyone out.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
(09-07-2018, 09:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Dems be like, WTF I love John Dean now.
One of the biggest dirtballs in the history of American politics and they sell out for 6 minutes of disconnected rambling. If it was off the top of his head I might understand, but that was prepared.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
(09-07-2018, 09:11 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Too bad Nixon’s dead. Maybe the Dems could call him too. The guy who orchestrated the Watergate coverup and then ratted everyone out.
(09-07-2018, 09:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Dems be like, WTF I love John Dean now.
See sane , fairpeople can listen and disagree.
Instead with have "dems" and nothing to disagree with what he said.
Typical.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(09-07-2018, 09:28 PM)GMDino Wrote: See sane , fairpeople can listen and disagree.
Instead with have "dems" and nothing to disagree with what he said.
Typical.
No I don’t believe calling the character of a witness into question rises to the level of insanity.
But character aside, did you listen to that and think, whoa. Dude nailed it. It was terrible. Random thoughts strung together in hope of a point.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
(09-07-2018, 09:40 PM)GMDino Wrote: I listened and thought that he made a few good points about how lies can come back to haunt people when they are placed in positions for life.
He knows a few things about lying and the repercussions from it.
But "dems"....amiright?
You are right. Too bad trump will be dead in 45 years or he could testify for them.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
(09-07-2018, 09:44 PM)GMDino Wrote: I'm sure the moral guides of the board will be by any second to say what disdain there is toward people you disagree with (dean).
Yep.
Any second....
I believe that was directed at having disdain for people who think differently, not disdain for total dirtballs. Not because of what they thought but because of what they did.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall
![[Image: giphy.gif]](http://media1.giphy.com/media/9EmYYw6o9cmsM/giphy.gif)
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png)
