This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
US politics
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Badger11  Beckenham 02 Jul 24 9.05am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Trump is claiming immunity for the Stormy Daniels saga. Whilst I think the charges about election fraud are bogus and will be over turned by a higher court I do not believe his actions are related to his duties as the President. In this case I hope the SC will trow that out whilst also throwing the charges of election fraud out as bootstrapping. Edited by Badger11 (02 Jul 2024 9.06am)
One more point |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 02 Jul 24 9.37am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
When Obama was still President he politely suggested that now would be a good time to retire so he could appoint a younger version of herself just in case the Republicans got in. Even back then Ginsberg had been plagued with serious health issues so it was obvious she would have to step down soon. She ignored his request so it's on her if she didn't like her replacement. That was her decision to make, which was clearly not made politically, quite unlike the current ones which are not nearly so clear. Indeed they look very likely to be politically influenced.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 02 Jul 24 10.01am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Trump is claiming immunity for the Stormy Daniels saga. Whilst I think the charges about election fraud are bogus and will be over turned by a higher court I do not believe his actions are related to his duties as the President. In this case I hope the SC will trow that out whilst also throwing the charges of election fraud out as bootstrapping. Edited by Badger11 (02 Jul 2024 9.06am) His legal team are. They look as though their brief is to use every opportunity, no matter how obvious it might look, to try to delay every case until after the election. This looks like a ridiculous concept. How can something that happened in New York when he was first running for President be part of a President's official duty? He wasn't even President. What it does is force the Judge to review and, almost certainly, deny. Which they will then appeal so causing yet another delay. I hope the Judge finds a way to issue his sentence, which is due soon by denying the right to appeal. The charges of election fraud are not bogus. They have been proven in a court of law with a unanimous guilty verdict. He is appealing, as another delaying tactic, which he would probably lose as the evidence was overwhelming. However, given the attitude of the SC anything could happen there. If it ever gets there, which seems in big doubt. If I were the Democrats I would take a long legal look at yesterday's ruling to see how it could be used to disable Trump's campaign. Biden is, after all, the President and now has immunity, both now and after leaving office. Dirty tricks beget dirty tricks and what happened yesterday has all the hallmarks of a genuinely dirty trick. Unlike the indictments Trump has faced which didn't alter the law to suit an individual, this does. It is a terrible precedent which could have momentous consequences.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 02 Jul 24 10.05am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
That was her decision to make, which was clearly not made politically, quite unlike the current ones which are not nearly so clear. Indeed they look very likely to be politically influenced. Ginsberg is the darling of the Liberals Obama wanted to replace her with a younger healthier version and that is not political?
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 02 Jul 24 10.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Ginsberg is the darling of the Liberals Obama wanted to replace her with a younger healthier version and that is not political? She made her own decision to not bow to political pressure to stand aside, so no, her decision was not political. It was the opposite. It frustrated politics.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 02 Jul 24 10.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
Back to the dissenting opinion the more I think about the example the judge gave the odder it seems. Trump trying to use immunity for his personal tax affairs would be a good example of over reach by the President. Instead she gave us Trump using navy seals to assassinate someone as an over reach, it's actually a terrible example because it is within the president's duties. During WW2 the US assassinated Yamamoto the master mind behind Pearl Harbour, everybody cheered that one. Recently Obama said "we got him" to great applause after Bin Laden was killed by Navy Seals. So in certain circumstances the President does have the right. There is a great episode of he West Wing called We Killed Yamamoto which Martin Sheen after much agonising orders the assassination of an Arab leader and so called ally of the US because he is secretly funding terrorism. This show was a Democrat wet dream but even they could find a scenario which was plausible. So sorry judge I get your point but a poor example. Edited by Badger11 (02 Jul 2024 10.13am)
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  02 Jul 24 10.13am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
That was her decision to make, which was clearly not made politically, quite unlike the current ones which are not nearly so clear. Indeed they look very likely to be politically influenced. Clearly not politically influenced?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 02 Jul 24 10.20am |
|
|---|---|
|
Yup I don't get the idea it isn't. In the past the Democrats have made no secret of their preference to have one of theirs on the bench and yet when Trump does the same it's rigging the court.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| silvertop Portishead 02 Jul 24 10.51am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Yup I don't get the idea it isn't. In the past the Democrats have made no secret of their preference to have one of theirs on the bench and yet when Trump does the same it's rigging the court. Yes and that's a point, albeit not the one I am now making. Thus, I see on this thread plenty of links to evidence of Democrat corruption. However, if I am honest, I couldn't pass a fag paper between the Republicans and Democrats in terms of misfeasance. They are all corrupt, obey their sponsors, self serve etc.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 02 Jul 24 11.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by silvertop
Yes and that's a point, albeit not the one I am now making. Thus, I see on this thread plenty of links to evidence of Democrat corruption. However, if I am honest, I couldn't pass a fag paper between the Republicans and Democrats in terms of misfeasance. They are all corrupt, obey their sponsors, self serve etc. That's very true but the links to Democrat misdemeanours are just for a bit of balance when Trump is getting accused of every crime in the book rather than any support for the Republicans.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 02 Jul 24 11.19am |
|
|---|---|
|
The US Supreme Court just basically legalised bribery'. It is corrupt, that's what it is.
Edited by steeleye20 (02 Jul 2024 11.20am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
HKOwen  Hong Kong 02 Jul 24 11.47am |
|
|---|---|
|
Irony abounds with SCOTUS. Having judges for life, as with peers, seems a system bound to have problems. Maybe a maximum term of ten years or reaching 80 whichever comes first with annual cognitive testing after the age of 75
Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.