• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 28

Status
Not open for further replies.
So the DOJ says it'll represent Chump in the defamation case brought by E. Jean Carroll. It's the DOJ's opinion that Chump derided, belittled and defamed Carroll in the context and capacity of the duties of POTUS. Glenn Kirschner's dismay and disgust mirrored my own. I hope there's some other motive at work here besides the two-faced 'justice' system where the privileged class stick together. Unless some satisfactory reasoning develops, this to me is just another nail in the coffin of the democratic experiment.
 
Lurch said:
So the DOJ says it'll represent Chump in the defamation case brought by E. Jean Carroll. It's the DOJ's opinion that Chump derided, belittled and defamed Carroll in the context and capacity of the duties of POTUS. Glenn Kirschner's dismay and disgust mirrored my own. I hope there's some other motive at work here besides the two-faced 'justice' system where the privileged class stick together. Unless some satisfactory reasoning develops, this to me is just another nail in the coffin of the democratic experiment.
Click to expand...
It would be nice if they assigned the most incompetent lawyer they could find. :thumbsup:
 
Stacyhs said:
Care to explain what you mean about "Elijah Cummings thing"?
Click to expand...
I presume the reference is to the boob-in-chief disparaging Baltimore in graphically nasty terms and stupidly blaming Representative Cummings for it. Not really related to Baltimore's ransomware problems. But of course relationship to anything real or true was not the ex's strong point.
 
Bob001 said:
Trump disparaged Baltimore and Rep. Cummings at length.
https://www.baltimoresun.com/politi...0190727-chty2yovtvfzfcjkeaui7wm5zi-story.html
Click to expand...

bruto said:
I presume the reference is to the boob-in-chief disparaging Baltimore in graphically nasty terms and stupidly blaming Representative Cummings for it. Not really related to Baltimore's ransomware problems. But of course relationship to anything real or true was not the ex's strong point.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. :thumbsup:
 
Belz... said:
Counting votes by hand wouldn't cost the US its major power status.

That makes no sense whatsoever.
Click to expand...

I suppose that it would make more sense if you had paid attention to the actual article. To poke at a short and simple quote -

During an interview on Fox Business, host Stuart Varney asked Trump about how the United States should respond to cyberattacks like the one that recently shut down the Colonial Pipeline.
Click to expand...

It's not about voting.

Either way, looks like I was ninja'd a few times. Thanks to those that did!
 
Last edited:
Lurch said:
So the DOJ says it'll represent Chump in the defamation case brought by E. Jean Carroll. It's the DOJ's opinion that Chump derided, belittled and defamed Carroll in the context and capacity of the duties of POTUS. Glenn Kirschner's dismay and disgust mirrored my own. I hope there's some other motive at work here besides the two-faced 'justice' system where the privileged class stick together. Unless some satisfactory reasoning develops, this to me is just another nail in the coffin of the democratic experiment.
Click to expand...

Not happy at all about some of Garland's decisions so far, really. Sorta seems like he's engaging in a variation of bothsiderism where he's effectively trying to use institutional momentum to gloss over how overwhelmingly partisan and unprofessional Barr's choices were in a bid to restore faith in the DOJ and shield it from accusations of partisanship... from those who are very inclined to make such accusations in very bad faith and work hard to corrupt the DOJ when they have the chance.
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
Not happy at all about some of Garland's decisions so far, really. Sorta seems like he's engaging in a variation of bothsiderism where he's effectively trying to use institutional momentum to gloss over how overwhelmingly partisan and unprofessional Barr's choices were in a bid to restore faith in the DOJ and shield it from accusations of partisanship... from those who are very inclined to make such accusations in very bad faith and work hard to corrupt the DOJ when they have the chance.
Click to expand...

I think he's bending over backwards not to show any influence of politics. It's the Democratic administration way, unlike GW Bush's and Dump's DOJ which were used as a political weapons.
 
I guess Garland's logic is that, by-and-large, DOJ personnel did their best not to break the rules under Trump, that was the work of the political appointees.
So they shouldn't be handicapped going forward because of something that wasn't their fault.

Of course, that completely ignores what the next Republican in the White House will do to destroy the Rule of Law.

Garland's has to legally booby-trap the DOJ against future abuse, and that requires establishing norms via lawsuits.
 
Belz... said:
I'm confused. Who's "he"?
Click to expand...

Trump the one who suggested the solution to the hacking of infrastructure billing systems was to go back to paper. That would mean purely paper billing and inventory management systems likely with all accounting done on adding machines at best.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
<...>

Garland's has to legally booby-trap the DOJ against future abuse, and that requires establishing norms via lawsuits.
Click to expand...

Re-establishing certain norms in the US is probably necessary right now, so it may be a wobbly stone they're stepping on, at least it's in the right direction if that's what they're doing.

At the beginning of the trump primary season and then presidency, I mentioned here on the forum that his being a rank jerk - primarily the insults and childish name-calling - would be a poison that would bleed into society. Something that would embolden some of his followers to openly emulate as well as something that would bring out the worst in his detractors. You I can only really combat that by not being the ******* that he is.
 
There's people waiting in the wings to launch their own agendas; noble and ignoble, based nearly entirely on "Stopping the next Trump."

To say they bear extra scrutiny is in no way Trump apologetics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom