jakee

This is the same as when people were saying "you wouldn't have a problem if Clinton had taken Chelsea to sit in at the G20!" No one would have a problem with it because it would never have happened. Trump is the only President to be so ignorant of international diplomacy that he would think this was a good idea. You know what pretty much everyone who isn't an american conservative's prediction for the result of this conference was? Kim would blow smoke up Trump's arse about how he was the only President great enough to make this happen, and the flattered Trump would come out and say how great Kim is. And in Trump's own words, that's exactly what happened. He gave Kim a platform for global respectability in exchange for absolutely nothing. In place of any discussion of his human rights abuses we saw Kim called a trustworthy man, a capable and tough leader, and someone who the North Korean people love with a fervent passion. Could you ever have predicted seeing a sitting US President kowtow to a communist dictator in such a manner? Tell me, would you be saying the exact same thing Obama had said the same things about Kim? Or Castro? Or would you have said the same things Fox news said when faced with the possibility that Obama would talk at all with any foreign dictators? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Right - but the University President isn't 17. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I don't believe that happened. Sources? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

It's related to them, but it isn't about them. That happened very recently. So Manafort was involved in criminal conspiracies with Russians before the campagn, he was involved in criminal conspiracies with Russians after the campaign.... but it's ludicrous to even investigate the possibility that he or anyone else conspired with Russians during the campaign? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Why is Trump's justice department a farce? Why is the Trump administration trying to set Trump up? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Check out the title of this thread. It wasn’t about the gay couple going to the Christian baker, it was about the angry Christian going out of his way to cause a problem at a normal baker in retaliation. Which means Nolhtairt’s attempted point backfired on him even harder than he thinks. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

But they didn't actually say that. None of those issues were decided on either way. (In fact, in the broad sense you just used, those issues were decided on quite some time ago. You don't get to choose who you serve if your decision is based on several defined types bigotry. That is the law.) Do you want to have an ideagasm?

And let's not forget that the couple drove 120 miles past 67 secular-owned bakeries, as well as 6 bakeries owned by Muslims, just to get to the one bakery owned by Christians. Sounds to me like they wanted to pick a fight with them in court. "Couldn't make it up" right? You got that quote from this twitter account, correct? A bare statement, completely unsourced and unsupported. Why do you believe them? It's clearly not because you did any research on the subject. The cakeshop is in Lakewood. Lakewood is in the Denver metro area. The couple live in Denver. Denver is not 120 miles across. In fact, they chose it because it was recommended by their wedding planner and was extremely close to their reception restaurant. Is there any subject you could contribute to on here without embarrassing yourself by parroting obvious fake news bullshit? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

The power to make wealthy, sophisticated, highly politically connected men afraid of completely made up charges? Nope, don't buy it. The power to make them afraid of real, prosecutable charges? Yeah, they can definitely do that. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Really? These aren't poor, high school dropouts caught with an ounce of pot who are relying on flawed advice from a Public Defender who can't budget more than 45 minutes of work on their case. These are educated, successful, wealthy people with well paid lawyers who have lived their entire adult lives inside the system. Hell, these are people who are the system. If the threat of additional charges is enough to make them plea-deal, it's going to be because they know those extra charges are legitimate and provable. So really, what your argument sounds like to me is "Sure a bunch of Trump campaign associates have been indicted and/or found guilty - but it's ok because they've actually done way more crimes than they were charged with!" Is that the effect you were aiming for? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Do you think that Lincoln meant that the Executive should be completely unaccountable to, and unrestrained by, the law? Is that the freedom he was afraid of losing? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Before she'd read the documents detailing the scope of the investigation. After she'd read the special counsel's orders she agreed that it was entirely within the mandate that Mueller was given by the Trump administration. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Why do you think it's OK for the President to be able to block any federal investigation into himself, his staff, his business associates or his friends? It's like you want to live in a banana republic. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

For what? What would Rosenstein go down for? What law has he broken? Be specific, please. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Why did Trump appoint so many ignorant people to the Justice department? Why couldn't he find even one person capable of understanding special counsel law? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

So why is Trump's administration ignoring the law? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

You said the investigation was illegal. If you don't know why it's illegal, why are you saying it? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Why doesn't Trump's administration follow the law? What law do you think he is not following? (This should be interesting) The one that makes the investigation (being carried out by his administration) illegal. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Why doesn't Trump's administration follow the law? Do you want to have an ideagasm?

A joke made, in all aspects, by Trump and his administration. I've never seen you so willing to criticise the Republicans. It's good progress

This is confusing. Your problem with the trial is that it was based on 'everyone knows' XYX. But you basis for having that problem is that you feel 'everyone knows' the juror's tone meant he was saying everyone knows XYZ, not that he actually said it? The link you posted earlier doesn't work in the uk at the moment, could you just paste the bit you're talking about? Tbh the Wikipedia article really highlights the differences from Arbuckle and the current high profile cases. Arbuckle was accused by one woman, and by business associates of the deceased who were plainly after money. The story was seized by a yellow press, tabloid mogul who printed numerous unsubstantiated, unsourced accusations and lurid tales whose evolution could be traced as they grew greater in the retelling. Cosby was accused by numerous different women over long, long periods of time. Women unconnected with each other whose accusations were on the record before his downfall began. Weinstein also has been accused by numerous different unconnected women, and directly through their own public statements, not amplified by a sensationalist media. Roy Moore was accused by numerous different women, and his history was reported on by serious, ethical news outlets - ones whose commitment to fact checking led them to uncover and turn the tables on fraudsters who tried to discredit them by feeding spurious stories in the hope they'd be printed. Donald Trump has been accused by numerous different, unconnected women, multiple times over several decades as well as after he sought public office. He has a documented history of shutting down the allegations by buying silence or threatening overwhelming legal retaliation, among other dirty tricks. That's not to say that some people aren't falsely accused of horrible things, but these guys? Nah, not these guys. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

But you get that this thread is about the government taking money from people who didn't grow any plants, right? People against whom the government has absolutely no evidence they grew plants or did anything else illicit that could be used to make a court case against the person... but they still took the money. It's fundamentally different to confiscating the property of someone who was convicted in court of using that property to grow or sell drugs. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I find that a little confusing since, at least around here, they've made no secret of the fact that the seized stuff becomes theirs. Not at all confusing, he's talking about personal corruption, i.e. those individual customs officers taking his money under cover of authority for their own enrichment. And since he was not given a receipt for a dollar amount at the time, and he claims the eventual receipt he was sent was shy $770 of what he was carrying, he may have a point. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

I wonder why they're so fond of it though? The Kazazi family did not hear anything about their cash or why it was taken until more than a month after it was seized, when Customs finally sent a seizure notice to their home. . . The first thing the Kazazis noticed was that the dollar amount listed was $770 less than the amount that Kazazi said he took with him. The family said that the cash was all in $100 bills, making it impossible for it to add up to $57,330. Hottot said that these types of “errors” are common in forfeiture cases and that it is “always in the same direction” — government receipts coming up a few hundred or a few thousand dollars short of what defendants say they had. Ah. Ok then. Do you want to have an ideagasm?

That information is contained within the article. He was boarding a domestic flight to an international connection. He hadn't filled out a form because he wasn't leaving the USA yet. (They also hadn't even bothered to do that anyway. According to the article they had a deadline to present a case or return the money, the deadline's long gone and they haven't presented any case or returned any money.) Do you want to have an ideagasm?