Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    34492
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by TwiceHorn

  1. 22 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

    Southern Baptist denomination is merely a whitewashed and normalized KKK.

    I don't like to say it, but I tend to agree, and Bolverk is right, the Christers (Ivins) are right behind them and possibly ahead of them.

     

    Also, both Southern Baptist and Church of Christ are highly congregational by nature, as are most of the "evangelical" churches.   Calling them a denomination is something of a misnomer, particularly in that the congregation essentially selects its own clergy.

     

    Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and even Lutherans rarely elevate a jackwagon like Jeffress to pastorship of a major church.

  2. None of this "leaky" shit sounds very credible, at least as concerns the Cohen warrant(s).  The warrants, and supporting affidavits, would have to be pretty specific as to the materials sought and exactly how those materials prove the crime, and which crime it proves.  All this leaky shit sounds like civil discovery fishing expedition stuff.

    For example, the warrants would have to identify things with sufficient specificity that it could be either easily segregated from privileged stuff, or subject to the crime/fraud exception.  The warrant most likely wouldn't permit sifting through "everything in Cohen's office" to be segregated by the "taint team" into privileged and non-privileged stuff.  The judge would/should have to be satisfied that the invasion into legitimately privileged stuff is minimal.

  3. 6 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

    If anyone is curious about what the Antichrist actually looks like....he looks exactly like Robert Jeffress.

    Robert-Jeffress-Trump-Selfie.jpg

    I am ashamed that he professes to be a Christian and an actual man of the cloth in a mainstream denomination.  While there are lots of jerkholes and dickwads that profess to be Christians (possibly including me), most of them are fringey.  That guy, as pastor of a very large and at least superficially mainstream church in a mainstream denomination, frightens me.

  4. 9 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

    no, citizens united is how we got trump

    Well, except for the part where Hillary nearly twice as much money as Teh Donald and took 3x the outside contributions and Teh Donald self-funded nearly a third of his campaign.  https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16

     

    Plus, Citizens United, while bad, only trashed a campaign finance limitation that was less than 10 years old.  More than a radical change to campaign finance law, it sort of unleashed the status quo and turbocharged it.

     

    I'm all for trashing Citizens United, but it had almost nothing to do with the Dotard.

  5. 2 minutes ago, skipmcgee said:

    Very nice.  Too bad the undergrad doesn't get the same ranking, because of the way that USNWR's algorithm favors small private schools.

    On the one hand, I think most people know that in the research-oriented fields, at least, grad school quality trickles down.  On the other hand, though, many of the high-profile, graduate-research-oriented professors are average-to-poor teachers.

  6. 33 minutes ago, kevwun said:

    The really depressing thing is she's not even the least qualified person that he's nominated to be a Judge.

    That guy from the Federal Election Commission?  That was just sad.  Had to feel sorry for the guy.

     

    And, as fun as it is to blame Trump, the fact that local GOPs are putting these people up for judgeships is staggering.

  7. 10 hours ago, Tex Long said:

    Deloss fucked up his share of things. LHN comes to mind. Pac-12, letting Colorado and Nebraska slip away. Plonsky. Letting Mack not only stay on, but even letting him override the HCIW's OC choice. 

    The one thing he did pretty right was the Longhorn Foundation, which largely (but not entirely) eliminated toxic relations with and between BMDs.

     

    He did preside over the joining of the Big XII and the extreme monetization of college sports, but that was more a right place, right time, rising tide lifts all boats thing.

  8. Yeah, places like backpage would seem to be more in the category of transaction costs/information rather than supply or demand.

     

    I, for one, am tired of analyzing human behavior and law enforcement strategies in economic terms.  It hasn't gotten us anywhere good.

  9. Dershowitz raises valid points.  These type of raids are highly problematic, even with "taint teams."

     

    You overstate the contrary position, but to anyone who has considered them, attorney-client privilege and all the other privileges and the work product doctrine obscure the truth.  But most who have considered them find it an acceptable balance between permitting full disclosure between parties to a privilege and truth-seeking.

     

    I ultimately don't have a problem with anything that makes the state's job more difficult in prosecuting the accused.

  10. 2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

    I don't think the average person is going to be inclined to read the mandate with the bright light of "is it true his mandate is limited"?  I err on the side that says the language is clear, but I've certainly seen enough lawyer types say it's more subtle than that.  I don't really get how that could be, given the fact that the entire practice of law seems to be heavily wrapped up in the meaning of words, sentences, and phrases, but I have definitely run into plenty of circumstances where historical context colors interpretation.  

    Perhaps we could cut a well-intentioned poster some slack for not having been through the argument before.  Or maybe we should feed him his nuts and laugh.  <trump> Vote? </trump>

    The  Constitution is words, but we have 200 plus years of other words, literally hundreds of thousands of them, telling us what the Constitution words mean. 

    Patent claims are just words, to be given their ordinary meaning, yet every patent infringement case has an entire proceeding to determine what the claims mean. 

  11. 1 minute ago, Pods said:

     

    I had just posted this 4 posts before your question.

    We literally have NO IDEA what Mueller is authorized to INVESTIGATE. There is a special MEMO Rosenstein wrote that STILL has about a full PAGE REDACTED.  

     

    Anyone saying Mueller is outside his mandate is full of SHIT because it's possible no one but Rosenstein and Mueller know what his full mandate is.  

     

    No one is saying he's outside his mandate, yet, well except Manafort tried to.  But obviously Mueller isn't taking that order reproduced above at face value.  He apparently is constantly going back to Rosenstein to confirm that areas of investigation are within the mandate.  And, actually, even Rosenstein's "word" isn't law.  The great limiter on Special Counsel is 28 CFR 600.1:

    Quote

    That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances

    And clearly, Mueller does not want to make those decisions unilaterally.  Nor does he want to subject his investigation to allegations that it exceeds his mandate.

  12. 1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

    Crime that arises from his investigation is within his mandate. 

    I understand where you're coming from, but that (para b) ii)) really is no limit at all.  And Mueller understands this and won't depart from the spirit of the mandate, as shown by his recently revealed consultations with Rosenstein, the "taint team," etc.  Even the Manafort stuff is acknowledged to have been triggered by an expiring statute of limitations, with the implication being that otherwise Mueller would have referred it out.

  13. 1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

    That argument isn’t based on fact since, as has been stated numerous times, that’s not Mueller’s mandate.

    We can disagree on that. But non campaign or election related criminal conduct by Trump, say in 2013 or 2014, is not within his mandate.  He can investigate it, but if it doesn't lead to mandate-related criminal conduct, he should probably leave it out of his report and refer it to the appropriate US Attorney for investigation and prosecution.

  14. 8 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

    Then he should be impeached and subsequently charged. The fuck?

    Well it's certainly not a requirement that impeachment be based on misconduct in office, but that's what everyone expects.  And, there's an argument that Mueller should not include much on criminal activity outside the scope of campaign-election-related "collusion."

  15. 3 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

    It's very hard to take shit like this as anything other than disingenuous concern trolling. 

    It's the nature of the investigation.  There's not going to be any "beef" in terms of The Donald until the Special Counsel issues his report because the Special Counsel is not going to indict the President.

     

    Currently, he's kind of nibbling at the edges of the whole thing and that creates more questions frankly than answers.

     

    What is becoming interesting to me is that I have little doubt that Donald Trump is dirty and indictable from his pre-election business dealings (possibly no more so than a lot of politicians and other public figures).  If the Special Counsel report shows all kinds of criminal dealings (money laundering, mortgage/lending fraud, etc.)  with Russians or others that precede the election and campaign (and minimal actual "collusion") what then?

     

     

  16. 16 hours ago, KuЯdt said:

    Agree that this is a great movie, and probably the best I've seen in the last 2-3 years.  One of those movies that just takes you right there into the setting. 

    It also taught me that those Full House twins have a smoking hot younger sister.

    Not sure I would say smoking hot, but she is a pretty damn good actress. 

×
×
  • Create New...