BoltProspects Community Forums  

Go Back   BoltProspects Community Forums > Miscellaneous > The Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #17611  
Old 04-30-2019, 11:04 PM
the_narrow_way's Avatar
the_narrow_way the_narrow_way is offline
Cooper's Law
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 4,871
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeykShade View Post
Also, someone should probably pay attention to Trump, Pompeo, Bolton et al, trying to start a war with Venezuela to distract from the shit news cycle they're having.
Look like Cuba is the target.
Reply With Quote
  #17612  
Old 04-30-2019, 11:06 PM
LightningTdi's Avatar
LightningTdi LightningTdi is offline
Keefamania!
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 779
Default Fox News Channel is top basic cable network in April; CNN ratings plummet

Fox News Channel is top basic cable network in April; CNN ratings plummet

'...According to Nielsen Media Research, FNC garnered 2.4 million viewers in primetime and finished first among all basic cable stations for the third month in a row, and 1.4 million viewers in total day to top basic cable for the 34th consecutive month.

For the 208th month in a row, FNC also beat left-leaning CNN and MSNBC across both categories, while CNN marked its lowest-rated month in total day viewers since October 2015, and since August 2015 in the key demographic of viewers age 25-54. ...'






https://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...-one-cnn-falls
__________________
"...But the larger point I want to emphasize here is that there is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even — you could even rig America’s elections, in part, because they are so decentralized and the numbers of votes involved.

There is no evidence that that has happened in the past or that there are instances in which that will happen this time.
..."

Partial text of President Obama's October 18, 2016 Speech

Reply With Quote
  #17613  
Old 05-01-2019, 09:04 AM
Maverick9911's Avatar
Maverick9911 Maverick9911 is offline
Steve F**king Yzerman
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,595
Send a message via AIM to Maverick9911
Default

Quote:
As for Yates, I did not know that she was "slip & fall's, 'esquire', " classmate from the "Cracker Jack School of Law"!!!???
Yet Lil' Nuggetless still won't respond directly.

It's okay. I'd be treading lightly if I'd spent the last few weeks gently kneading my sore posterior on an inflatable ass donut, too.

Now go get your shine box, pissant.
Reply With Quote
  #17614  
Old 05-01-2019, 09:09 AM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LightningTdi View Post


'...“When Barr pressed Mueller on whether he thought Barr’s memo to Congress was inaccurate, Mueller said he did not but felt that the media coverage of it was misinterpreting the investigation, officials said. ...'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.b95e0ddb2c9b



Oh really? A DOJ official that works for Barr spun a conversation they weren’t involved in to be favorable to Barr? That’s amazeballs! Let’s see the letter and let’s see Mueller testify.
__________________
S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2018-2019: 45
Reply With Quote
  #17615  
Old 05-01-2019, 09:58 AM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maverick9911 View Post
Yet Lil' Nuggetless still won't respond directly.

It's okay. I'd be treading lightly if I'd spent the last few weeks gently kneading my sore posterior on an inflatable ass donut, too.

Now go get your shine box, pissant.
So, Maverick, as you possess higher than a Trump University level law degree, can you confirm the following for all of us:

1.) That the Mueller Report specifically did not exonerate Trump on collusion, because as the report clearly states, "collusion" is a manufactured term of Trump and the media that has no legal definition. The only thing he was exonerated on was a very narrow band of "conspiracy" that is actually defined by the federal statute, and the report also clearly states that part of the reason they couldn't establish "conspiracy" beyond a reasonable doubt was the obstructive acts of Trump and his confederates that included everything from lying to investigators to the destruction of evidence?

Therefore, can you basically confirm to us that anyone bleating "no collusion" is a GD idiot who clearly hasn't read the report because "collusion" is not a legally defined thing (although by the dictionary definition of "collusion" there was collusion as outlined in the fourth part of Benjamin Wittes' review of the report in The Atlantic)?

2.) Can you also confirm that the Mueller Report specifically and directly does not exonerate Trump on obstruction, and that it also spells out that it is DOJ policy not to indict a sitting POTUS within the explanation of their charging decision? Can you also confirm that the report says that they would have exonerated Trump if they could have, but after collecting and reviewing all of the evidence they could not?

Therefore, given the above, would it be your personal opinion, like Sally Yates', that the report seems to indicate the only thing keeping Trump from being charged is the DOJ's policy?

3.) Can you confirm that the double-digit number of potentially obstructive acts committed by Trump that were specifically investigated by Mueller as contained in the report included many more episodes that were likely obstructive than merely the firing of James Comey? So, even if one believed the constitutionally dubious opinion of Dershowitz re: a POTUS' legal right to fire anyone investigating their potential crimes, there are still ample episodes of obstructive activities to consider (such as, perhaps, Trump's request to Comey to let Flynn off the hook)?

4.) Can you also confirm, via a cursory review of Wikipedia, that Sally Yates attended college in the stinky piss-smelling city of Athens, Georgia and not at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Georgia (in the mighty 404)?
__________________
S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2018-2019: 45

Last edited by pete; 05-01-2019 at 10:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #17616  
Old 05-01-2019, 01:38 PM
jdhebner's Avatar
jdhebner jdhebner is offline
The Bulin Wall
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ridgecrest
Posts: 1,039
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
So, Maverick, as you possess higher than a Trump University level law degree, can you confirm the following for all of us:

1.) That the Mueller Report specifically did not exonerate Trump on collusion, because as the report clearly states, "collusion" is a manufactured term of Trump and the media that has no legal definition. The only thing he was exonerated on was a very narrow band of "conspiracy" that is actually defined by the federal statute, and the report also clearly states that part of the reason they couldn't establish "conspiracy" beyond a reasonable doubt was the obstructive acts of Trump and his confederates that included everything from lying to investigators to the destruction of evidence?

Therefore, can you basically confirm to us that anyone bleating "no collusion" is a GD idiot who clearly hasn't read the report because "collusion" is not a legally defined thing (although by the dictionary definition of "collusion" there was collusion as outlined in the fourth part of Benjamin Wittes' review of the report in The Atlantic)?

2.) Can you also confirm that the Mueller Report specifically and directly does not exonerate Trump on obstruction, and that it also spells out that it is DOJ policy not to indict a sitting POTUS within the explanation of their charging decision? Can you also confirm that the report says that they would have exonerated Trump if they could have, but after collecting and reviewing all of the evidence they could not?

Therefore, given the above, would it be your personal opinion, like Sally Yates', that the report seems to indicate the only thing keeping Trump from being charged is the DOJ's policy?

3.) Can you confirm that the double-digit number of potentially obstructive acts committed by Trump that were specifically investigated by Mueller as contained in the report included many more episodes that were likely obstructive than merely the firing of James Comey? So, even if one believed the constitutionally dubious opinion of Dershowitz re: a POTUS' legal right to fire anyone investigating their potential crimes, there are still ample episodes of obstructive activities to consider (such as, perhaps, Trump's request to Comey to let Flynn off the hook)?

4.) Can you also confirm, via a cursory review of Wikipedia, that Sally Yates attended college in the stinky piss-smelling city of Athens, Georgia and not at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, Georgia (in the mighty 404)?
How about we open up a new thread "Ask the Experts"? It might have to be a bit more moderated(especially in the citation area) but some folks might find informative/helpful. I'll offer my services as a Scientist.....
__________________
"To Serve Man" It's a Cookbook!
Reply With Quote
  #17617  
Old 05-01-2019, 01:51 PM
dannybolt's Avatar
dannybolt dannybolt is offline
The Chief's Canadian Ginger Ale
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Pete
Posts: 1,637
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdhebner View Post
How about we open up a new thread "Ask the Experts"? It might have to be a bit more moderated(especially in the citation area) but some folks might find informative/helpful. I'll offer my services as a Scientist.....
Great idea.
__________________
Ondrej Palat fan club member
Reply With Quote
  #17618  
Old 05-01-2019, 03:36 PM
ZeykShade's Avatar
ZeykShade ZeykShade is offline
Cooper's Law
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 4,134
Default

This Barr testimony is absurd.

There's no doubt that this man is grossly unqualified for being America's Top Prosecutor. He's working for Trump and none other and it's disgusting.
__________________
The problem with today’s world is that everyone believes they have the right to express their opinion AND have others listen to it.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense! - Brian Cox
Reply With Quote
  #17619  
Old 05-01-2019, 03:48 PM
ZeykShade's Avatar
ZeykShade ZeykShade is offline
Cooper's Law
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 4,134
Default More of Biden's Receipts

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...tter-candidate
__________________
The problem with today’s world is that everyone believes they have the right to express their opinion AND have others listen to it.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense! - Brian Cox
Reply With Quote
  #17620  
Old 05-01-2019, 04:12 PM
LightningTdi's Avatar
LightningTdi LightningTdi is offline
Keefamania!
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 779
Default UNCC shooting victim Riley Howell 'saved lives' by tackling gunman, police say

UNCC shooting victim Riley Howell 'saved lives' by tackling gunman, police say

'..."You're either gonna run, gonna hide and shield, or you're gonna take the fight to the assailant," the police chief said. "Having no place to run and hide, he did the last." ...

It would be an "understatement" to say Howell tackled the gunman, but it "would be appropriate," according to Putney. He said that if Howell didn't approach the gunman, he "might not have been disarmed."

"Unfortunately, he gave his life in the process. But his sacrifice saved lives," he said of Howell. "What he did was he took the assailant off his feet, and then the heroes that we have here were able to apprehend him from there."

Putney described Howell as "the first and foremost hero as far as [he's] concerned" regarding the shooting, which also killed 19-year-old Ellis Parlier. ...'



https://www.foxnews.com/us/uncc-rile...ll-saved-lives
__________________
"...But the larger point I want to emphasize here is that there is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even — you could even rig America’s elections, in part, because they are so decentralized and the numbers of votes involved.

There is no evidence that that has happened in the past or that there are instances in which that will happen this time.
..."

Partial text of President Obama's October 18, 2016 Speech

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2005-2008, BoltProspects.com. All Rights Reserved.