Fiona Hill: "The president was trying to stage a coup"

[User Name]

The only fool making that fool claim is you.

Oh.

 

[Idolater]

Oh.

lol.

Weighty.

 

[annabenedetti]

What an idiot.

He's actually not.

The Supreme Court is our living code of ethics. America's founded upon a moral theory, expressed prosaically and rhetorically in our Declaration. The Constitution is the legal expression of that moral theory, version two (version one didn't work and the Constitution is the embodiment of the founders' understanding of both our moral theory and plus the lessons learned from version one). The Supreme Court has, in the Constitution, the power to review laws that the Legislative Branch makes, and because laws are judged according to the Constitution, and because the Constitution is a legal expression of a moral theory, the Supreme Court is our living code of ethics. In judging their constitutionality the Court also judges the morality of our nation's laws. If Washington made a code of ethics for the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court is going to have the power to review that law, to see if it comports with the Constitution, and that is what we literally pay these guys and gals to already be doing. The only way you can correct a problem in the Supreme Court is with impeachment, and nobody's saying impeachment because we all know how ridiculous impeaching Justice Thomas over this is.

Ginni Thomas worked diligently to overthrow our election. Her husband was the lone dissent in an 8-1 ruling to allow the release of Trump’s Jan. 6 documents. There's a rule that applies to all federal justices below SC level that if the spouse is likely to be a material witness in a a case the justice shall (not might think about it and maybe) disqualify him or herself. This rule should apply to the SC as well, and if Thomas had any ethics he would have recused himself.

 

[ok doser]

He's actually not.

He actually is

 

[marke]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1507440547614572549

Richard Blumenthal is a hypocrite for talking about ethics after lying about his military service in order to get elected. He never served in Viet Nam but pretended that he did in order to stel the glory and honor he did not deserve.

 

[marke]

Richard Blumenthal is a hypocrite for talking about ethics after lying about his military service in order to get elected. He never served in Viet Nam but pretended that he did in order to stel the glory and honor he did not deserve.

Democrats don't care if democrats lie about their military service because lying is the cornerstone of democrat politics.

Veterans on Blumenthal: It's about 'stolen valor'

It's called "stolen valor."

www.middletownpress.com

The state's Democrats endorsed Blumenthal as their nominee for the U.S. Senate on Friday. Sterner said of the candidate, "I'm not cutting him any slack. ... It's obvious that he has falsely portrayed himself as being a Vietnam veteran."

 

[Idolater]

He's actually not.

He is. See below.

Ginni Thomas worked diligently to overthrow our election. Her husband was the lone dissent in an 8-1 ruling to allow the release of Trump’s Jan. 6 documents. There's a rule that applies to all federal justices below SC level that if the spouse is likely to be a material witness in a a case the justice shall (not might think about it and maybe) disqualify him or herself. This rule should apply to the SC as well, and if Thomas had any ethics he would have recused himself.

None of that changes a single thing I said.

 

[Skeeter]

That is irrelevant. Anything that can be said (by people) is divisible into distinct elemental propositions, and every single one of these is either true or false.

The law tries to pigeon hole concepts into discrete binary propositions to make decisions easier, but that does not reflect reality. There is a range from true to false on many points.

 

[Idolater]

The law tries to pigeon hole concepts into discrete binary propositions to make decisions easier, but that does not reflect reality. There is a range from true to false on many points.

. . . within discrete philosophies of morality, law. Judicial philosophies and moral theories differ and conflict. What an absolute monarchist ideology thinks should be done conflicts with liberalism. For one it's true for the other it's false.

But even that all aside, you haven't nullified anything I've said to @User Name on this score. Your first sentence confirms that he or she or neither he nor she doesn't know the first thing about logic. I have come to expect that centuries of jurisprudence reflect a more than elementary understanding of logic.

 

[Idolater]

Through the lens of critical race theory

Don't forget that you racist

If I could just ascertain any single elemental proposition made by CRT then I could begin to attempt to understand what it is.

 

[ok doser]

If I could just ascertain any single elemental proposition made by CRT then I could begin to attempt to understand what it is.

White people are bad
Capitalism is bad
The United States is bad

 

[Idolater]

White people are bad
Capitalism is bad
The United States is bad

Right. So if there's any confirmation of that, then I could begin to understand CRT. But as things stand I can't find a single 'canonical' reference of what CRT is. Whatever you accuse CRT of being is always denied, and you're never told what it is, only just what it isn't.

 

[marke]

Right. So if there's any confirmation of that, then I could begin to understand CRT. But as things stand I can't find a single 'canonical' reference of what CRT is. Whatever you accuse CRT of being is always denied, and you're never told what it is, only just what it isn't.

Question: What is CRT and why is it taught in public schools?

BLM supporter and leftist democrat activist response: CRT is the true history of America and no racist ideology is being taught in America's glorious public schools being administered by the duly elected democrat leaders of the US. And don't ask us to define or defend CRT because we are not the African American forefathers who founded America and struggled against its racist history.

 

[User Name]

. . . within discrete philosophies of morality, law. Judicial philosophies and moral theories differ and conflict. What an absolute monarchist ideology thinks should be done conflicts with liberalism. For one it's true for the other it's false.

But even that all aside, you haven't nullified anything I've said to @User Name on this score. Your first sentence confirms that he or she or neither he nor she doesn't know the first thing about logic. I have come to expect that centuries of jurisprudence reflect a more than elementary understanding of logic.

I wasn't talking about law or logic. My whole point was that to speak in shrill extremes about other people, as @marke does in virtually every post, is...shrill and extreme. It is also illogical/irrational, etc.

 

[marke]

I wasn't talking about law or logic. My whole point was that to speak in shrill extremes about other people, as @marke does in virtually every post, is...shrill and extreme. It is also illogical/irrational, etc.

Marxist version of shrill and extreme:

Matthew 23:33
"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"
Jesus Christ

 

[User Name]

Marxist version of shrill and extreme:

Matthew 23:33
"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?"
Jesus Christ

1) You aren't Jesus Christ.
2) You have much more in common with the judgemental, hypocritical Pharisees than you could even begin to realize.
3) Go and learn what 2 Corinthians 3:6, James 2:13, and James 1:20 mean.

 

[annabenedetti]

Ginni Thomas’ Election Fraud Guru

Ginni Thomas name-checked Steve Pieczenik, a little-known conspiracy theorist, in texts to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows about overturning the 2020 election.

As Ginni Thomas, a prominent conservative activist and the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, made the case to overturn the election to a top adviser to former President Donald Trump in the days after the 2020 election, she cited several conspiracy theories popular with the president’s most deluded supporters

In her messages, published Thursday by CBS News and the Washington Post, Thomas urged then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to look into the claims of Steve Pieczenik, a little-known conspiracy theorist whose ideas are often too crazy for even Alex Jones.

 

[Rusha]

Ginni Thomas’ Election Fraud

Thomas needs to step down … or at the very least recuse himself on any matters involving the 2020 election and January 6th.

 

[annabenedetti]

Thomas needs to step down … or at the very least recuse himself on any matters involving the 2020 election and January 6th.

He should step down, simply for his past refusals to recuse himself in any SC deliberation regarding the 2020 election when he knew his wife was all along pushing to overthrow it.

As Sen. Wyden said: “Judges are obligated to recuse themselves when their participation in a case would create even the appearance of a conflict of interest. A person with an ounce of common sense could see that bar is met here. Justice Thomas participated in cases related to Donald Trump’s efforts to rig and then overturn the 2020 election, while his wife was pushing to do the same. He was the lone dissent in a case that could have denied the January 6th Committee records pertaining to the same plot his wife supported."

 

[Idolater]

He should step down, simply for his past refusals to recuse himself in any SC deliberation regarding the 2020 election when he knew his wife was all along pushing to overthrow it.

As Sen. Wyden said: “Judges are obligated to recuse themselves when their participation in a case would create even the appearance of a conflict of interest. A person with an ounce of common sense could see that bar is met here. Justice Thomas participated in cases related to Donald Trump’s efforts to rig and then overturn the 2020 election, while his wife was pushing to do the same. He was the lone dissent in a case that could have denied the January 6th Committee records pertaining to the same plot his wife supported."

Nobody----nobody----is talking impeachment of Justice Thomas. This is all rhetoric, spin, narrative, electioneering, partisanship.