Political Roundtable Part XXVII

[daoneandonly]

Hold up? Didn’t you claim that Kavanugh was innocent despite multiple credible claims against him? How are you not giving Katie Hill the benefit of the doubt? Your misogyny is showing

Isnt there picture evidence of her? Pretty substantial difference there, like I dont even understand how its debatable. She mentioned in her resignation cryade about the pictures And these pictures and talk didnt come out as soon as she put her name in the hat, unlike the allegations that suddenly surfaced when Kavanaugh was set to be in the SCOTUS.

Ignore that major piece of the puzzle

JFC dude. She was in a consensual three-way relationship and they took nude pictures. Then the criminal ex hubby sold those pictures to a right wing publication so they could use the pictures to revenge porn her out of office.

Shut the hell up about stuff you know nothing about. Unless you are saying she is guilty *automatically* because nude pictures of her in a consensual relationship exist. She's not accused of raping someone like Kavanaugh was, so your both sidesing this is complete horsecrap.

Dont quote me and use that derogatory acronym. She was in a relationship with a staffer, no one said it wasn't consensual, its still wrong based on her position. Heck, she admitted that herself, so yeah this outcry, and acting like she's a victim is what's horsecrap. She did it, she's paying for it. her stupid self is the one that consented to the pics that proved her guilt. There's no such thing that can prove Kavanaugh's guilt. if anything, an accuser hiring Avenntti as her lawyer proves his innocence more than any claims have proven guilt.

[dckingsfan]

What needs to change is the amount of time people are on death row. In cases where there's not any doubt whatsoever, those guys should be killed as soon as the gavel hits and the words we find the defendant guilty are uttered.

And again, not beating a dead horse, your opinion of something working is just that, an opinion. 37% is not many people's idea of working, thats a huge number

Please research the number on death row where they got it wrong. Then research due process. Then research the costs. You will find that you are just trying to spend other peoples money without thinking.

Then look at the trendline for abortion - that is fact not opinion. What you have is an opinion that is dramatically lacking in fact on how to take care of the abortion issue - namely lock people up. And again, you would just be spending other people's money.

Really getting tired of these spendthrift Rs that don't bother to do research on the costs.

[montestewart]

Hold up? Didn’t you claim that Kavanugh was innocent despite multiple credible claims against him? How are you not giving Katie Hill the benefit of the doubt? Your misogyny is showing

Isnt there picture evidence of her? Pretty substantial difference there, like I dont even understand how its debatable. She mentioned in her resignation cryade about the pictures And these pictures and talk didnt come out as soon as she put her name in the hat, unlike the allegations that suddenly surfaced when Kavanaugh was set to be in the SCOTUS.

Ignore that major piece of the puzzle

JFC dude. She was in a consensual three-way relationship and they took nude pictures. Then the criminal ex hubby sold those pictures to a right wing publication so they could use the pictures to revenge porn her out of office.

Shut the hell up about stuff you know nothing about. Unless you are saying she is guilty *automatically* because nude pictures of her in a consensual relationship exist. She's not accused of raping someone like Kavanaugh was, so your both sidesing this is complete horsecrap.

Republicans are always better than Democrats with hit pieces. The Republican party is overwhelmingly white and patriarchal, so they need only be concerned with white male backlash, whereas the Democrat's "big tent" has multiple identity interests that could potentially be offended. Sex shaming a female Republican could offend women. Hit pieces on a black or Latino Republican could be seen as racist (I recall some backlash to hit pieces on Clarence Thomas and Ben Carson).

If I understand correctly, Hill had a lover whom she hired onto her staff (as opposed to entering a relationship with one of her staffers). That is the only thing I can see that is improper. I don't know the lover's actual qualifications for her position, and the issue may be nepotism, regardless of qualifications and value for the dollar. If nepotism is the issue, I don't see how Trump supporters could call for her resignation, since he freely practices nepotism himself.

So yes, the sale of the pictures by the jilted ex-husband (and that act alone shows why he was a lousy husband), and the slow burn release of the photos, looks very much like political blackmail of something that may not be at all criminal, and something that may be quite hypocritical to characterize as even unethical. I just hope no one ever releases nude photos of Trump. I cannot stand to see his supporters stoop to that level of support ("He's so sexy. Like a Cossack! His hands are HUGE!")

[daoneandonly]

Its not nepotism when you're getting sexual benefits from the perosn, she should have never been hired on given the nature of their relationship. That's what Hill did wrong, and for that, to her we say: So long, see ya sucker, bon voyage, arrivederci, later loser, goodbye, good riddance, peace out, let the doorknob hit ya where the good Lord split ya, don't come back around here no more, hasta la vista baby, kick rocks, and get the hell out!

And dck I'll reasearch that piece, if you re-intoroduce yourself to the Declaration: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

[montestewart]

Da1, If you hire your husband, wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, it's nepotism. If you hire someone you are having sex with, it's nepotism. If you hire your daughter or son-in-law, it's nepotism. Shoot from the fact sheet, not from the hip.

[daoneandonly]

Sure, but I don't think its a stretch to say hiring someone you are in a sexual relationship with should be considered worse than hiring a friend or family member. There are varying degrees of nepotism, what Hill did was the worst.

And for the record, I dont agree nor support Ivanka or her husband having any positions associated with the WH, I think when you're in an elected public servant role such as Trump or Hill, that should not even be an option.

[dckingsfan]

Sure, but I don't think its a stretch to say hiring someone you are in a sexual relationship with should be considered worse than hiring a friend or family member. There are varying degrees of nepotism, what Hill did was the worst.

And for the record, I dont agree nor support Ivanka or her husband having any positions associated with the WH, I think when you're in an elected public servant role such as Trump or Hill, that should not even be an option.

Reason 3940506050004 to vote him out of office.

[montestewart]

If you hire someone you are having sex with, presumably you have confirmed they do at least one thing well. With spouse or kids, that's not necessarily the case.

[Pointgod]

Isnt there picture evidence of her? Pretty substantial difference there, like I dont even understand how its debatable. She mentioned in her resignation cryade about the pictures And these pictures and talk didnt come out as soon as she put her name in the hat, unlike the allegations that suddenly surfaced when Kavanaugh was set to be in the SCOTUS.

Ignore that major piece of the puzzle

I’m talking about the allegations of her having an inappropriate relationship with a staffer. Why should she resign because of the pictures? Who gives a ****? If you believe Kavanaugh is innocent you should give Katie Hill the benefit of the doubt. This is actually what a political hit job looks like not the investigative process of vetting a supreme court nominee.

There are pictures of her naked with said staffer. Do you hang around with your coworkers in the buff? Thinking that's not a normal thing to do

Maybe I do what’s it too you? As long as it’s not a subordinate that’s not inappropriate. You’re awfully prudish for a guy who supports rapists and sexual assaulters. Hill is exactly right this was a dirty right wing campaign to force her out of her seat. It’s revenge porn and the fact that you somehow don’t find that the biggest issue with the situation says a lot about you. Kavanaugh raping a woman is cool. Trump raping women is cool. A woman having her nude pictures leaked and she’s the problem.

[Pointgod]

Sure, but I don't think its a stretch to say hiring someone you are in a sexual relationship with should be considered worse than hiring a friend or family member. There are varying degrees of nepotism, what Hill did was the worst.

And for the record, I dont agree nor support Ivanka or her husband having any positions associated with the WH, I think when you're in an elected public servant role such as Trump or Hill, that should not even be an option.

There’s a reason there are laws against nepotism. People meet and form relationships working together so it’s not necessarily a stretch to hire someone that you’ve worked with that’s qualified.

[Kanyewest]

Iowa is up in the air for four candidates https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/01/politics/new-york-times-2020-democrats-poll-november/index.html

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[montestewart]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

And my hands are YUGE!

[dckingsfan]

When you read his actual words, he is a bumbling fool.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[daoneandonly]

I’m talking about the allegations of her having an inappropriate relationship with a staffer. Why should she resign because of the pictures? Who gives a ****? If you believe Kavanaugh is innocent you should give Katie Hill the benefit of the doubt. This is actually what a political hit job looks like not the investigative process of vetting a supreme court nominee.

There are pictures of her naked with said staffer. Do you hang around with your coworkers in the buff? Thinking that's not a normal thing to do

Maybe I do what’s it too you? As long as it’s not a subordinate that’s not inappropriate. You’re awfully prudish for a guy who supports rapists and sexual assaulters. Hill is exactly right this was a dirty right wing campaign to force her out of her seat. It’s revenge porn and the fact that you somehow don’t find that the biggest issue with the situation says a lot about you. Kavanaugh raping a woman is cool. Trump raping women is cool. A woman having her nude pictures leaked and she’s the problem.

No one cares about her pics, its that the pics prove she was in a relationship with a subordinate, which she already admitted to. There's no injustice here, she did something that was a fire-able offense in any industry, but should especially be true for political positions and now she's gone. Tata

[I_Like_Dirt]

No one cares about her pics, its that the pics prove she was in a relationship with a subordinate, which she already admitted to. There's no injustice here, she did something that was a fire-able offense in any industry, but should especially be true for political positions and now she's gone. Tata

Where's your outrage for Duncan Hunter?

Whether or not there was injustice or not is subjective but surely we should be trying to treat things similarly?

[montestewart]

There are pictures of her naked with said staffer. Do you hang around with your coworkers in the buff? Thinking that's not a normal thing to do

Maybe I do what’s it too you? As long as it’s not a subordinate that’s not inappropriate. You’re awfully prudish for a guy who supports rapists and sexual assaulters. Hill is exactly right this was a dirty right wing campaign to force her out of her seat. It’s revenge porn and the fact that you somehow don’t find that the biggest issue with the situation says a lot about you. Kavanaugh raping a woman is cool. Trump raping women is cool. A woman having her nude pictures leaked and she’s the problem.

No one cares about her pics, its that the pics prove she was in a relationship with a subordinate, which she already admitted to. There's no injustice here, she did something that was a fire-able offense in any industry, but should especially be true for political positions and now she's gone. Tata

I also see the actual offense (as opposed to the pictures) as a not a moral issue but a general standard in this country. The CEO of McDonalds was just forced to resign for having an affair with a subordinate. But Republican have not gone to such extreme lengths to get rid of Rep. Duncan Hunter, accused of having five or more affairs, including one with his own staffer, and spending campaign funds on his affairs, his house, etc. He blames it all on his wife, who has pled guilty and is cooperating with prosecutors, he calls it all a "witch hunt" carried out by "partisan Democrat prosecutors" (the prosecutor is a Trump appointee) and the "deep state". Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know that tune.

The issue of revenge porn shaming is really a separate issue. Perhaps it was stupid for a person in her position to have so many porn selfies (if that's what you want to call them), but a burglar and his fence are no less guilty because the front door was unlocked. Hill may or may not have been re-elected, but the powers that worked to sexually shame her from office (including her obvious db of an ex-husband) show the dehumanizing lengths some will go to destroy opponents.

The big battle currently involves a president who has been arrogant, contentious, egotistical, misogynistic, boisterous, boastful, self-absorbed, incurious, provocative, vain, and dishonest his entire life, and also quite whiney when he is reported as arrogant, contentious, egotistical, misogynistic, boisterous, boastful, self-absorbed, incurious, provocative, vain, and dishonest. He and his administration have been the subject of several investigations since he took office, regarding the lengths he and his team would go to in order to secure victory. Very similar to Nixon. The latest investigation seems to have the most steam, an alleged extremely corrupt attempt to expose a perceived opponent's alleged extreme corruption.

Many Trump supporters (maybe all, I don't know) do not seem to understand that FAKE NEWS! is not necessary to reach conclusions about Trump. It is very easy to form an opinion based purely on him, his tweets, his speeches, his interviews, his (obviously ghost written) books, his public statements, and his very public actions, including some that he surely did not intend to go public. He is surely the least private candidate and president in history, and he brought his arrogant, contentious, egotistical, misogynistic, boisterous, boastful, self-absorbed, incurious, provocative, vain, dishonest behavior to an even larger audience.

This is politics at its slimiest. Hound a woman from office not with ethical violations but with naked pictures. The Democratic party cannot get away with such slut shaming...or gay shaming, or attacking Latino or black or Native American or Islamic or...just about anyone who isn't a white male...without some sort of backlash from its own constituents. But when the emperor shows up naked, over and over, his supporters just keep saying, "Nice suit! You're one of us!"

The political process likely pollutes every politician's winning ambition with necessary compromise, and inevitably corrupts repeat players, if not through personal financial gain, then at least through an abandonment of ideals in order to remain repeat players. I have lived in DC virtually all my life and watched this all like it is a very consequential but inherently absurd game. And yet, in all that time, I have never seen someone like Trump, who so clearly had a broken moral compass at the starting gate, rise to the top, and while repeatedly confirming that he has no moral compass, continue to enthrall supporters and inspire the most twisted, ridiculous, and frequently contradictory rationalizations for supporting him. Extremely consequential, inherently absurd.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Really getting tired of these spendthrift Rs that don't bother to do research on the costs.

This is also where I feel like we need to actually have an honest national discussion about universal health care. That means not dancing around issues about which costs are going to be restrained but also discussing the costs of doing nothing because the below really can't continue ad nauseum. Heck, it can't continue for the other countries on the chart, either; it's just the one outlier that's really in trouble.

[Ruzious]

Surprise no one has posted the vote to move forward with impeachment.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/us/politics/house-impeachment-vote.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

The vote was 232 to 196 to approve a resolution that sets out rules for an impeachment process for which there are few precedents, and which promises to consume the country a little more than a year before the 2020 elections. It was only the third time in modern history that the House had taken a vote on an impeachment inquiry into a sitting president.

How is he not impeached NOW just for his intimidation of witnesses? I don't understand how he's allowed to keep doing this on a regular basis. It's so obviously criminally, ethically and morally wrong. Is this country so bleeped up that people don't understand this? He should be impeached NOW. He should be thrown out of office by the Senate tomorrow. He should be on trial for criminal charges the next day. His relatives should all be kicked out of their WH offices the day after that.