HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » EffieBlack » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 53 Next »

EffieBlack

Profile Information

Member since: Sat Feb 3, 2007, 12:43 AM
Number of posts: 13,753

Journal Archives

Speaking of white privilege ...

Former Stanford Coach Gets No Prison Time in College Admissions Scandal
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/12/us/college-admissions-scandal-stanford.html?action=click&module=Alert&pgtype=Homepage

A former Stanford University sailing coach accused of taking bribes from a corrupt college consultant was ordered on Wednesday to serve no prison time, becoming the first person sentenced in the nation’s largest-ever college admissions fraud prosecution.

The coach, John Vandemoer, was given a far lighter sentence than prosecutors had sought: a single day in jail — time the judge said had already been served — and six months of home confinement as part of two years of supervised release.


An impeachment inquiry ISN'T the only way for the House to get secret grand jury material, after all

It’s been practically a mantra on DU, in the media, and elsewhere that Democrats MUST start impeachment because that's supposedly the only way for the House to obtain grand jury material.

Well, today, the House is scheduled to vote to authorize the Judiciary Committee Chairman to petition the court to obtain grand jury materials, on the basis that the Judiciary Committee is conducting hearings that are “preliminary” to a judicial proceeding and, therefore, a judge can disclose grand jury materials to them for this purpose. They actually quote the rule’s language in the bill to justify their request to obtain the materials even though an impeachment inquiry hasn’t been opened. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-116hres430ih/xml/BILLS-116hres430ih.xml

This is exactly the basis described by a DUer who’s tried to push back on the “impeachment’s the only way” fallacy, only to be met with uniformed arguments, hostility, alerts, attacks on her expertise, credibility, motives and even the length of time she’s been on DU.

It’s nice to see her (and others of us who read the law the same way - as it’s written) proven correct, by no less than Chairman Nadler, the Judiciary Committee and the House.

"How come nobody told these stupid motherf#ckers I singlehandedly took down a president?"

A president must threaten bodily harm or engage in other criminality to be shown to have obstructed

justice?

“Moreover, it is almost invariably the case that someone attempting to obstruct an investigation simultaneously engages in other nefarious activities, such as destroying evidence, suborning perjury, bribing witnesses, or threatening them with (or actually inflicting) bodily harm. That is critically important.” John Malcolm, Heritage Foundation


The Committee Dems should get a Medal of Honor for not laughing in that fool’s face.

Trump blasts "Deep State Tailor"

https://twitter.com/Gerald_Weaver_/status/1135694819295186946

Trump blasts "deep state tailor" at White House.

"He was appointed by Obama," Trump claims, "like those judges."

Tailor is Trump's personal tailor, and says it was not his fault. "Someone substituted a bib from Red Lobster at the last minute, and gave him Barron's jacket. https://t.co/1qaj25dxFl

BREAKING: Trump transition team member indicted on child pornography charges

https://wapo.st/2HSDAxN

A key witness in former Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of Russian election interference has been indicted by federal officials on child pornography charges, according to court documents.

George Nader, who had a previous criminal record on such charges, was charged in federal court in Virginia, and is expected to make an initial court appearance in New York.

Nader played an unusual role as a kind of liaison between Trump supporters, Middle East leaders, and Russians interested in making contact with the incoming administration in early 2017.
...
Nader was convicted 28 years ago of transporting child pornography, a case in which he received a reduced sentence after influential figures argued privately to the court that he was playing a valuable role in national security affairs — trying to free U.S. hostages then held in Lebanon.

Don't buy the lie that Mueller said he believes it's unconstitutional to indict a sitting president

He didn't say that.
"We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. The introduction to the volume two of our report explains that decision. It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that too is prohibited. The special counsel’s office is part of the Department of Justice and by regulation it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider. "

He stated clearly and unequivocally that it's DOJ policy that it's unconstitutional to indict a sitting president. He offered nothing of his first view or subject

Claiming he said otherwise is a lie and is, unfortunately, being spread on DU for some reason.

We're being played. Don't fall for it!

What specifically do you expect Mueller to say in his testimony

that would influence or matter to you that would not be communicated in a transcript of his testimony?

Please be specific.

Note: I'm not asking for your opinions about how Mueller's testimony might influence someone else. This is a question directed to each of you. What do you expect that Mueller would say in his testimony that could influence or make a difference to you in any way that wouldn't influence or make a difference to you if you read it in a transcript?

On Day 2 of the Pelosi Mashdown of Trump, we suddenly get inundated with a stream

with a stream of breathless angry diatribes about Mueller's testimony.

I willingly joined in the conversations myself because some of the carrying on seemed so ridiculous and I wanted to counter it ... but now that I think about it, I just find it interesting.

Pelosi's detractors were right about one thing: She IS a lightning rod. And thank God, she is

And I’ll bet the red state Members who, even if they support impeachment, need some time and space to help their constituents catch up with the rest of us, are grateful that Nancy Pelosi is taking the incoming bolts for them.

That’s what a leader does. And Pelosi is doing it so well, she makes it look easy - so easy, in fac, that some people don’t even realize she’s doing it.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 53 Next »