- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
10thFltPsyWarDawg
| Favorite team: | Georgia  |
| Location: | American South |
| Biography: | Christian Husband Sailor Dawg |
| Interests: | God Family Country UGA |
| Occupation: | Narrative Underminer |
| Number of Posts: | 24 |
| Registered on: | 8/18/2019 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Elizabeth Warren's tax guru explains how he will tax wealth, not income (f#cking scary)
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/21/19 at 11:23 pm to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
Progressives are jealous of wealth
Agreed.
quote:
and want to punish the wealthy through tax.
horseshite. They want all the wealth for themselves, as well as control over everyone else's lives.
"Progressives" = camouflaged American bullshite-speak for Communists. Period. They are sick shitbag Marxists.
0
re: As a public service re: Tulsi Gabbard, here's a reminder who she is:
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/21/19 at 10:37 pm to RollTide1987
re: Someone clearly explain the Tulsi Gabbard hate from Crooked
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/18/19 at 7:24 pm to Pussykat
Same thing could be said about Nancy Pelosi once...look how that turned out.
re: Someone clearly explain the Tulsi Gabbard hate from Crooked
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/18/19 at 7:22 pm to Covingtontiger77
Possibly a double-blind.
HRC's move doesn't make sense. Clinton has zero electability so the dare to for her to enter the race from Gabbard rings hollow; however, it's hellacious optics for unifying a lot of dem-leaning undecideds who are turned off by Clinton.
And Gabbard has the "military service" record supporting her. Media has been uniformly silent as to anything the general public would find truly negative about her politics (hmmmm...)
So, question is, does Gabbard have anything that offers Clinton & her cabal buddies (Obama comes to mind) leverage for behind-the-scenes maneuvering? Gabbard comes from Hawaii, Obama's old stomping grounds...
I smell a rat. Named ISLUT.
HRC's move doesn't make sense. Clinton has zero electability so the dare to for her to enter the race from Gabbard rings hollow; however, it's hellacious optics for unifying a lot of dem-leaning undecideds who are turned off by Clinton.
And Gabbard has the "military service" record supporting her. Media has been uniformly silent as to anything the general public would find truly negative about her politics (hmmmm...)
So, question is, does Gabbard have anything that offers Clinton & her cabal buddies (Obama comes to mind) leverage for behind-the-scenes maneuvering? Gabbard comes from Hawaii, Obama's old stomping grounds...
I smell a rat. Named ISLUT.
re: Mifsuds cell phones that Barr now has were "given" to him by someone
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/18/19 at 10:57 am to trinidadtiger
I can pretty much answer the 2nd question.
It's an ethics matter, if you're a lawyer. When Barr/Durham came into possession of evidence that may contain evidence that is exculpatory or may be used to impeach a prosecution witness in Flynn's case, it has to be disclosed...even though he's pled guilty, as there is the possibility of appeal/retrial. These are disclosure requirements that developed from the Brady v. Maryland US Supreme Court decision and later decisions.
Plenty of Fed and State prosecutors play fast and loose with the disclosure requirements - in fact, that's one of the likely reasons that the Fed prosecutors may be later disbarred.
There are still honest lawyers, and Barr/Durham fit that description.
And here's one more item for thought - Barr/Durham had NO obligation to disclose the phones if they contained nothing that a court might consider exculpatory.
Whoops. That tells us something, doesn't it?
It's an ethics matter, if you're a lawyer. When Barr/Durham came into possession of evidence that may contain evidence that is exculpatory or may be used to impeach a prosecution witness in Flynn's case, it has to be disclosed...even though he's pled guilty, as there is the possibility of appeal/retrial. These are disclosure requirements that developed from the Brady v. Maryland US Supreme Court decision and later decisions.
Plenty of Fed and State prosecutors play fast and loose with the disclosure requirements - in fact, that's one of the likely reasons that the Fed prosecutors may be later disbarred.
There are still honest lawyers, and Barr/Durham fit that description.
And here's one more item for thought - Barr/Durham had NO obligation to disclose the phones if they contained nothing that a court might consider exculpatory.
Whoops. That tells us something, doesn't it?
re: Posting this to see if this Anon makes the correct prediction.
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/16/19 at 11:02 pm to GumboPot
No, appointment of independent (aka "special") counsel is only done by the AG or, if the AG recuses, by the Deputy AG.
Previously, under Title VI of the Ethics in
Government Act of 1978 relating to the appointment of
“independent counsels” (called “special prosecutors” until 1983), the Attorney General was directed to petition a special three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals to name an independent counsel upon the receipt of credible allegations of criminal misconduct by certain high-level personnel in the executive branch of the federal government whose prosecution by the Administration might give rise to an appearance of a conflict of interest.
In 1999, Congress allowed the “independent counsel” provisions of law to expire.
That explains the Starr appointment.
Previously, under Title VI of the Ethics in
Government Act of 1978 relating to the appointment of
“independent counsels” (called “special prosecutors” until 1983), the Attorney General was directed to petition a special three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals to name an independent counsel upon the receipt of credible allegations of criminal misconduct by certain high-level personnel in the executive branch of the federal government whose prosecution by the Administration might give rise to an appearance of a conflict of interest.
In 1999, Congress allowed the “independent counsel” provisions of law to expire.
That explains the Starr appointment.
re: When Beto says "We will take your guns"
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/16/19 at 10:45 pm to Wolfmanjack
I think you may be extrapolating that LEO's are willing to do this based on some Northern/Western agencies that are beset with cronyism.
I know and have worked very closely with quite a few local, county, state and federal law enforcement - including recent presidential protective details - from other parts of the country, particularly Southern, where the cops are both pro 2A and have absolutely no problem refusing to enforce a law they know is damn well unConstitutional.
Just thought you'd like to know that it's not nearly as cut-n-dried as you imagine. The majority are not willing to be jackbooted thugs...
Especially when you consider that the average large city has a ratio of about 1 sworn officer (thus entitled to carry a firearm) per around every 160-200 citizens, as a general range.
That's really shitty odds. They are very aware of that.
I know and have worked very closely with quite a few local, county, state and federal law enforcement - including recent presidential protective details - from other parts of the country, particularly Southern, where the cops are both pro 2A and have absolutely no problem refusing to enforce a law they know is damn well unConstitutional.
Just thought you'd like to know that it's not nearly as cut-n-dried as you imagine. The majority are not willing to be jackbooted thugs...
Especially when you consider that the average large city has a ratio of about 1 sworn officer (thus entitled to carry a firearm) per around every 160-200 citizens, as a general range.
That's really shitty odds. They are very aware of that.
re: Pentagon says unable to share documents with House impeachment request
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/16/19 at 10:30 pm to bmy
Well, frickit. Let's just take a look at what the CURRENT U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES has to say about the impeachment process ON ITS OWN WEBSITE:
"The House's Role
The House brings impeachment charges against federal officials as part of its oversight and investigatory responsibilities. Individual Members of the House can introduce impeachment resolutions like ordinary bills, or the House could initiate proceedings by passing a resolution authorizing an inquiry. The Committee on the Judiciary ordinarily has jurisdiction over impeachments, but special committees investigated charges before the Judiciary Committee was created in 1813. The committee then chooses whether to pursue articles of impeachment against the accused official and report them to the full House. If the articles are adopted (by simple majority vote), the House appoints Members by resolution to manage the ensuing Senate trial on its behalf. These managers act as prosecutors in the Senate and are usually members of the Judiciary Committee. The number of managers has varied across impeachment trials but has traditionally been an odd number. The partisan composition of managers has also varied depending on the nature of the impeachment, but the managers, by definition, always support the House’s impeachment action."
Any of that sounds like it's happened to you?
LINK
"The House's Role
The House brings impeachment charges against federal officials as part of its oversight and investigatory responsibilities. Individual Members of the House can introduce impeachment resolutions like ordinary bills, or the House could initiate proceedings by passing a resolution authorizing an inquiry. The Committee on the Judiciary ordinarily has jurisdiction over impeachments, but special committees investigated charges before the Judiciary Committee was created in 1813. The committee then chooses whether to pursue articles of impeachment against the accused official and report them to the full House. If the articles are adopted (by simple majority vote), the House appoints Members by resolution to manage the ensuing Senate trial on its behalf. These managers act as prosecutors in the Senate and are usually members of the Judiciary Committee. The number of managers has varied across impeachment trials but has traditionally been an odd number. The partisan composition of managers has also varied depending on the nature of the impeachment, but the managers, by definition, always support the House’s impeachment action."
Any of that sounds like it's happened to you?
LINK
re: Stop saying Tulsi Gabbard is a "Moderate", she's absolutely not.
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/16/19 at 9:15 pm to BeefDawg
DRABBAG ISLUT
0202
0202
re: How the mighty have fallen-Megyn Kelly
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 5:25 pm to jrobic4
Nothing wrong with shopping at the Dollar Store. My wife and I spend a pretty fair amount of money there every year because we can strech our purchasing power.
Cheap goods, sure, but that means we can buy more towels, toothbrushes, socks and soap for the homeless.
Same thing with Walmart and a few other places.
Screw the insults.
Cheap goods, sure, but that means we can buy more towels, toothbrushes, socks and soap for the homeless.
Same thing with Walmart and a few other places.
Screw the insults.
re: BARR/DURHAM obtain Mifsud’s phones, Court docs say (Mifsud tried to target Flynn??)
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 5:21 pm to KCT
Heh heh.
Those #'s have already been logged and dogged.
Think about it...if BARR (the top lawyer for the US of A) got the phones...
and Sydney Powell somehow learned about it...
Doesn't that mean that the good guys are running the show?
Barr, as a lawyer and the nation's top prosecutor, was taking his duty seriously by voluntarily and promptly disclosing the possible exculpatory information.
Now, if Van Grack and Van Crack (madam prosecutrix) try to withhold producing the materials...
Ruh roh.
Those #'s have already been logged and dogged.
Think about it...if BARR (the top lawyer for the US of A) got the phones...
and Sydney Powell somehow learned about it...
Doesn't that mean that the good guys are running the show?
Barr, as a lawyer and the nation's top prosecutor, was taking his duty seriously by voluntarily and promptly disclosing the possible exculpatory information.
Now, if Van Grack and Van Crack (madam prosecutrix) try to withhold producing the materials...
Ruh roh.
re: BARR/DURHAM obtain Mifsud’s phones, Court docs say (Mifsud tried to target Flynn??)
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 5:16 pm to LuckyTiger
Pardon Flynn, my arse.
People guilty of crimes get pardoned.
I want to see the conviction reversed, the charges thrown out, Gen. Flynn exhonerated and the people who framed him sent to hell.
People guilty of crimes get pardoned.
I want to see the conviction reversed, the charges thrown out, Gen. Flynn exhonerated and the people who framed him sent to hell.
re: Giuliani Tells Democrats To Take Their Subpoena & Cram It
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 5:07 pm to GumboPot
Totally agree except for the "contempt is criminal" part.
Read 755 which spells out generally the underlying basis for your (correct) premise that the House Dems' remedy for Rudy telling them to pound sand is a civil lawsuit.
That's why I'm laughing, it leaves them with a crappy binary set, like choosing btn gonorrhea or diarrhea
That's why I'm laughing. Apologies if it was misconstrued
Read 755 which spells out generally the underlying basis for your (correct) premise that the House Dems' remedy for Rudy telling them to pound sand is a civil lawsuit.
That's why I'm laughing, it leaves them with a crappy binary set, like choosing btn gonorrhea or diarrhea
That's why I'm laughing. Apologies if it was misconstrued
re: Officially Editing My Prediction re: Indictments/Arrests
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 4:50 pm to BeefDawg
I understand the frustration, and under ordinary circumstances many (all the ones Vox mentioned, as well as others) would have been indicted by now.
These circumstances are far from ordinary, and as many in the US are just now coming to realize, involve a LOT of foreign interference and involvement with countries like Canada, NZ, Australia, Britain, Italy, Ukraine, Germany, Russia, China, etc.
Aside from the complications that arise from that, and the maneuvering necessary to align both cooperative and uncooperative governments (including wholesale changes of government powers, for example in Ukraine), people still forget 2 things:
1. This is still a wartime situation and some acts frankly invoke military jurisdiction, and,
2. FISA goes both ways.
It takes time and skillful manipulation to get people in power to communicate things that ordinarily wouldn't be said, even in code. That time is spent putting the rat line together, connecting the dots and getting cast-iron proofs. And when the hammer drops, the process won't be either pretty or even fully in the open (same reason, foreign intelligence).
Don't like how slow it's going? TFB. Folks can come across as intelligent enough to actually understand patience, then end up sounding like spoiled fricking Veruca Salt "I want it now!"
Growaset is now sold OTC in Walgreens, Rite Aid, Walmart and other fine retailers. I've got the patent. Check it out.
These circumstances are far from ordinary, and as many in the US are just now coming to realize, involve a LOT of foreign interference and involvement with countries like Canada, NZ, Australia, Britain, Italy, Ukraine, Germany, Russia, China, etc.
Aside from the complications that arise from that, and the maneuvering necessary to align both cooperative and uncooperative governments (including wholesale changes of government powers, for example in Ukraine), people still forget 2 things:
1. This is still a wartime situation and some acts frankly invoke military jurisdiction, and,
2. FISA goes both ways.
It takes time and skillful manipulation to get people in power to communicate things that ordinarily wouldn't be said, even in code. That time is spent putting the rat line together, connecting the dots and getting cast-iron proofs. And when the hammer drops, the process won't be either pretty or even fully in the open (same reason, foreign intelligence).
Don't like how slow it's going? TFB. Folks can come across as intelligent enough to actually understand patience, then end up sounding like spoiled fricking Veruca Salt "I want it now!"
Growaset is now sold OTC in Walgreens, Rite Aid, Walmart and other fine retailers. I've got the patent. Check it out.
re: Trump’s Syrian Maneuver Works. President Erdogan Asks for Negotiations With Kurds in Syria
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 4:04 pm to cajunangelle
I'm surprised they didn't try to spin it into a Turkish invasion of Kentucky.
Of course, a lot of booze is made in KY and I hear the Turks are on the fundamentalist side of Islam these days...
Of course, a lot of booze is made in KY and I hear the Turks are on the fundamentalist side of Islam these days...
re: Trump’s Syrian Maneuver Works. President Erdogan Asks for Negotiations With Kurds in Syria
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 4:00 pm to bmy
Turks are asking for a way out of their own invasion less than 2 days after starting, and you're griping?
To borrow a line from the movie "Patton" -
It's time to consider just how many casualties there would be if we were still crawling along that GD road.
:spank:
To borrow a line from the movie "Patton" -
It's time to consider just how many casualties there would be if we were still crawling along that GD road.
:spank:
re: Giuliani Tells Democrats To Take Their Subpoena & Cram It
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 3:31 pm to GumboPot
Incorrect. Both civil contempt and criminal contempt exist. If you wish to read about both and the differences between them, go to the link and read 754 and 755 from the US DOJ Criminal Resource Manual.
Bon appetit. US DoJ CRM
:bwahaha: :bwahaha:
Bon appetit. US DoJ CRM
:bwahaha: :bwahaha:
re: Project Veritas CNN NothingBurger
Posted by 10thFltPsyWarDawg on 10/15/19 at 11:32 am to GumboPot
Commie News Network
"The Most Rusted Name In News"
"The Most Rusted Name In News"
Popular
15
