and now he's a convict .... 34 times over.

[norefusal]

yeah, no. i wasn't trying to channel my inner kellyanne conway. but why try to explain the evils of the church to your catholic grandma? she not only drank the cool aid, she runs her own cool aid stand by the side of the road. 😜(ha. that's such a libra thing to say! )

[NWUSHorny]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

I am pretty confident the verdict will be upheld.

I'm pretty certain his appeal will go no where, and I was fully expecting a hung jury rather than a conviction. His defense is primarily centered on, I did it, but it shouldn't be a crime or no one else ever gets prosecuted for this kind of crime.

[50latinos]

5 hours ago, BlackDude said:

Interesting how “international communities” respect two of the most presidents who were most overt with their racism….a lot to unpack their if it’s true….

Racism is not a mental defect exclusive to America, neither is stupidity.

There are plenty of stupid racists in Europe as well as in the UK. But they are not a majority in either place. 

[think before following links] https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/globally-biden-receives-higher-ratings-than-trump/

[norefusal]

12 minutes ago, 50latinos said:

Racism is not a mental defect exclusive to America, neither is stupidity.

There are plenty of stupid racists in Europe as well as in the UK. But they are not a majority in either place. 

[think before following links] [think before following links] https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/globally-biden-receives-higher-ratings-than-trump/

im sure somebody did a study somewhere w data lol but on a personal note: i lived in italy in 84 and 85. princess diana was a big big deal. no one ever mention reagan once. ever. the average italian was vocal and unapologetic about their hatred of the japanese. it was shocking tbh. that's just a snap shot of one country at a particular time for what it's worth. 

[hntnhole]

4 hours ago, norefusal said:

but if we're gonna knock belief systems: may i introduce you to the concept of an all knowing God that micromanages events on planet earth? 😜

Unfortunately, that introduction - at least in my case - began when I was still in knickers.  That said, with some honest reflection on the intrinsic silliness of the concept, I smelled the weasel in that woodwork at an early age.  

Depending on some magical "being", rooted in millennia-old ignorance, which allows some to believe that only certain folks are going to be "saved", and the rest are bound for fire and brimstone, is the excuse the Magaroids hinge their entire world-view upon.  These nonsensical idiots ignore completely the so-called "New Covenant", in favor of clinging to antiquities millennia old. 

And before anyone starts in on the dismissal in these folks mind of the "New Covenant", first take on the rejection of the teachings of that kind and decent man, in favor of a far more ancient magic which relies on Pie in the Sky based not on how we live our lives, what good we manage to do, how we try to make the world a better place for everyone, I say go back a couple of millennia and learn about what that "New Covenant" was all about. 

You'll find precious little of it in the mouths of the Magaroids.  

[PozBearWI]

Hmmm.  Yeah I learned about god and jesus while I was learning about santa, the easter bunny, the tooth fairy....  All came from the same source.  I am fine with anyone believing whatever they want.  Even santa if you want.  But for myself, it's all fiction; made up stories for when we didn't have better information.  

[PozTalkAuthor]

2 minutes ago, PozBearWI said:

Hmmm.  Yeah I learned about god and jesus while I was learning about santa, the easter bunny, the tooth fairy....  All came from the same source.  I am fine with anyone believing whatever they want.  Even santa if you want.  But for myself, it's all fiction; made up stories for when we didn't have better information.  

 

The Flying Spaghetti Monster!!! 

Yeah, anyone can believe what they want. Believing in some superior being is (and must be) something PERSONAL and INTIMATE! No other human creature should tell you how the divinity is shaped, what they like or dislike, watch under your sheets and over your table. 

From my own point of view, those folks (especially men) who claim to spread the words of divinity -pope, priest, imam, etc.- are narcissistic, let alone the politicians who follow them.

Laws must not interfer with religion, and vice-versa! Why should I behave like Christians / jewish / muslim etc... want me to do, when I literally don't give a fucking shit of their divinities? They can't prove the divinity exists, I can't prove the opposite. So, at almost 50, I claim every right to behave for what makes me happy and of course RESPECTING other people. 

[BootmanLA]

On 6/11/2024 at 5:03 PM, norefusal said:

im sure somebody did a study somewhere w data lol but on a personal note: i lived in italy in 84 and 85. princess diana was a big big deal. no one ever mention reagan once. ever. the average italian was vocal and unapologetic about their hatred of the japanese. it was shocking tbh. that's just a snap shot of one country at a particular time for what it's worth. 

I think there's a huge difference between Reagan and Trump, though (well, actually, many huge differences, but...). Especially with respect to Europe. Quite a few liberal Europeans probably fretted that Reagan was going to end up provoking a nuclear war with the USSR, but at least they knew on whose side he stood (with them, against the USSR and eastern bloc).

Trump, by contrast, has made it clear he's fully prepared to hang western Europe out to dry, NATO be damned. I wouldn't be shocked in the slightest if European sentiment (outside the authoritarian bloc) is strongly for Biden, at least as opposed to Trump, because they can watch what's happening in Ukraine and realize that very little (other than the US helping Europe) is keeping Russia from just taking whatever parts of whatever countries on its border that it wants.

Yes, the Princess of Wales was a huge deal in all of Europe in the mid-80's, much more so than any US president. But again - I suspect the reason nobody had much to say about Reagan was that they knew he was on their side (as indeed all US presidents since WW2 had been). Europeans no longer have the luxury of ignoring which party's in power in the US, and by and large, they know it.

[norefusal]

On 6/12/2024 at 9:05 AM, PozBearWI said:

Hmmm.  Yeah I learned about god and jesus while I was learning about santa, the easter bunny, the tooth fairy....  All came from the same source.  I am fine with anyone believing whatever they want.  Even santa if you want.  But for myself, it's all fiction; made up stories for when we didn't have better information.  

i wish i could have this attitude. 

santa etc are blips on the radar screen, not quite as optional as big foot or lock nessy but not heavily pushed imho

god however is the abusive cult i was born into and even after leaving, continue to be hounded and harassed by its members. 

the fucking Allito douchbags aren't flying flags about the tooth fairy. they are using god as an excuse to control our lives, our bodies, our freedoms 

[PozBearWI]

34 minutes ago, norefusal said:

i wish i could have this attitude. 

santa etc are blips on the radar screen, not quite as optional as big foot or lock nessy but not heavily pushed imho

god however is the abusive cult i was born into and even after leaving, continue to be hounded and harassed by its members. 

the fucking Allito douchbags aren't flying flags about the tooth fairy. they are using god as an excuse to control our lives, our bodies, our freedoms 

Because we are letting them.  We can't afford not to push back hard in our right to think for ourselves on things pertaining to our life and bodies; to the extent we don't intrude on anyone else'.

[Nastyblkboy]

On 6/10/2024 at 10:23 PM, Fillitup57 said:

I believe the higher court will reverse the decision- the judge should have recused himself as his daughter was/is active in Democratic politics and the judge himself gave money to an anti-Trump group.  Only in New York would such a judge hear the case- he wanted to be in the limelight.

Well the US only has 2 major political parties and how exactly would you be able to find a judge and their entire family and all thier friends are completely impartial one way or the other. It's like that SNL sketch trying to find 12 jurors who have no beforehand knowledge of OJ Simpson. 

 

 

 

And this is not a joke...you can go on YouTube and look up the video of uncontacted Amazonian tribes knowing who Michael Jackson was before they had electricity. 

[BootmanLA]

On 6/24/2024 at 12:51 PM, Nastyblkboy said:

Well the US only has 2 major political parties and how exactly would you be able to find a judge and their entire family and all thier friends are completely impartial one way or the other. It's like that SNL sketch trying to find 12 jurors who have no beforehand knowledge of OJ Simpson. 

And actually, this isn't the standard applied to either judges (for recusal) or jurors (for disqualification).

Judges are supposed to recuse themselves when there is something (that they've said, done, are, etc.) about them that would make a reasonable person doubt that they could be impartial. I don't think any reasonable person would think a sub-$50 donation to a single Democratic organization renders that judge unable to rule impartially. In fact, the judge bent over backward in Trump's case, giving him multiple opportunities to stop violating his gag order, for instance, before finally holding him in contempt. And even then, he postponed punishment until AFTER the trial, for when sentencing will occur, so that there was no chance the jurors would see him being punished during the trial.

Any other defendant would have been taken to the holding cells at the courthouse by the second offense. And anyone who'd done it as many times as Trump did would have been serving 30 days or so, not postponed until after the trial.

As for jurors: the standard is similar: the court, on its own, can dismiss any number of potential jurors if they indicate they're unable to render an impartial verdict. In fact, from among the 96 people in the initial jury pool in Trump's case, over half were dismissed that way before either side began striking jurors they thought would be unfavorable. Notably, jurors do NOT have to have never heard of Trump, or even never heard that he has been charged with criminal offenses. They just have to be able to deliver a verdict based on the evidence.

And to that end, the prosecution and defense hammer out, with the judge, what are known as jury instructions. Those instructions explain the charges, and what precise things the jurors must - unanimously, since it's a criminal jury - find in order to render a guilty verdict. That language is precise, and it's drilled into the jurors' minds during instructions, and they're free to ask the judge to call them back into explain any instruction again.

Moreover: even beyond the "for cause" challenges (which are unlimited) to jurors, Trump's team was allowed ten "peremptory" challenges - that is, striking up to ten juror candidates for any reason at all (save for a "forbidden" reason such as race or sex or ethnicity). Trump's team didn't even use all its peremptory challenges available.