|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled
Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 22,207
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter
#26925515 - 09/08/20 11:43 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: ballsalsa]
#26925563 - 09/09/20 12:48 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Strange story. Carroll alleges Trump tried to rape her in a dressing room of a famous New York City department store while she was modeling lingerie for him. She never filed any charges against him, but then when she wrote about the incident in a book after Trump became President, Trump commented “she’s not my type” and now she's suing him for defamation.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
falcon
Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,043
Last seen: 17 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: ballsalsa]
#26925726 - 09/09/20 05:24 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
public defender? for those who can't afford a lawyer
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,661
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 8 minutes, 46 seconds
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: ballsalsa]
#26925729 - 09/09/20 05:36 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Some legalese; still dont see how this applies since alleged action took place before Trump was prez?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/50.15
50.15 Representation of Federal officials and employees by Department of Justice attorneys or by private counsel furnished by the Department in civil, criminal, and congressional proceedings in which Federal employees are sued, subpoenaed, or charged in their individual capacities. (a) Under the procedures set forth below, a federal employee (hereby defined to include present and former Federal officials and employees) may be provided representation in civil, criminal and Congressional proceedings in which he is sued, subpoenaed, or charged in his individual capacity, not covered by § 15.1 of this chapter, when the actions for which representation is requested reasonably appear to have been performed within the scope of the employee's employment and the Attorney General or his designee determines that providing representation would otherwise be in the interest of the United States. No special form of request for representation is required when it is clear from the proceedings in a case that the employee is being sued solely in his official capacity and only equitable relief is sought. (See USAM 4-13.000)
(1) When an employee believes he is entitled to representation by the Department of Justice in a proceeding, he must submit forthwith a written request for that representation, together with all process and pleadings served upon him, to his immediate supervisor or whomever is designated by the head of his department or agency. Unless the employee's employing federal agency concludes that representation is clearly unwarranted, it shall submit, in a timely manner, to the Civil Division or other appropriate litigating division (Antitrust, Civil Rights, Criminal, Land and Natural Resources or the Tax Division), a statement containing its findings as to whether the employee was acting within the scope of his employment and its recommendation for or against providing representation. The statement should be accompanied by all available factual information. In emergency situations the litigating division may initiate conditional representation after a telephone request from the appropriate official of the employing agency. In such cases, the written request and appropriate documentation must be subsequently provided.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
Psilynut2
Stranger
Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,284
Last seen: 3 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: ballsalsa] 2
#26925779 - 09/09/20 06:57 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I wonder how conservatives would have felt about Obama using their tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge that allegedly took place before he was in office if he had been white instead of black ?
|
Shenmue
Dark Lord of the Sith
Registered: 12/21/18
Posts: 2,514
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26925794 - 09/09/20 07:20 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Strange story. Carroll alleges Trump tried to rape her in a dressing room of a famous New York City department store while she was modeling lingerie for him. She never filed any charges against him, but then when she wrote about the incident in a book after Trump became President, Trump commented “she’s not my type” and now she's suing him for defamation.
Ok this shit is starting to get old lol. Either every male celebrity is a rapist amd wife beater or some of these bitches are lying for fame and money lol.
Trump has billions! He doesn't have to rape women! He could bang a beautiful virgin every Friday night if he wanted to.... Even the Biden thing is probably bullshit. These women want money!!!!!
|
Shenmue
Dark Lord of the Sith
Registered: 12/21/18
Posts: 2,514
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Shenmue]
#26925798 - 09/09/20 07:24 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
|
Billy Ray
Stranger
Registered: 11/19/19
Posts: 754
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Psilynut2] 1
#26925904 - 09/09/20 08:44 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: I wonder how conservatives would have felt about Obama using their tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge that allegedly took place before he was in office if he had been white instead of black ?
Obama killed American citizens while in office. Not many people seemed to care.
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled
Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 22,207
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Billy Ray]
#26925907 - 09/09/20 08:45 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Obama is trash.
Happy?
-------------------- Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Billy Ray
Stranger
Registered: 11/19/19
Posts: 754
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: ballsalsa]
#26925911 - 09/09/20 08:47 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Indifferent.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,661
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 8 minutes, 46 seconds
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: ballsalsa]
#26925926 - 09/09/20 08:58 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Da legal argument, they want to change Trump to "United States".
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/09/910992023/justice-dept-intervenes-to-take-over-trumps-defense-in-defamation-lawsuit
In an unusual five-page filing in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Justice Department argued that Trump's remarks were made in the performance of his official duties as president and that therefore government attorneys should assume Trump's defense from his private lawyers.
The filing asked the court to designate the United States, rather than Trump, as the defendant in Carroll's defamation suit and to move the case from state to federal court. Federal officials are generally immune from charges of defamation. If the DOJ's filing is successful, it would effectively bring Carroll's case to an end.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
Edited by SirTripAlot (09/09/20 08:59 AM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 2
#26925932 - 09/09/20 09:00 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Strange story. Carroll alleges Trump tried to rape her in a dressing room of a famous New York City department store while she was modeling lingerie for him. She never filed any charges against him, but then when she wrote about the incident in a book after Trump became President, Trump commented “she’s not my type” and now she's suing him for defamation.
Which part of that is supposed to be funny? A woman being raped? The rapist ridiculing her thereafter? I'm having a really hard time finding the funny part in your post.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
qman
Stranger
Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 19 hours, 39 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926068 - 09/09/20 10:31 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Strange story. Carroll alleges Trump tried to rape her in a dressing room of a famous New York City department store while she was modeling lingerie for him. She never filed any charges against him, but then when she wrote about the incident in a book after Trump became President, Trump commented “she’s not my type” and now she's suing him for defamation.
Which part of that is supposed to be funny? A woman being raped? The rapist ridiculing her thereafter? I'm having a really hard time finding the funny part in your post.
The humor comes from the fact that she was more outrage about what was written in a book about her than being potentially raped. The outrage isn't proportional to the listed events and that makes the credibility of her claims highly questionable, and somewhat humorous for many people.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Psilynut2]
#26926079 - 09/09/20 10:38 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Some legalese; still dont see how this applies since alleged action took place before Trump was prez?
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: I wonder how conservatives would have felt about Obama using their tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge that allegedly took place before he was in office if he had been white instead of black ?
As I explained above, the alleged rape is not what Trump's in trouble for, Carroll never pressed charges for that. He's being sued for defamation for saying "she's not my type" while he was President.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: qman]
#26926083 - 09/09/20 10:39 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
The humor comes from the fact that she was more outrage about what was written in a book about her than being potentially raped. The outrage isn't proportional to the listed events and that makes the credibility of her claims highly questionable, and somewhat humorous for many people.
How do you know she was more outraged? Have you spoken to her? Do you have any quotes from her saying that she's more outraged about one than the other?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926085 - 09/09/20 10:41 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Which part of that is supposed to be funny? A woman being raped? The rapist ridiculing her thereafter? I'm having a really hard time finding the funny part in your post.
Because Trump is being sued for saying "she's not my type".
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled
Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 22,207
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil] 2
#26926090 - 09/09/20 10:41 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It's a lot easier to prove that someone is a shit talker than a rapist, this far down the road
-------------------- Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926100 - 09/09/20 10:45 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Because Trump is being sued for saying "she's not my type".
Here is an example of dishonesty. She is suing because the President called her a liar, claimed she is making false allegations, and that he never met her. "She's not my type" isn't defamatory and could never be the basis of a lawsuit.
So, why would you lie about this? Do you have an agenda? Or are you just believing some crazy online source like Jimmy Dore or something?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926145 - 09/09/20 11:12 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It's an example of misunderstanding something I read in the media:
Quote:
“She’s not my type,” the president said at the time. His remarks prompted Carroll to sue him for defamation.
If she's suing the President for calling her a liar, I'll accept that; I won't cling to a dishonest story, as others here do.
If you're going accuse people of dishonesty, what about Psilynut2's claim that Trump is "using their tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge"? We know that's not true, but I'll blame the deceptive NY Times story rather than Psilynut2.
I think you're trying a little too hard to make believe that I'm a make believer.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926149 - 09/09/20 11:17 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
That is exactly the effect of what Trump is doing, though. That it isn't technically a "charge" isn't much of a misrepresentation, even if he hadn't couched it as a hypothetical. What you did was completely mischaracterize her lawsuit. On top of that, you found it necessary to laugh about it...twice.
So, exactly what is funny about any of this?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926160 - 09/09/20 11:24 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: What you did was completely mischaracterize her lawsuit. On top of that, you found it necessary to laugh about it...twice.
Again, what I did was read an article that mischaracterized her lawsuit (as I quoted above), and changed my opinion after a single post that clarified things.
You're still trying way too hard to make believe I'm a make believer.
Quote:
Enlil said: So, exactly what is funny about any of this?
I already explained. IF she was suing for defamation for Trump saying "she's not my type", that would have been funny.
Now I know better.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926172 - 09/09/20 11:32 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It was the first post of yours I read since we talked. I'm sure there will be plenty of other opportunities in the next few days.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
qman
Stranger
Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 19 hours, 39 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926188 - 09/09/20 11:41 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
qman said:
The humor comes from the fact that she was more outrage about what was written in a book about her than being potentially raped. The outrage isn't proportional to the listed events and that makes the credibility of her claims highly questionable, and somewhat humorous for many people.
How do you know she was more outraged? Have you spoken to her? Do you have any quotes from her saying that she's more outraged about one than the other?
I'm basing it on her lack of action in one case and her action in the second case.
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26926192 - 09/09/20 11:43 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Enlil said: What you did was completely mischaracterize her lawsuit. On top of that, you found it necessary to laugh about it...twice.
Again, what I did was read an article that mischaracterized her lawsuit (as I quoted above), and changed my opinion after a single post that clarified things.
You're still trying way too hard to make believe I'm a make believer.
Quote:
Enlil said: So, exactly what is funny about any of this?
I already explained. IF she was suing for defamation for Trump saying "she's not my type", that would have been funny.
Now I know better.
Ok but had enlil not come in and make the correction for you, you would have continued on spewing your bullshit, thus misleading others.
I'm not even a lawyer and it was pretty obvious that "she's not my type" isnt grounds for defamation.
You fall for fake news a lot. Correcting yourself when called out on it is hardly a reason to pat yourself on the back.
Any decent person would correct themselves after laughing at a potential rape victim after falling for fake news
--------------------
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: qman] 4
#26926195 - 09/09/20 11:46 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
I'm basing it on her lack of action in one case and her action in the second case.
Sounds like you have a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature. A rape victim not reporting a crime is very common. A rape victim being outraged when her rapist calls her a liar is also very common. Neither of these phenomena are funny in the least.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26926226 - 09/09/20 12:16 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Ok but had enlil not come in and make the correction for you, you would have continued on spewing your bullshit, thus misleading others.
Again, I was mislead by the media, as I noted above (“'She’s not my type,' the president said at the time. His remarks prompted Carroll to sue him for defamation"), and when corrected I had no problem with that at all; unlike the make believers here.
The whole point of political discussion is to discuss different points of view to help determine the truth, not to double down on make believe.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: I'm not even a lawyer and it was pretty obvious that "she's not my type" isnt grounds for defamation.
Good for you!
Quote:
natedawgnow said: You fall for fake news a lot. Correcting yourself when called out on it is hardly a reason to pat yourself on the back.
I fall for it a LOT less than you do. And yes, I am willing to correct myself when called out on it, unlike others here.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Any decent person would correct themselves after laughing at a potential rape victim after falling for fake news
Thanks for calling me a decent person, as I corrected myself.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926266 - 09/09/20 12:40 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Ya it's obvious you purposely missed the point of my post. What else can you expect from the most dishonest poster here?
Can you provide an example of fake news that I've fallen for in this sub please? An article I've shared that turned out to be false, not an accusation against you that you deny and scream make believe at. If you refuse, no big deal; I do it to you all the time.
I'm 99% sure you fall for FAR more fake news than I (I almost never come in his sub to share news, I come in to comment and weigh in on news others have shared) and I'm sure that if you abandon your dishonest tactics you'd be able to acknowledge that.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow] 1
#26926384 - 09/09/20 01:41 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
She’s trying to get a DNA sample from the president but he is refusing. The DNA could be great evidence that her defamation suit is false, but he refuses to provide one. Because he’s guilty. We all know he’s gulity. The man is a fucking rapist and pervert. Everyone knows it. He won’t give up his dna because the hell have to explain why his jizz is on her dress. And he’ll lose the defamation suit.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (09/09/20 01:44 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26926635 - 09/09/20 04:00 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Ya it's obvious you purposely missed the point of my post. What else can you expect from the most dishonest poster here?
Actually, it's obvious I wanted to be correct, and quickly said the article I read was misleading, just like the article Psilynut2 read that made him think Trump was being defended for rape charges was misleading. You're make believing once again that I "purposely" missed the point of your post, and this constant make believe about me is getting old.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Can you provide an example of fake news that I've fallen for in this sub please? An article I've shared that turned out to be false
Actually, you rarely share articles, but here's a piece of fake news you've discussed:
"One man was accosted by police for being in a spot literally minutes after announcing curfew." My response:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: The video VERY CLEALY shows the guy was walking towards the police after they announced curfew, he wasn't "being in a spot".
Quote:
natedawgnow said: ...not an accusation against you that you deny and scream make believe at.
This is the majority what I complain about - you make believing that I'm a make believer, and you not being able to prove it.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: I almost never come in his sub to share news, I come in to comment and weigh in on news others have shared
This confirms my previous point...
Quote:
natedawgnow said: ...and I'm sure that if you abandon your dishonest tactics you'd be able to acknowledge that.
What dishonest tactics? Can you provide just one example?
In fact, anyone here should feel free to give an example, especially the ones who think I'm a make believer. The "talk" that Enlil referred to here was him calling me dishonest and me asking him to provide an example. You guys are free to collectively help him. I've asked all of you already, with no response yet.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Nonagon Infinity
Mycologist
Registered: 06/02/20
Posts: 756
Loc: Polygondwanaland
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Shenmue] 2
#26926641 - 09/09/20 04:03 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shenmue said: Ok this shit is starting to get old lol. Either every male celebrity is a rapist amd wife beater or some of these bitches are lying for fame and money lol.
But it's not every male celebrity. It's just the ones who have actually raped and abused. There are many male celebrities for which there are presently no accusations of rape or abuse. Johnny Depp is an example. There are many male politicians for which there are presently no accusations of rape or abuse. Bernie Sanders is an example.
Quote:
Shenmue said: Trump has billions! He doesn't have to rape women! He could bang a beautiful virgin every Friday night if he wanted to.... Even the Biden thing is probably bullshit. These women want money!!!!!
So your argument is that, because Trump and Biden have lots of money, these rape accusations must be false?
That's a trash argument.
-------------------- Nonagon Infinity Opens the Door
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926697 - 09/09/20 04:30 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Ya it's obvious you purposely missed the point of my post. What else can you expect from the most dishonest poster here?
Actually, it's obvious I wanted to be correct, and quickly said the article I read was misleading, just like the article Psilynut2 read that made him think Trump was being defended for rape charges was misleading. You're make believing once again that I "purposely" missed the point of your post, and this constant make believe about me is getting old.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Can you provide an example of fake news that I've fallen for in this sub please? An article I've shared that turned out to be false
Actually, you rarely share articles, but here's a piece of fake news you've discussed:
"One man was accosted by police for being in a spot literally minutes after announcing curfew." My response:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: The video VERY CLEALY shows the guy was walking towards the police after they announced curfew, he wasn't "being in a spot".
Quote:
natedawgnow said: ...not an accusation against you that you deny and scream make believe at.
This is the majority what I complain about - you make believing that I'm a make believer, and you not being able to prove it.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: I almost never come in his sub to share news, I come in to comment and weigh in on news others have shared
This confirms my previous point...
Quote:
natedawgnow said: ...and I'm sure that if you abandon your dishonest tactics you'd be able to acknowledge that.
What dishonest tactics? Can you provide just one example?
In fact, anyone here should feel free to give an example, especially the ones who think I'm a make believer. The "talk" that Enlil referred to here was him calling me dishonest and me asking him to provide an example. You guys are free to collectively help him. I've asked all of you already, with no response yet.
That's really the best example of fake news you could muster? Ya you definitely fall for FAR more than I.
Shit that isnt even fake news, guigino was in a spot minutes after curfew was announced, fact. Walking towards cops isnt a crime and moving your hands at cops isnt a crime either.
You post baseless conspiracy theories by OAN then feign ignorance and claim you never said they were right, yet you share their theories and argue to others that it could possibly be true. Not even the cops back up the OAN theory yet you've posted it multiple times
You just now tried to claim trump was being sued for saying "she isnt my type." It's obvious to anyone who is paying attention that you fall for fake news a lot then come here to defend it.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Nonagon Infinity] 1
#26926748 - 09/09/20 05:01 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Nonagon Infinity said:
Quote:
Shenmue said: Ok this shit is starting to get old lol. Either every male celebrity is a rapist amd wife beater or some of these bitches are lying for fame and money lol.
But it's not every male celebrity. It's just the ones who have actually raped and abused. There are many male celebrities for which there are presently no accusations of rape or abuse. Johnny Depp is an example.
It’s very easy for trump to prove he didn’t shoot his cum all over this lady’s dress. He’s fighting like crazy to prevent that from happening. Very strange stance to take for an innocent man.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26926785 - 09/09/20 05:21 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: That's really the best example of fake news you could muster? Ya you definitely fall for FAR more than I.
So far you've come up with NOTHING though. Every time I ask, you make an excuse why you can't find anything.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Shit that isnt even fake news, guigino was in a spot minutes after curfew was announced, fact.
But that's not why he got pushed.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Walking towards cops isnt a crime and moving your hands at cops isnt a crime either.
Did I claim they were crimes? No, that's just more make believe again. I claimed he got pushed away for those reasons and I claimed it didn't appear they intended to crack his skull.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: You post baseless conspiracy theories by OAN then feign ignorance and claim you never said they were right, yet you share their theories and argue to others that it could possibly be true. Not even the cops back up the OAN theory yet you've posted it multiple times
Actually, it was koods that first posted it, and I've repeatedly said I can't know if it's true, and I even offered alternate explanations.
You, on the other hand, claimed "He was in no way using his phone to do anything to his equipment". How do you know that? Or were you just make believing again?
Quote:
natedawgnow said: You just now tried to claim trump was being sued for saying "she isnt my type." It's obvious to anyone who is paying attention that you fall for fake news a lot then come here to defend it.
I already showed you an article I read claimed it, and when I was corrected, I accepted that article's mistake. You're trying too hard to make believe I'm a make believer dude.
If I get tricked, I'll admit it (unlike others here).
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Psilynut2
Stranger
Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,284
Last seen: 3 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926790 - 09/09/20 05:25 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
As I explained above, the alleged rape is not what Trump's in trouble for, Carroll never pressed charges for that. He's being sued for defamation for saying "she's not my type" while he was President.
You know I’m so used to not taking your explanations seriously I didn’t even notice . Oh Well I see no reason not be more accurate . I wonder how Republicans would have felt about Obama using their tax dollars to defend himself for lying about committing rape In the past while serving as president after having bragged about sexually assaulting other women on the campaign trail in front of the world , if he were white ?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Psilynut2]
#26926800 - 09/09/20 05:30 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: You know I’m so used to not taking your explanations seriously I didn’t even notice .
Then can YOU post something of mine that was false, and that I wouldn't correct after being shown it was wrong? No one else has been able to.
Or why else would you not take my explanations seriously?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926804 - 09/09/20 05:32 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It was your mistake though. The article was correct.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926815 - 09/09/20 05:37 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
If so, where's the dishonesty in making a mistake and admitting it as soon as I realize it?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926823 - 09/09/20 05:40 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Whether it's dishonest is debatable, but it certainly reflects on your credibility.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926830 - 09/09/20 05:43 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Admitting a mistake the moment it's pointed out to me makes me not credible?
I thought discussion to get to the bottom of something is the point of political discussion.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926835 - 09/09/20 05:46 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
No, spreading a false rumor based on a poor review of one internet article makes you less credible. How can we trust anything you say if that's your modus operandi? You said it at least three times and ridiculed the woman twice without going back to fact check yourself.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926842 - 09/09/20 05:49 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
You got one example of an honest mistake that I immediately admitted to, and now you claim that's my "modus operandi"?
Let me repost the sentence that got me confused: "'She’s not my type,' the president said at the time. His remarks prompted Carroll to sue him for defamation."
Can I get a mod to weigh in this? Oh shit, I'm screwed.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926854 - 09/09/20 05:54 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
And are you now going to claim that Psilynut2 also is not credible for claiming Trump was using tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge? That turned out to be incorrect. People make mistakes. It's the ones who won't correct themselves after being called out who are not credible in my opinion.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926857 - 09/09/20 05:55 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
The sentence before that says he says she was lying.
And here you are still defending the false statement as not being your fault. If I didn't say anything, how many more times would you have said it before fact checking it?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926864 - 09/09/20 05:58 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: And are you now going to claim that Psilynut2 also is not credible for claiming Trump was using tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge? That turned out to be incorrect. People make mistakes. It's the ones who won't correct themselves after being called out who are not credible in my opinion.
More dishonesty from you. Psily didn't say that.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926877 - 09/09/20 06:06 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: More dishonesty from you. Psily didn't say that.
Quote:
Enlil said: And here you are still defending the false statement as not being your fault.
I didn't say that "it wasn't my fault", I said "here is the sentence that got me confused". More dishonesty from you.
(I normally wouldn't have called you dishonest, except you're doing it to me.)
Quote:
Enlil said: If I didn't say anything, how many more times would you have said it before fact checking it?
Probably until somebody corrected me. I didn't know I was wrong before that.
That's the point of "Political Discussion".
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 3
#26926891 - 09/09/20 06:13 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
And that's why it reflects on your credibility. Credibility is the degree to which we can believe things that you say. It's not the same as honesty. Honesty is a part of it, but not all of it. Someone can be perfectly honest and not credible. For instance, someone who has vision problems could not be credible in testifying to what they saw. In this case, someone who reads one sentence in one article and posts false statements repeatedly as if they were true without further investigation makes him/her not credible.
If you don't think it's important to verify what you say before you say it, that's fine. Just know that some of us are more careful than that, and for myself, I have to take everything you say with a grain of salt because I know that you aren't that careful about what you post.
As far as your willingness to laugh at a rape victim based on a "fact" that you didn't even verify as accurate, that's more of a moral failing than a credibility failing.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Psilynut2
Stranger
Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,284
Last seen: 3 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926915 - 09/09/20 06:28 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
And are you now going to claim that Psilynut2 also is not credible for claiming Trump was using tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge?
I haven’t made any claims or even used the word Trump in either of the two posts I made before this one . I said I wonder how conservatives would feel about Obama using tax dollars blah blah blah if we’re he were white .
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926922 - 09/09/20 06:31 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: And that's why it reflects on your credibility. Credibility is the degree to which we can believe things that you say. It's not the same as honesty. Honesty is a part of it, but not all of it. Someone can be perfectly honest and not credible. For instance, someone who has vision problems could not be credible in testifying to what they saw. In this case, someone who reads one sentence in one article and posts false statements repeatedly as if they were true without further investigation makes him/her not credible.
You said we'd have indictments for Russia Collusion "by the end of 2020". If we don't, then I guess you're not credible. This seems like a stupid game you're playing.
(normally I wouldn't say you're not credible, but you're doing it to me)
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926961 - 09/09/20 06:47 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
This is enlils quote that you just linked to
Quote:
I'd say by the end of 2020, we should see something
Thats an obvious opinion dude. Sharing an opinion is not the same as stating something as fact, like you did concerning the defamation lawsuit.
You are grasping at straws pretty hard here dude.
--------------------
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow] 1
#26926964 - 09/09/20 06:49 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
If that opinion of enlils doesnt pan out, it in no way effects his credibility.
More dishonest tactics. So glad they are coming to light and youre slowly exposing yourself more and more
--------------------
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26926973 - 09/09/20 06:55 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It absolutely reflects on my credibility as a fortune teller, sure.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926979 - 09/09/20 06:58 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
(normally I wouldn't say you're not credible, but you're doing it to me)
Would you rather I not point out to you when I believe you're being dishonest/not credible? This isn't about me. I never asked you to point out anything like that in me.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926985 - 09/09/20 07:06 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: It absolutely reflects on my credibility as a fortune teller, sure.
Dude, the ridicule I got for pointing out that this whole thing had no evidence was ridiculous. If you had any credibility, you'd have been on my side saying "we can't know for sure".
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26926987 - 09/09/20 07:07 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Would you rather I not point out to you when I believe you're being dishonest/not credible?
Yes, please point it out. You've got one post now where I misread an article and corrected myself immediately when this was pointed out to me.
Quote:
Enlil said: This isn't about me. I never asked you to point out anything like that in me.
Of course you don't want it to go both ways. I'd bring up the chemical attacks in Douma, Bill Browder, Concord...
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26926993 - 09/09/20 07:10 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
And one where you wholly lied about what psilynut said... unless you're going to somehow demonstrate that it was another mistake.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26927000 - 09/09/20 07:15 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26927008 - 09/09/20 07:19 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
That's a good example of bad faith arguing on your part. Why would Psilynut have said "I wonder how conservatives would have felt about Obama using their tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge that allegedly took place before he was in office" if that's not what he thought Trump did? Who cares what conservatives think if it's something different?
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he was expressing random thoughts that had nothing to do with the conversation.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26927017 - 09/09/20 07:23 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
He's using a hypothetical to make a point. No one should expect a hypothetical to perfectly align with reality. If it did, it wouldn't be a hypothetical.
Do you want to improve or win? It looks like the latter. I don't need to waste the time and effort if you're just looking to reinforce your current habits.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26927083 - 09/09/20 08:10 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Oooh, you make it sound like it's so hard to do a hypothetical. I think that's more bad faith arguing on your part, because instead of this...
"I wonder how conservatives would have felt about Obama using their tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge that allegedly took place before he was in office..."
...he could have said this to make his hypothetical more accurate:
"I wonder how conservatives would have felt about Obama using their tax dollars to defend himself against a lie charge that allegedly took place while he was in office..."
Pretty easy, huh?
I'd love to hear from others here on whether you're arguing in bad faith or not.
Anyone (besides koods, and natedawgnow who I know hate me because I call them out on make believe all the time)?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26927091 - 09/09/20 08:15 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
He COULD have said many things. He DIDN'T SAY that Trump was using tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge. Nonetheless, you literally DID say:
Quote:
Psilynut2 also is not credible for claiming Trump was using tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge?
You also said:
Quote:
what about Psilynut2's claim that Trump is "using their tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge"?
You even quoted Psily and intentionally omitted the word "Obama" and pretended he was talking about Trump. Of course, this isn't the first time you've been accused of misleading use of quotes, so you knew what you were doing when you did it.
Do you want to be right? Or do you want to improve? I'm seeing a lot of pushback from you on something that is clearly dishonest on your part.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26927115 - 09/09/20 08:30 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: He COULD have said many things.
Not if you want to make an accurate hypothetical.
Quote:
Enlil said: He DIDN'T SAY that Trump was using tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge. Nonetheless, you literally DID say:
Quote:
Psilynut2 also is not credible for claiming Trump was using tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge?
You also said:
Quote:
what about Psilynut2's claim that Trump is "using their tax dollars to defend himself against a rape charge"?
Ok, fair point.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26927147 - 09/09/20 08:51 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Fine. Back on topic. The strategy is to get Trump out of trouble by having the statements treated as official communications in the performance of his duties. That way, he's immune.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26927215 - 09/09/20 09:32 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Call me out on make believe all the time? You couldnt cite one actual example. Yet multiple examples of your make believe exist in this thread alone.
You even made a poll in an attempt to troll me and it backfired; proving most of the posters in this sub consider you to be the runner up to king of make believe around here.
I dont hate you, dude. I think you're a dishonest debater and I choose not to engage with you sometimes and choose to call bullshit other times.
You're not important enough for me to hate. You're a person on the internet, man.
Criticising you and calling out your bullshit is hardly indicative of hatred.
--------------------
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: SirTripAlot]
#26927225 - 09/09/20 09:41 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
On topic, it's fucking stupid that they are trying to change trump to "the united states" if this here is true.
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Da legal argument, they want to change Trump to "United States".
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/09/910992023/justice-dept-intervenes-to-take-over-trumps-defense-in-defamation-lawsuit
In an unusual five-page filing in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Justice Department argued that Trump's remarks were made in the performance of his official duties as president and that therefore government attorneys should assume Trump's defense from his private lawyers.
The filing asked the court to designate the United States, rather than Trump, as the defendant in Carroll's defamation suit and to move the case from state to federal court. Federal officials are generally immune from charges of defamation. If the DOJ's filing is successful, it would effectively bring Carroll's case to an end.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26927250 - 09/09/20 10:00 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I think falcon’s credibility has been pretty much trashed at this point. Some of us realized he had none a long time ago, but he’s done himself in during 2020
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26927304 - 09/09/20 10:49 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Call me out on make believe all the time? You couldnt cite one actual example. Yet multiple examples of your make believe exist in this thread alone.
Holy make believe dude! You gave me a qualifier of "An article I've shared that turned out to be false". Then you said "I almost never come in his sub to share news, I come in to comment and weigh in on news others have shared", so OF COURSE I'm not going to find a fake news article you've posted. But I can find dozens of make believe statements you've made about me, and be happy to do that to prove my point.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: I dont hate you, dude. I think you're a dishonest debater and I choose not to engage with you sometimes and choose to call bullshit other times.
You're not important enough for me to hate. You're a person on the internet, man.
Criticising you and calling out your bullshit is hardly indicative of hatred.
You don't call out my bullshit though, you just call me names and when I ask for proof you tell me you've gotta go fishing instead.
I'll make you a signature bet to prove my point. Let's see who can post the most make believe statements of the other person. I'll work alone, you can have everyone here helping you, including Enlil. Balls (or someone else we think is neutral) will be the judge. If I find more make believe, you have to change your signature to "I now realize that I am a bigger make believer than Falcon91Wolvrn03" for 3 months. If you find more make believe, I have to change my signature to "I now realize that I am a bigger make believer than natedawgnow" for 3 months, PLUS I'll take a voluntary 1 week ban.
I KNOW you'll make excuses because I KNOW you know you'll lose. But prove me wrong by taking the challenge.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: koods]
#26927305 - 09/09/20 10:50 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: I think falcon’s credibility has been pretty much trashed at this point. Some of us realized he had none a long time ago, but he’s done himself in during 2020
I'll make the same bet above for you.
I can't wait for the excuses...
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26927310 - 09/09/20 10:56 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Call me out on make believe all the time? You couldnt cite one actual example. Yet multiple examples of your make believe exist in this thread alone.
Holy make believe dude! You gave me a qualifier of "An article I've shared that turned out to be false". Then you said "I almost never come in his sub to share news, I come in to comment and weigh in on news others have shared", so OF COURSE I'm not going to find a fake news article you've posted. But I can find dozens of make believe statements you've made about me, and be happy to do that to prove my point.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: I dont hate you, dude. I think you're a dishonest debater and I choose not to engage with you sometimes and choose to call bullshit other times.
You're not important enough for me to hate. You're a person on the internet, man.
Criticising you and calling out your bullshit is hardly indicative of hatred.
You don't call out my bullshit though, you just call me names and when I ask for proof you tell me you've gotta go fishing instead.
I'll make you a signature bet to prove my point. Let's see who can post the most make believe statements of the other person. I'll work alone, you can have everyone here helping you, including Enlil. Balls (or someone else we think is neutral) will be the judge. If I find more make believe, you have to change your signature to "I now realize that I am a bigger make believer than Falcon91Wolvrn03" for 3 months. If you find more make believe, I have to change my signature to "I now realize that I am a bigger make believer than natedawgnow" for 3 months, PLUS I'll take a voluntary 1 week ban.
I KNOW you'll make excuses because I KNOW you know you'll lose. But prove me wrong by taking the challenge.
That conversation in which I "added a qualifier" was about FAKE NEWS, not your interpretation of make believe.
I hold strong that I havent posted fake news. Sure, Ive posted a few things that hurt your sensibilities that youve labled make believe, but we were talking about fake news, of which I have posted none; unlike you.
Damn man you cant go 1 post without being dishonest
--------------------
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26927317 - 09/09/20 10:59 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Dude I'm not playing your game, keep asking and I'll keep ignoring.
I've played your show me evidence game before and you denied I supplied it even after resupplying it and quoting it several times. Engaging you in such a fashion is a waste of time.
Say I'm making excuses if you want
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26927325 - 09/09/20 11:03 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: That conversation in which I "added a qualifier" was about FAKE NEWS, not your interpretation of make believe.
No, not my interpretation of make believe, a neutral party's interpretation.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: I hold strong that I havent posted fake news. Sure, Ive posted a few things that hurt your sensibilities that youve labled make believe, but we were talking about fake news, of which I have posted none; unlike you.
You already admitted you don't even post news.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Damn man you cant go 1 post without being dishonest
What's the dishonesty here? I've called you a make believer for make believing things about me, not for hurting my sensibilities (more make believe). Please explain the dishonesty. Maybe balls or Enlil can help me understand the dishonesty here, because you're never able to.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26927327 - 09/09/20 11:06 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Dude I'm not playing your game, keep asking and I'll keep ignoring.
I've played your show me evidence game before and you denied I supplied it even after resupplying it and quoting it several times. Engaging you in such a fashion is a waste of time.
Say I'm making excuses if you want
I WILL say you're making excuses, because I wouldn't be the judge.
And you've never supplied evidence of my make believe before - you tell me something like it's back 10 pages somewhere.
Enlil at least gave me one example.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 2
#26927335 - 09/09/20 11:20 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
koods said: I think falcon’s credibility has been pretty much trashed at this point. Some of us realized he had none a long time ago, but he’s done himself in during 2020
I'll make the same bet above for you.
I can't wait for the excuses...
Grow up
Just the fact that you want to compare yourself to the king of make believe says everything. It’s like when people say our gun crimes aren’t as bad as Zimbabwe
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (09/09/20 11:28 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: koods]
#26927354 - 09/09/20 11:47 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
But nate's claiming he's more honest. Are you saying nate is also comparable to Zimbabwe?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26927373 - 09/10/20 12:14 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Fine. Back on topic. The strategy is to get Trump out of trouble by having the statements treated as official communications in the performance of his duties. That way, he's immune.
Which is strange because his lawyers argued that he could block people on Twitter because his statements weren’t official communications
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26927376 - 09/10/20 12:16 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: But nate's claiming he's more honest. Are you saying nate is also comparable to Zimbabwe?
what do you get out of being declared more honest than the two people you think are the most dishonest? It’s just a stupid game for you to relitigate issues.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: koods]
#26927474 - 09/10/20 02:15 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I knew you'd both chicken out.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26927556 - 09/10/20 04:07 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: But nate's claiming he's more honest. Are you saying nate is also comparable to Zimbabwe?
Nate IS more honest. But you don’t think so. It’s like you challenging the person you think is the worst chess player to a game. You gonna brag about beating the person youve been saying is the worst chess player? Why would you even lower yourself to that level? You know neither me or Nate is gonna waste our time rehashing all crap you bullshitted the first time ad naseum. It’s just a stupid game and the only winning move is not to play.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: koods]
#26927944 - 09/10/20 10:02 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Because if someone keeps saying they are better at chess than me, I'll challenge them to a game so we both can find out. I've got nothing but excuses from you and nate every time I ask you for examples as they happen.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Nonagon Infinity
Mycologist
Registered: 06/02/20
Posts: 756
Loc: Polygondwanaland
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: koods]
#26927946 - 09/10/20 10:02 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Jesus, can we just keep the thread on topic? It's kind of annoying to see that there are new posts on this interesting thread only to find out that it's just the two of you bickering over who's more honest (as you do on other threads). Can one of you just be the bigger person and drop it?
-------------------- Nonagon Infinity Opens the Door
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Nonagon Infinity]
#26927983 - 09/10/20 10:24 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Sure.
According to Wikipedia, "attorney general Bill Barr asserted the move was a routine application of the Westfall Act that permits the Justice Department to defend federal employees against civil liability for acts conducted in the normal course of their duties." Barr believed Trump was acting within the scope of his office as President when he called Carroll’s rape accusation a lie in 2019.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928006 - 09/10/20 10:35 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
That'll be up to the court to decide, but it sure seems like cherry picking to call this an official communication and then claim his tweets about government business are not.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26928029 - 09/10/20 10:46 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Barr claimed to not know if voting twice is illegal to cleanup trumps voter fraud mess.
I wouldnt trust his opinion on much. Seems he cares less about the law and cares more about being the best sychophant he can be.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow]
#26928144 - 09/10/20 11:59 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Barr claimed to not know if voting twice is illegal...
Neither Trump nor Barr said that one voter could have two votes. Here is an excerpt from the CNN interview with Barr (watch from about 1:05):
Blitzer: That would be illegal if they did that — if somebody mailed in a ballot and then actually showed up to vote in person — that would be illegal.
Barr: I don't know what the law in the particular state says...
Blitzer: You can't vote twice.
Barr: Well, I don't know what the law in the particular state says, and when that vote becomes final.
Blitzer: Is there any state that says you can vote twice?
Barr: Well, there's some - maybe you can change your vote up to a particular time, I don't know what the law is, so I'm not going to offer...
Now check out the bottom of the New York State Board of elections website:
Quote:
Even if you request or cast and return an absentee ballot, you may still go to the polls and vote in person. The Election Law recognizes that plans change. The Board of Elections is required to check the poll book before canvassing any absentee ballot. If the voter comes to the poll site, on Election Day or during early voting and votes in person, the absentee ballot is set aside and not counted.
It turns out Trump and Barr were correct after all, and the mainstream news duped everyone again.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26928262 - 09/10/20 01:08 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Most election law is defined at the state level, and I believe Trump’s comments were made to an audience in North Carolina. Why do you think quoting New York state legislation is relevant?
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26928276 - 09/10/20 01:15 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Because Barr made it very clear " I don't know what the law in the particular state says", and that there was a possibility North Carolina's law allowed them to vote both ways, like New York's law does.
As you said yourself "election law is defined at the state level".
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26928283 - 09/10/20 01:17 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Personally, I think the North Carolina State Board of Elections is far more relevant:
Quote:
Sep 3, 2020
Raleigh, N.C. – The following is a message to North Carolina voters from Karen Brinson Bell, executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections:
It is illegal to vote twice in an election. N.C.G.S. § 163-275(7) makes it a Class I felony for a voter, “with intent to commit a fraud to register or vote at more than one precinct or more than one time…in the same primary or election.” Attempting to vote twice in an election or soliciting someone to do so also is a violation of North Carolina law.
--------------------
|
Mycolorado
Hobbyist
Registered: 07/23/16
Posts: 8,567
Loc: Interdimensional Bootcamp
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928290 - 09/10/20 01:21 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Some states allow you to request that your absentee ballot be invalidated but that’s not what Trump said...he said “send it in early and then go and vote and if it’s not tabulated, you vote and the vote is gonna count”. Where did he say anything about requesting the mail in ballot be invalidated? As it stands, his initial statement was suggesting that people deliberately vote twice. Whether it’s to test the system or not, it’s still fraud and a felony in most states to do so. In fact, the North Carolina (where Trunp made the statement) State Board of Elections actually issued a statement to reiterate that it is in fact illegal to vote twice and that there are ways to check on the status of one's mail in ballot without going to the polls in person day-of and voting twice. It could be surmised that Trump actually just wants to sow discord/confusion/clog up the polls or anything he can in order to cast doubt on the process. Do you think the NC Election Board was duped by the media or actually concerned by Trump's statement?
Quote:
Raleigh Sep 3, 2020 Raleigh, N.C. – The following is a message to North Carolina voters from Karen Brinson Bell, executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections:
It is illegal to vote twice in an election. N.C.G.S. § 163-275(7) makes it a Class I felony for a voter, “with intent to commit a fraud to register or vote at more than one precinct or more than one time…in the same primary or election.” Attempting to vote twice in an election or soliciting someone to do so also is a violation of North Carolina law.
There are numerous checks in place in North Carolina that prevent people from double voting. Electronic pollbooks with information about who has already voted are used at every early voting site. If a voter tries to check in who has already voted, they will be prevented from voting a regular ballot. A voter will be offered a provisional ballot if they insist on voting, and this ballot will be researched after Election Day to determine whether it should be counted.
On Election Day, voters who have voted absentee are removed from the pollbook, which is updated before voting starts at 6:30 a.m. Absentee ballots that are received on Election Day are not counted until after the election, and this prevents double voting.
Also, the State Board conducts audits after each election that check voter history against ballots cast and would detect if someone tries to vote more than once in an election. Because absentee ballots and early voting ballots are retrievable, if someone tries to get around the system, their ballot can be retrieved and not counted, so it will not affect the outcome of an election.
The State Board has a dedicated investigations team that investigates allegations of double voting, which are referred to prosecutors when warranted.
If you request an absentee by-mail ballot but decide later that you would like to vote in person instead, you may. You should discard your absentee ballot. Do not send it back in.
If you have already placed your ballot in the mail but are not sure whether it has been accepted by your county board of elections, North Carolina offers a few ways to check the status of your absentee by-mail ballot without leaving your home.
Voters can:
Check your voter record at the State Board’s Voter Search Tool to find out whether your ballot was accepted by your county board of elections. This information will appear in the voter record after a ballot has been accepted. Sign up for BallotTrax, when it launches in the next few days, to track your ballot through the system. BallotTrax is a new service that will allow voters to track their ballot through the mail and confirm receipt by the county board of elections, much like they can track their online order or pizza delivery. When it launches, a link will be available at NCSBE.gov. Contact your county board of elections if you have questions about your ballot status. The State Board office strongly discourages people from showing up at the polls on Election Day to check whether their absentee ballot was counted. That is not necessary, and it would lead to longer lines and the possibility of spreading COVID-19.
North Carolina elections officials encourage voters to request their ballot as soon as possible and return it as soon as they are ready to do so. By doing so, you can track your ballot and ensure your vote counts.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928296 - 09/10/20 01:24 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Because Barr made it very clear " I don't know what the law in the particular state says", and that there was a possibility North Carolina's law allowed them to vote both ways, like New York's law does.
And he was wrong about that possibility being legal in North Carolina. How does stated ignorance of NC state law ("I don't know what the law in the particular state says") and NY state allowing voters to cast two ballots make "Trump and Barr were correct after all"?
Ignorance of the law is not a defence - particularly from the top AG and president.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26928300 - 09/10/20 01:26 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Personally, I think the North Carolina State Board of Elections is far more relevant
Obviously. But Barr said he didn't know the laws of every state. He said "there's some - maybe you can change your vote up to a particular time"
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26928313 - 09/10/20 01:31 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: And he was wrong about that possibility being legal in North Carolina.
No, there WAS a possibility that North Carolina had a similar law than New York. He clearly said he didn't know.
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: How does stated ignorance of NC state law ("I don't know what the law in the particular state says") and NY state allowing voters to cast two ballots make "Trump and Barr were correct after all"?
Because Barr said it was possible in some states, and it depends on the state's laws. Is that not correct?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928361 - 09/10/20 02:05 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Ignorance of the law is not a defence - particularly from the top AG and president.
AG is law enforcement, and for LEO ignorance of the law is a valid defense as long as they truly believe they are upholding a law. Only regular citizens get dinged for ignorance of the law.
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: How does stated ignorance of NC state law ("I don't know what the law in the particular state says") and NY state allowing voters to cast two ballots make "Trump and Barr were correct after all"?
Because Barr said it was possible in some states, and it depends on the state's laws. Is that not correct?
No, that is not correct. Intentionally voting twice is illegal, even in New York, even with their "plans change" thing.
Quote:
In Rochester, N.Y., a man admitted to voting twice in the 2004 presidential election, the second time by filing an affidavit ballot at a polling place. He said he did it to get two “I voted” stickers that entitled him to free beer and food at a local bar. He was sentenced to 36 hours of community service.
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos]
#26928378 - 09/10/20 02:12 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Ok Donald Trump wasn’t sure if he was telling people to do something illegal. Wow. That’s so much better.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: koods]
#26928406 - 09/10/20 02:22 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Donald Trump has a long history of telling people to do illegal things, telling them he's got their back, and then mysteriously disappearing.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928496 - 09/10/20 03:06 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: And he was wrong about that possibility being legal in North Carolina.
No, there WAS a possibility that North Carolina had a similar law than New York. He clearly said he didn't know.
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: How does stated ignorance of NC state law ("I don't know what the law in the particular state says") and NY state allowing voters to cast two ballots make "Trump and Barr were correct after all"?
Because Barr said it was possible in some states, and it depends on the state's laws. Is that not correct?
You said this: "It turns out Trump and Barr were correct after all, and the mainstream news duped everyone again."
Trump explicitly told people in North Carolina to vote twice as a test to test the system:
Quote:
On your ballots, if you get the unsolicited ballots, send it in and then go make sure it counted, and then if it doesn’t tabulate, you vote. You just vote. And then if they tabulate it very late, which they shouldn’t be doing, they’ll see you voted and so it won’t count. So, send it in early, and then go and vote. And if it’s not tabulated, you vote, and the vote is gonna count.
Voting twice is illegal in North Carolina. As Kryptos' has pointed out, even NY state law - designed to allow a change of mind - considers fraudulently voting twice to be illegal. Can you explain how Trump was "correct after all"?
As for Barr, I guess he was correct in stating that there was a possibility that North Carolina allowed voting twice - but we now know that it's not possible, so basically Barr was correct in stating he was ignorant of the law. Why do you feel this impacts the initial claim by Trump for voters in North Carolina to vote twice?
It's also odd you consider that mainstream news duped everyone, considering this quote you provided shows the CNN interviewer was correct regarding the law in North Carolina:
Quote:
Barr: I don't know what the law in the particular state says...
Blitzer: You can't vote twice.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26928618 - 09/10/20 04:28 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: You said this: "It turns out Trump and Barr were correct after all, and the mainstream news duped everyone again."
Trump explicitly told people in North Carolina to vote twice as a test to test the system:
Quote:
On your ballots, if you get the unsolicited ballots, send it in and then go make sure it counted, and then if it doesn’t tabulate, you vote. You just vote. And then if they tabulate it very late, which they shouldn’t be doing, they’ll see you voted and so it won’t count. So, send it in early, and then go and vote. And if it’s not tabulated, you vote, and the vote is gonna count.
Voting twice is illegal in North Carolina. As Kryptos' has pointed out, even NY state law - designed to allow a change of mind - considers fraudulently voting twice to be illegal. Can you explain how Trump was "correct after all"?
Per your quote above, Trump said "if it doesn’t tabulate, you vote" and again "if it’s not tabulated, you vote"
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: As for Barr, I guess he was correct in stating that there was a possibility that North Carolina allowed voting twice - but we now know that it's not possible, so basically Barr was correct in stating he was ignorant of the law. Why do you feel this impacts the initial claim by Trump for voters in North Carolina to vote twice?
Actually, the initial claim was: "Barr claimed to not know if voting twice is illegal..."
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: It's also odd you consider that mainstream news duped everyone, considering this quote you provided shows the CNN interviewer was correct regarding the law in North Carolina:
Quote:
Barr: I don't know what the law in the particular state says...
Blitzer: You can't vote twice.
Yes, of course voting twice is illegal in all states, but that's not what Trump actually suggested, is it?
If Trump was an establishment candidate, like Biden, I'll bet the media would have let this go, like they let so much of what Biden does go.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
christopera
Stranger
Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,456
Last seen: 1 hour, 5 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928655 - 09/10/20 04:56 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
In Pennsylvania, if you are registered for vote by mail but don't want to vote via mail, you have to use a provisional ballot. Trump told people in PA to vote twice, he never mentioned a provisional ballot. And mailing your ballot, while filling out a provisional or normal ballot is in fact voter fraud (a felony), because you are voting multiple times. The provisional ballot may or may not be counted depending on your eligibility.
It's ridiculous that this has to even be discussed.
Trump;
Quote:
“These mail-in ballots are a disgrace and they know it. Sign your mail-in ballot. Sign it and send it in and then you have to follow it. And if on Election Day or early voting, that is not tabulated and counted, you go vote,”
That is voter fraud in Pennsylvania. You get one ballot. Either you do it in person, or you mail it in, not both.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/trump-doubles-down-encouraging-supporters-vote-twice-which-illegal-n1239265 https://www.votespa.com/Voting-in-PA/Pages/Voting-by-Provisional-Ballot.aspx https://www.wgal.com/article/if-you-request-a-mail-in-ballot-in-can-you-change-your-mind-and-vote-in-person-in-pennsylvania/33648018#
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
imachavel
I loved and lost but I loved-ftw
Registered: 06/06/07
Posts: 31,488
Loc: You get banned for saying that
Last seen: 3 hours, 14 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928685 - 09/10/20 05:23 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Strange story. Carroll alleges Trump tried to rape her in a dressing room of a famous New York City department store while she was modeling lingerie for him. She never filed any charges against him, but then when she wrote about the incident in a book after Trump became President, Trump commented “she’s not my type” and now she's suing him for defamation.
Trump? Would do something like that? Nah no way
-------------------- I did not say to edit my signature soulidarity! Now forever I will never remember what I said about understanding the secrets of the universe by paying attention to subtleties! I'm never giving you the password again. Jerk
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928715 - 09/10/20 05:49 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Voting twice is illegal in North Carolina. As Kryptos' has pointed out, even NY state law - designed to allow a change of mind - considers fraudulently voting twice to be illegal. Can you explain how Trump was "correct after all"?
Per your quote above, Trump said "if it doesn’t tabulate, you vote" and again "if it’s not tabulated, you vote"
You are correct that Trumps's stated intent was for people to go to voting stations to ensure their ballot is counted, not to elicit a double vote - but here's another portion of the quote: "You just vote. And [...] they’ll see you voted and so it won’t count." That tells people in North Carolina (who's advance vote doesn't register at the polling station) to vote twice as a test to the system. It is advice that could directly lead to people voting twice in violation of North Carolina state law - to the extent that the executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections felt the need to clarify things.
It seems the best case scenario here is that Trump’s suggestion to go to polling stations in order to ensure your ballot is counted - a suggestion the NCSBE "strongly discourages" - also misleadingly (albeit unintentionally) suggested that people vote twice in violation of the law. Does that strike you as vindicating Trump’s statement as correct?
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: As for Barr, I guess he was correct in stating that there was a possibility that North Carolina allowed voting twice - but we now know that it's not possible, so basically Barr was correct in stating he was ignorant of the law. Why do you feel this impacts the initial claim by Trump for voters in North Carolina to vote twice?
Actually, the initial claim was: "Barr claimed to not know if voting twice is illegal..."
Well it appears you agree with that claim that Barr did not know the law: "Because Barr made it very clear " I don't know what the law in the particular state says"..." - so perhaps we can return to your claim that "it turns out Trump and Barr were correct after all, and the mainstream news duped everyone again." In the interview selection you quoted earlier, the CNN interview is giving correct information and Barr is claiming ignorance - why do you consider this an example of mainstream media duping people?
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: It's also odd you consider that mainstream news duped everyone, considering this quote you provided shows the CNN interviewer was correct regarding the law in North Carolina:
Quote:
Barr: I don't know what the law in the particular state says...
Blitzer: You can't vote twice.
Yes, of course voting twice is illegal in all states, but that's not what Trump actually suggested, is it?
If Trump was an establishment candidate, like Biden, I'll bet the media would have let this go, like they let so much of what Biden does go.
"You just vote. And [...] they’ll see you voted and so it won’t count."
That is Trump explicitly telling people to vote twice and let the system sort it out. It created the need for the NCSBE to provide official clarification that voting twice is illegal because because of the risk that it created.
Has Biden done something comparable?
--------------------
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26928734 - 09/10/20 05:58 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: If Trump was an establishment candidate, like Biden, I'll bet the media would have let this go, like they let so much of what Biden does go.
Fortunately, this is another one of those idiotic hypotheticals you hate so much, because unlike Trump, Biden isn;t a retard and seems to know the basic laws regarding voting.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26928780 - 09/10/20 06:19 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Ok, so there's a lot ambiguity in whether Trump told people to vote twice or not. Snopes can't even figure it out but said "the stated goal was to ensure people's ballots get counted, not to elicit double voting." I see both sides of the argument.
So I'll stop arguing the Trump claim and go back to the original claim that "Barr claimed to not know if voting twice is illegal". I didn't get that out of the interview, did you?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Seriously_trippin
Cosmic Guru Ganesh
Registered: 07/12/13
Posts: 14,656
Last seen: 12 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26928789 - 09/10/20 06:22 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
King alligator of the swamp
-------------------- R.I.P Zombi3, Blue Helix Modest Mouse Zappa Slothie That Kid With The face ShLong Le Canard split_by_nine & Big Worm Forever Etched in the sands of time in the shroomery and ever so beloved and deeply missed by many
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Seriously_trippin]
#26929135 - 09/10/20 10:17 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
@fal- So you claim that I'm wrong when I said barr didnt know if it was illegal to vote twice, then you supply interview transcripts etc that prove that barr clearly said he didnt know if it was illegal.
Dude you love to argue so much you literally argued against a claim, then supported the claim with evidence
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929201 - 09/10/20 11:37 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: @fal- So you claim that I'm wrong when I said barr didnt know if it was illegal to vote twice, then you supply interview transcripts etc that prove that barr clearly said he didnt know if it was illegal.
Dude you love to argue so much you literally argued against a claim, then supported the claim with evidence
What he said in that some states you can cast a ballot by mail, and then vote in person, and the bottom of the New York State Board of elections website clearly proves this (which I mentioned earlier):
Quote:
Even if you request or cast and return an absentee ballot, you may still go to the polls and vote in person. The Election Law recognizes that plans change. The Board of Elections is required to check the poll book before canvassing any absentee ballot. If the voter comes to the poll site, on Election Day or during early voting and votes in person, the absentee ballot is set aside and not counted.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos]
#26929415 - 09/11/20 06:10 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Ignorance of the law is not a defence - particularly from the top AG and president.
AG is law enforcement, and for LEO ignorance of the law is a valid defense as long as they truly believe they are upholding a law. Only regular citizens get dinged for ignorance of the law.
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: How does stated ignorance of NC state law ("I don't know what the law in the particular state says") and NY state allowing voters to cast two ballots make "Trump and Barr were correct after all"?
Because Barr said it was possible in some states, and it depends on the state's laws. Is that not correct?
No, that is not correct. Intentionally voting twice is illegal, even in New York, even with their "plans change" thing.
Quote:
In Rochester, N.Y., a man admitted to voting twice in the 2004 presidential election, the second time by filing an affidavit ballot at a polling place. He said he did it to get two “I voted” stickers that entitled him to free beer and food at a local bar. He was sentenced to 36 hours of community service.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26929511 - 09/11/20 08:02 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Y'all are kinda just arguing semantics depending on what you consider "voting" and what Barr meant by the word. The reality is that Barr, as hard as it is to believe, is human. There's no way he would know the law in every state. No lawyer can do that. It's probably impossible to know all the laws in any state, frankly. That's just not practical, and lawyers almost always have to look up anything to be sure.
I'm not even sure that it's illegal to cast multiple votes in any state, frankly.
What trump said was foolish, reckless, and irresponsible, for sure. It also showed his lack of familiarity with voting. I know of no mechanism where one can check to see if his/her vote was tabulated, so trump's suggestion couldn't be followed. Instead, his suggestion is likely to lead to more double votes in an abundance of caution, and these double votes will have to be weeded out by the states.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929522 - 09/11/20 08:16 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It is illegal to intentionally vote multiple times in every state. The only difference between states is if it's a misdemeanor or a felony.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26929523 - 09/11/20 08:18 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Define "vote" as used in your post, please. Do you mean fill out a ballot and send it in? Or do you mean actually have your choice in an election counted?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
christopera
Stranger
Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,456
Last seen: 1 hour, 5 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929526 - 09/11/20 08:20 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
In PA it’s defined by signing a ballot.
It’s pretty cut and clear here.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: christopera]
#26929527 - 09/11/20 08:22 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I'm asking what KRYPTOS means.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: christopera]
#26929530 - 09/11/20 08:23 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
christopera said: In PA it’s defined by signing a ballot.
Do you happen to have the PA statute that defines it?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
christopera
Stranger
Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,456
Last seen: 1 hour, 5 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929561 - 09/11/20 08:54 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
christopera said: In PA it’s defined by signing a ballot.
Do you happen to have the PA statute that defines it?
I don’t currently and I’m not going to look it up. Home schooling my child due to Covid has made me exhausted. Maybe this weekend I’ll get it together.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: christopera]
#26929564 - 09/11/20 09:00 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I'd appreciate that. I just tried to search election law in PA, and it appears that title 25 is the relevant part, but within title 25, I can't seem to find any specific statutes other than the ones about electors and procedures regarding them.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929591 - 09/11/20 09:20 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Define "vote" as used in your post, please. Do you mean fill out a ballot and send it in? Or do you mean actually have your choice in an election counted?
Vote as in fill out a ballot and sign it with the intention of it being counted. So, things get a little bit fuzzy with provisional ballots, but even with provisional ballots:
Quote:
In Rochester, N.Y., a man admitted to voting twice in the 2004 presidential election, the second time by filing an affidavit ballot at a polling place. He said he did it to get two “I voted” stickers that entitled him to free beer and food at a local bar. He was sentenced to 36 hours of community service.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26929596 - 09/11/20 09:23 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
So, you're saying that it's a crime to fill out two ballots with the intention they both be counted. That's absolutely not what Trump suggested, though.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929607 - 09/11/20 09:28 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
No, what Trump suggested was that people vote twice in NC, which is illegal. NC law expressly forbids voting twice, with no mention of intention. The definition that I provided and used in my post in narrower than the definition used by the state of NC, because my post applied to all 50 states, some of which are more lax in their definitions (see: NY).
Interestingly, NC law also forbids telling people to vote twice, so Trump committed a state felony with his statement.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26929618 - 09/11/20 09:34 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
No, he didn't. At least not under your definition of "vote." He suggested that if one vote isn't counted, to cast another one. That is not casting two ballots "with the intention that [both] be counted" The law doesn't have to mention intent, since your definition of "vote" includes an intent element.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929630 - 09/11/20 09:41 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Again: my definition of "vote", as used in the post where I said it is illegal to vote twice in all 50 states, is different than the definition of vote used by the state of North Carolina. This is because I intended that post to apply to all 50 states.
Unlike Trump, who told a crowd in NC to vote twice. Under state law, he personally committed a felony while encouraging his audience to go out and commit felonies.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26929642 - 09/11/20 09:46 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I disagree. Based on what you've posted, I think Trump lacked the requisite intent.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929650 - 09/11/20 09:48 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
NC state law does not require intent. Only the action of voting twice.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom] 1
#26929654 - 09/11/20 09:52 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: NC state law does not require intent. Only the action of voting twice.
You're wrong. Shivas specifically quoted the law:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: N.C.G.S. § 163-275(7) makes it a Class I felony for a voter, “with intent to commit a fraud to register or vote at more than one precinct or more than one time…in the same primary or election.”
Also, protip: Almost every criminal violation requires some level of intent for conviction. If someone tells you a law doesn't require intent to prosecute, you should assume they are wrong unless/until they point to binding authority to support the claim.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929666 - 09/11/20 09:58 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
In almost every case I know of, actions can be used to prove intent.
I base my statement on the fact that the NCSBE immediately told people that it is illegal to vote twice.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26929668 - 09/11/20 10:01 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
NCSBE statements aren't law. And yes, actions can be used to prove intent. Trump's actions clearly showed that his intent was not that anyone have two votes counted in a single election. Therefore, Trump did not encourage anyone to break the law nor did he break the law himself with that statement.
How long are you going to cling to a debunked position? By this point, you already know I'm right.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos]
#26929697 - 09/11/20 10:18 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: No, what Trump suggested was that people vote twice in NC, which is illegal.
Even Snopes said "the stated goal was to ensure people's ballots get counted, not to elicit double voting."
And though Trump's speech was in North Carolina, I assume that public Presidential speeches are intended to be broadcast nationwide, so he wasn't necessarily only referring to NC voters.
I even can agree with Enlil's comment:
Quote:
Enlil said: What trump said was foolish, reckless, and irresponsible, for sure.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Psilynut2
Stranger
Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,284
Last seen: 3 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929717 - 09/11/20 10:31 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Isn’t it cool how Trump doesn’t speak like a politician? I didnt know when I heard people saying that back during the election it would mean I would get to watch you guys argue over what he meant , for a week . I was actually expecting something else .
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929737 - 09/11/20 10:40 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Yea, I agree with that assessment as well - and to be honest I regret even participating in the discussion, because the implication of your DOJ representing the president in a personal legal matter is far more interesting. I'm not sure how the continual conflation between Trump and regime can be seen as anything but a burgeoning cult of personality.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26929784 - 09/11/20 11:00 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: ...the implication of your DOJ representing the president in a personal legal matter is far more interesting.
He hasn't been found guilty of rape, so his claim that she was lying (which he made while he was President) could possibly be true (I have no idea).
Regardless, a judge will still have to allow the Department of Justice to handle the case, so we'll see what they decide.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929793 - 09/11/20 11:06 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It could be true. If, however, I was accused of rape, and a woman claimed to have the DNA of the rapist, I would have demanded that DNA in discovery so I could prove it wasn't mine. Interestingly, he did just the opposite and has done everything he can to prevent a DNA comparison. A DNA comparison that excludes him would end the case immediately.
The chosen strategy certainly points to the conclusion that he knows she has his DNA. Whether it was rape is a whole other question, of course.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929800 - 09/11/20 11:08 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Whether it was rape is a whole other question, of course.
Ya, I was just going to say that. She was modeling lingerie for him, which of course doesn't give him the right to force sex on her, but what really happened we don't currently know.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
falcon
Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,043
Last seen: 17 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929804 - 09/11/20 11:13 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
If it is his DNA, he's lying about her not being his type or lying about having a type.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929823 - 09/11/20 11:20 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: She was modeling lingerie for him
I don't know what your source is for this, but this is certainly a gross misrepresentation of her explanation of the events.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: falcon]
#26929824 - 09/11/20 11:21 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
True, but Enlil clarified that's not the reason he's being sued.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929828 - 09/11/20 11:22 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not sure how that changes things - why is it within the scope of a president’s duties to comment on the physical appearance of a woman who had accused him of rape? It's clearly a personal matter and this conflation between a private individual and your state institutions should be worrying.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26929835 - 09/11/20 11:29 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: She was modeling lingerie for him
I don't know what your source is for this, but this is certainly a gross misrepresentation of her explanation of the events.
The Huffington Post:
Quote:
According to Carroll, Trump spotted her in the store, recognizing her as “that advice lady.” He then asked if she would help him buy a gift for an unnamed woman. Carroll agreed, and after browsing gifts, Trump allegedly led her to the lingerie section. He suggested that she try on a lace bodysuit, and after expressing reservations, she reluctantly agreed.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26929840 - 09/11/20 11:33 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: why is it within the scope of a president’s duties to comment on the physical appearance of a woman who had accused him of rape?
Again, Enlil clarified that's NOT what he's being sued for and it's NOT what the DOJ is defending him for.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929843 - 09/11/20 11:35 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I don't know their source, but the complaint tells a different story. According to the complaint, no lingerie was ever tried on at all. He grabbed some lingerie and said, "let's try this on." He said this after she suggested that he try it on. Never did she agree to try anything on, and in fact, he never gave her a chance. I don't know if huffington post is making that up or relying on some other source, but I'm pulling this all right out of the complaint. Here is the relevant section of the complaint:
Quote:
29. Trump then had an idea: He would buy lingerie instead. 30. Trump and Carroll rode up the escalator to the lingerie department. When they arrived, it was uncharacteristically empty, with no sales attendant in sight. Sitting on the counter near them were two or three boxes and a see-through bodysuit in lilac gray. 31. Snatching the bodysuit, Trump insisted that Carroll try it on. Bemused, Carroll responded that he should try it on himself, adding that it was his color. Trump and Carroll went back and forth, teasing each other about who should try on the bodysuit. 32. Suddenly, Trump grabbed Carroll’s arm and said, “Let’s put this on.” 33. Trump maneuvered Carroll to the dressing room. As they moved, Carroll laughed, thinking to herself that she would make him put the bodysuit on over his pants. 34. Strangely for Bergdorf’s, the dressing room door was open and unlocked. 35. Trump closed the door of the dressing room. 36. Immediately, Trump lunged at Carroll, pushing her against the wall, bumping her head quite badly, and putting his mouth on her lips. 37. Carroll shoved him back. Utterly shocked by Trump’s unexpected attack, Carroll burst out in awkward laughter. She could hardly process the insanity of the situation. She also hoped, at least at first, that laughter would bruise his ego and cause him to retreat. 38. But Trump did not stop. He seized both of her arms and pushed her up against the wall again, bumping her head a second time. While pinning Carroll against the wall with his shoulder, Trump jammed his hand under her coatdress and pulled down her tights. 39. Trump opened his overcoat and unzipped his pants. Trump then pushed his fingers around Carroll’s genitals and forced his penis inside of her. 40. Carroll resisted, struggling to break free. She tried to stomp his foot with her high heels. She tried to push him away with her one free hand (as she kept holding her purse with the other). Finally, she raised a knee up high enough to push him out and off her. 41. Carroll ran out of the dressing room, out of Bergdorf’s, and onto Fifth Avenue. 42. The whole attack lasted two to three minutes.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929844 - 09/11/20 11:36 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: why is it within the scope of a president’s duties to comment on the physical appearance of a woman who had accused him of rape?
Again, Enlil clarified that's NOT what he's being sued for and it's NOT what the DOJ is defending him for.
Why is it within the scope of a president's duties to call a rape victim a liar or to claim that he never met her?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929846 - 09/11/20 11:38 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
That's for the judge to decide. I'm not a lawyer. We'll see what he says.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26929850 - 09/11/20 11:39 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: I don't know their source, but the complaint tells a different story.
They say their source was her book, not her complaint.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929861 - 09/11/20 11:46 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: why is it within the scope of a president’s duties to comment on the physical appearance of a woman who had accused him of rape?
Again, Enlil clarified that's NOT what he's being sued for and it's NOT what the DOJ is defending him for.
Did I say that's what he's being sued for?
He's being sued for defamation because he essentially called her a liar in his response to her accusation - included in that statement was disparaging comments on a private citizens appearance. The DOJ claims that his statement - which includes the comments on her physical appearance - were made in his official capacity of president. Why is disparaging private citizens over personal matters considered within the scope of the president’s duties?
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: That's for the judge to decide. I'm not a lawyer. We'll see what he says.
Most of us aren't lawyers - that's never prevented us from giving our inexpert opinions in the past. Odd you have no opinion to share regarding this conflation of private individual and state institutions.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26929868 - 09/11/20 11:54 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Most of us aren't lawyers - that's never prevented us from giving our inexpert opinions in the past. Odd you have no opinion to share regarding this conflation of private individual and state institutions.
You're asking me to give my opinion about a law I'm not familiar with?
According to Barr, D.C. case law ruled “elected officials in our ... representative democracy when they’re answering questions in office even about personal affairs, any defamation claim is subject to Westfall.”
If he's right, I agree with him, if he's not, the judge shouldn't allow it and I'll agree with that.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26929883 - 09/11/20 12:05 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not concerned with the legal argument. Legal institutions can be corrupted. That's kind of the whole point here.
Do you think that it's appropriate to consider 'Trump disparaging a private citizen over a personal matter' as falling within the scope of presidential duties? Especially when we consider the exceptional protections (such as, in my understanding, immunity to defamation) given to those acting in an official capacity.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26929892 - 09/11/20 12:13 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Do you think that it's appropriate to consider 'Trump disparaging a private citizen over a personal matter' as falling within the scope of presidential duties?
Poor choice of wording I think. The question should be: "Do you think that it's appropriate to consider 'Trump defending himself against a unproven attack while President' as falling within the scope of his presidential duties?"
To me, the answer is if Trump didn't rape her, then yes, but if he's lying, then he should have to pay.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat
Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,940
Loc: ation
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26929893 - 09/11/20 12:14 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
These people are paid by our taxes, I dont think my tax dollars should go towards the defense of a president accused of something that has nothing to do with political issues.
Just my opinion not based on political expertise
--------------------
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: natedawgnow] 1
#26929913 - 09/11/20 12:24 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
There are two separate issues here, really, although they will likely be decided based on the same factors:
1. Should the DOJ defend him? and 2. Should he enjoy immunity from defamation suits?
I couldn't care less about the first part, really. The second part is where the real harm comes, though. If he's immune, he can basically say anything about anyone, including talking shit about business competitors, and no one can touch him. It makes the presidency his private marketing force.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26929917 - 09/11/20 12:30 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Do you think that it's appropriate to consider 'Trump disparaging a private citizen over a personal matter' as falling within the scope of presidential duties?
Poor choice of wording I think. The question should be: "Do you think that it's appropriate to consider 'Trump defending himself against a unproven attack while President' as falling within the scope of his presidential duties?"
To me, the answer is if Trump didn't rape her, then yes, but if he's lying, then he should have to pay.
How would responding to the personal criticism of private citizens fall under his duties as president?
Also, if Trump and the DOJ successfully argue that his statements were made in his official capacity as president, (my understanding is that) he will be considered immune to any claim of defamation, and the lawsuit effectively ended. In other words, if Trump is lying, this tactic will successfully prevent the truth from being revealed. If he's lying, he won't have to pay because the state institutions will have shielded him from the defamation lawsuit. That's why I consider it a corruption of your legal institutions to conflate Trump with your government.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26930016 - 09/11/20 01:28 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It sounds like a bad law to me, but it may well be the law.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ
Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,473
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 1 hour, 2 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26930150 - 09/11/20 02:53 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Yes, political corruption (the use of powers by government officials or their network contacts for illegitimate private gain) can sometimes seemingly operate within the law. It's understandable why a law would exist to prevent federal employees, acting within their official duties, from defamation lawsuits. That this protection would be extended to a federal employee acting outside their official duties is a pretty clear corruption of the intended function of the institution, with resulting private gain.
Even if the courts agre with Barrs claim, that should be all the more reason to rally against this act of political corruption.
--------------------
|
Nonagon Infinity
Mycologist
Registered: 06/02/20
Posts: 756
Loc: Polygondwanaland
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom] 1
#26930178 - 09/11/20 03:01 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Yes, political corruption (the use of powers by government officials or their network contacts for illegitimate private gain) can sometimes seemingly operate within the law.
No doubt. Politicians are to blame for being corrupt, but our system itself is equally to blame for allowing such corruption in the first place.
-------------------- Nonagon Infinity Opens the Door
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26930211 - 09/11/20 03:18 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: I couldn't care less about the first part, really. The second part is where the real harm comes, though. If he's immune, he can basically say anything about anyone, including talking shit about business competitors, and no one can touch him. It makes the presidency his private marketing force.
As opposed to the many many other times he's used the presidency as a private marketing force?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Kryptos]
#26930246 - 09/11/20 03:34 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
As illustrated by those times.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,661
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 8 minutes, 46 seconds
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil] 1
#26930269 - 09/11/20 03:50 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
And it wont end after his presidency; hopefully Mother Nature will take care of it in short order.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
Kryptos
Stranger
Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,657
Last seen: 1 hour, 53 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: SirTripAlot]
#26930289 - 09/11/20 04:02 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It won't. He has another 20-25 years left, though I expect the second half of those he will spend as a vegetable.
Of course, as Herman Cain's twitter account has shown us, death doesn't stop these cockroaches.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#26930421 - 09/11/20 05:22 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Yes, political corruption (the use of powers by government officials or their network contacts for illegitimate private gain) can sometimes seemingly operate within the law. It's understandable why a law would exist to prevent federal employees, acting within their official duties, from defamation lawsuits. That this protection would be extended to a federal employee acting outside their official duties is a pretty clear corruption of the intended function of the institution, with resulting private gain.
Even if the courts agre with Barrs claim, that should be all the more reason to rally against this act of political corruption.
I agree. But if the judge rules in Trump's favor, it shows Trump is pretty damn clever.
Again, I'm not a lawyer, so I can't weigh in on what the judge's decision should be.
But I'll agree that in principal (ignoring current laws), this shouldn't be allowed.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26930585 - 09/11/20 06:54 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
How does that make him clever?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26930596 - 09/11/20 07:03 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
How would legally getting the Government to pay for your legal bills and also act as the defendant make Trump clever?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26930599 - 09/11/20 07:05 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
That was my question to you.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26930899 - 09/11/20 09:56 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It's also my answer to you. By legally getting the Government to pay for your legal bills and also act as the defendant.
Clever!
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26930903 - 09/11/20 09:57 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
What makes you think that was trumps idea?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,661
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 8 minutes, 46 seconds
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#26930927 - 09/11/20 10:22 PM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Art of the Deal , its so clear.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
Brian Jones
Club 27
Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,426
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26931098 - 09/12/20 01:40 AM (3 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: You said this: "It turns out Trump and Barr were correct after all, and the mainstream news duped everyone again."
Trump explicitly told people in North Carolina to vote twice as a test to test the system:
Quote:
On your ballots, if you get the unsolicited ballots, send it in and then go make sure it counted, and then if it doesn’t tabulate, you vote. You just vote. And then if they tabulate it very late, which they shouldn’t be doing, they’ll see you voted and so it won’t count. So, send it in early, and then go and vote. And if it’s not tabulated, you vote, and the vote is gonna count.
Voting twice is illegal in North Carolina. As Kryptos' has pointed out, even NY state law - designed to allow a change of mind - considers fraudulently voting twice to be illegal. Can you explain how Trump was "correct after all"?
Per your quote above, Trump said "if it doesn’t tabulate, you vote" and again "if it’s not tabulated, you vote"
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: As for Barr, I guess he was correct in stating that there was a possibility that North Carolina allowed voting twice - but we now know that it's not possible, so basically Barr was correct in stating he was ignorant of the law. Why do you feel this impacts the initial claim by Trump for voters in North Carolina to vote twice?
Actually, the initial claim was: "Barr claimed to not know if voting twice is illegal..."
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: It's also odd you consider that mainstream news duped everyone, considering this quote you provided shows the CNN interviewer was correct regarding the law in North Carolina:
Quote:
Barr: I don't know what the law in the particular state says...
Blitzer: You can't vote twice.
Yes, of course voting twice is illegal in all states, but that's not what Trump actually suggested, is it?
If Trump was an establishment candidate, like Biden, I'll bet the media would have let this go, like they let so much of what Biden does go.
Voting twice was exactly what Trump suggested, repeatedly. Maybe a federal investigator could cast a ballot by mail and then try to vote in person, to test the system, if it was part of an established investigation. Telling private citizens to do it is just trolling and encouraging felonies.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Brian Jones]
#27006842 - 10/27/20 06:00 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Well, today the judge made a ruling that the DOJ could not substitute the U.S. in for Mr. Trump, thus ending his argument that he is immune to defamation suits. The case will move forward, and Trump will likely have to give his DNA.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#27007079 - 10/27/20 07:57 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Eeww
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#27007185 - 10/27/20 09:03 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Well, today the judge made a ruling that the DOJ could not substitute the U.S. in for Mr. Trump, thus ending his argument that he is immune to defamation suits. The case will move forward, and Trump will likely have to give his DNA.
Good thing. The people want to know if Trump was one of five others who touched Carroll on her jacket.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#27007190 - 10/27/20 09:05 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Which people?
If his DNA is there, that's strong evidence he lied. Of course, you're okay with his lies.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#27007201 - 10/27/20 09:15 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Which people?
If his DNA is there, that's strong evidence he lied. Of course, you're okay with his lies.
The American people.
If his DNA is there, that's strong evidence that he touched her jacket, along with five other guys. There's no evidence of semen like koods claimed earlier.
I'm not ok with lies, but if I have to choose between insignificant lies and lies about not working with other countries, I'll take the former.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#27007204 - 10/27/20 09:16 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, a lie about never meeting a woman he actually raped is pretty insignificant.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Enlil]
#27007217 - 10/27/20 09:20 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: ...a woman he actually raped...
Do you mean "allegedly" raped?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King
Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,273
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#27007219 - 10/27/20 09:21 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
No.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
koods
Ribbit
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,919
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 hour, 50 minutes
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#27007362 - 10/27/20 10:24 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Enlil said: Which people?
If his DNA is there, that's strong evidence he lied. Of course, you're okay with his lies.
The American people.
If his DNA is there, that's strong evidence that he touched her jacket, along with five other guys. There's no evidence of semen like koods claimed earlier.
I'm not ok with lies, but if I have to choose between insignificant lies and lies about not working with other countries, I'll take the former.
You don’t get your dna on a dress by simply touching it.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger
Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 7 months, 7 days
|
Re: DOJ to represent Trump in a personal legal matter [Re: koods]
#27007884 - 10/28/20 08:49 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: You don’t get your dna on a dress by simply touching it.
You should tell that to the New York Times or Wikipedia.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
|