In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Theory about Conspiracy Theories
mag00
Member Posts: 4,719 ✭✭
When do the actually become conspiracy and not just a theory? What does it take to prove it is not a theory any longer?
Comments
Like the Kavanaugh confirmation stalling conspiracy.
When do the actually become conspiracy and not just a theory? What does it take to prove it is not a theory any longer?
Oh I don't know how about reporting a building collapsing in prime time and report it before it actually happens in real time in a video perhaps?
serf
ttps://www.metabunk.org/bbcs-jane-standley-premature-reporting-of-the-collapse-of-wtc-7-building-7.t9811/
quote:Originally posted by mag00
When do the actually become conspiracy and not just a theory? What does it take to prove it is not a theory any longer?
Oh I don't know how about reporting a building collapsing in prime time and report it before it actually happens in real time in a video perhaps?
serf
ttps://www.metabunk.org/bbcs-jane-standley-premature-reporting-of-the-collapse-of-wtc-7-building-7.t9811/
Yes, I lived very near there when that all happened. We could see the World Trade Towers collapse from the front Lawn of our business in Paramus, NJ.
The fact that that was all broadcast, about the ancillary buildings collapsing before it even happened, was quite interesting.
quote:Originally posted by serf
quote:Originally posted by mag00
When do the actually become conspiracy and not just a theory? What does it take to prove it is not a theory any longer?
Oh I don't know how about reporting a building collapsing in prime time and report it before it actually happens in real time in a video perhaps?
serf
ttps://www.metabunk.org/bbcs-jane-standley-premature-reporting-of-the-collapse-of-wtc-7-building-7.t9811/
Yes, I lived very near there when that all happened. We could see the World Trade Towers collapse from the front Lawn of our business in Paramus, NJ.
The fact that that was all broadcast, about the ancillary buildings collapsing before it even happened, was quite interesting.
It's all just a misunderstanding and who could even think it was scripted before the facts. Those conspiracy nuts are just mistaken.
They will never get to investigating that little slip up will they? Move along sheeple you must trust your NWO shepherd government.
serf
?
Now, then, that is how you evaluate what is known, when evaluating any theory or explanation of what we see.
And there is your conspiracy, if you need one.
Only a CIA Brain p-wave test could prove anything and a lie detector test is not allowed in a court of law for evidence barz....
serf
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3713201/
Brain fingerprinting detects concealed information stored in the brain by measuring brainwave responses. We compared P300 and P300-MERMER event-related brain potentials for error rate/accuracy and statistical confidence in four field/real-life studies. 76 tests detected presence or absence of information regarding (1) real-life events including felony crimes; (2) real crimes with substantial consequences (either a judicial outcome, i.e., evidence admitted in court, or a $100,000 reward for beating the test); (3) knowledge unique to FBI agents; and (4) knowledge unique to explosives (EOD/IED) experts. With both P300 and P300-MERMER, error rate was 0 %: determinations were 100 % accurate, no false negatives or false positives; also no indeterminates.
quote:Originally posted by serf
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
?
Now, then, that is how you evaluate what is known, when evaluating any theory or explanation of what we see.
And there is your conspiracy, if you need one.
Only a CIA Brain p-wave test could prove anything and a lie detector test is not allowed in a court of law for evidence barz....
serf
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3713201/
Brain fingerprinting detects concealed information stored in the brain by measuring brainwave responses. We compared P300 and P300-MERMER event-related brain potentials for error rate/accuracy and statistical confidence in four field/real-life studies. 76 tests detected presence or absence of information regarding (1) real-life events including felony crimes; (2) real crimes with substantial consequences (either a judicial outcome, i.e., evidence admitted in court, or a $100,000 reward for beating the test); (3) knowledge unique to FBI agents; and (4) knowledge unique to explosives (EOD/IED) experts. With both P300 and P300-MERMER, error rate was 0 %: determinations were 100 % accurate, no false negatives or false positives; also no indeterminates.
I am well aware of the utility of polygraphs, serf.
This is not a criminal proceeding.
Thanks for dropping by.
Anytime and enjoy the facts presented instead of your rhetoric jargon about who what where why and how someone is guilty.
You know whoever stacks the supreme court may cause one side or the other to revolt so we can have another Reichstag burning incident. It's so cunning isn't it? Like being in the garden of Eden all over again with a new omen like The NWO...[:D]
serf
Men on the moon. Kennedy killings. World Trade center drops. Shoe bombs. On and on. Where facts are obscured by reality. Modern techniques can make things hollywierd. God only knows...
Left out the Drug Bank laundry /CIA BCCI Bank scandals in 1980's under Ronald Reagan administration.It's just an honest mistake or a misunderstanding when The government Black ops bubbles up in the press!
serf
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP99-01448R000401700007-0.pdf
quote:Originally posted by mag00
When do the actually become conspiracy and not just a theory? What does it take to prove it is not a theory any longer?
Oh I don't know how about reporting a building collapsing in prime time and report it before it actually happens in real time in a video perhaps?
serf
ttps://www.metabunk.org/bbcs-jane-standley-premature-reporting-of-the-collapse-of-wtc-7-building-7.t9811/
Reacting to a report that firefighters were pulled from the building because it was going to collapse and not understanding that the building had not yet collapsed seems a pretty mundane conspiracy.
Brad Steele
quote:Originally posted by serf
quote:Originally posted by mag00
When do the actually become conspiracy and not just a theory? What does it take to prove it is not a theory any longer?
Oh I don't know how about reporting a building collapsing in prime time and report it before it actually happens in real time in a video perhaps?
serf
ttps://www.metabunk.org/bbcs-jane-standley-premature-reporting-of-the-collapse-of-wtc-7-building-7.t9811/
Reacting to a report that firefighters were pulled from the building because it was going to collapse and not understanding that the building had not yet collapsed seems a pretty mundane conspiracy.
Was that after or before all that gold was confiscated? Mundane you say? Scripted is more like it! Someone slipped up on confirmation it was down & not coming down. More than one reporter said it was down also so it was confirmed down not coming down soon.
serf
(Before 9:59 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Gold Transported Through WTC Basement
Edit event
Large amounts of gold are stored in vaults in the massive basement below the WTC, and some of this is being transported through the basement this morning. Several weeks later, recovery workers will discover hundreds of ingots in a service tunnel below WTC 5, along with a ten-wheel lorry and some cars (which were, presumably, transporting the gold) (see (Mid-October-mid November 2001)). The lorry and cars had been crushed by falling steel, but no bodies will be reported found with them, so presumably they were abandoned before the first WTC collapse, at 9:59 a.m. [New York Daily News, 10/31/2001; London Times, 11/1/2001]
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by serf
quote:Originally posted by mag00
When do the actually become conspiracy and not just a theory? What does it take to prove it is not a theory any longer?
Oh I don't know how about reporting a building collapsing in prime time and report it before it actually happens in real time in a video perhaps?
serf
ttps://www.metabunk.org/bbcs-jane-standley-premature-reporting-of-the-collapse-of-wtc-7-building-7.t9811/
Reacting to a report that firefighters were pulled from the building because it was going to collapse and not understanding that the building had not yet collapsed seems a pretty mundane conspiracy.
Was that after or before all that gold was confiscated? Mundane you say? Scripted is more like it! Someone slipped up on confirmation it was down & not coming down. More than one reporter said it was down also so it was confirmed down not coming down soon.
serf
(Before 9:59 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Gold Transported Through WTC Basement
Edit event
Large amounts of gold are stored in vaults in the massive basement below the WTC, and some of this is being transported through the basement this morning. Several weeks later, recovery workers will discover hundreds of ingots in a service tunnel below WTC 5, along with a ten-wheel lorry and some cars (which were, presumably, transporting the gold) (see (Mid-October-mid November 2001)). The lorry and cars had been crushed by falling steel, but no bodies will be reported found with them, so presumably they were abandoned before the first WTC collapse, at 9:59 a.m. [New York Daily News, 10/31/2001; London Times, 11/1/2001]
When something gets reported on a day like that, the report can easily take on a life of its own.
The gold?
Well, if I have tons of gold in the basement of a building that is massively on fire, I would seriously consider getting it out.
Hell, maybe it just a few members of the FDNY and/or the NYPD looking for a way to pad their retirement?
Yes.
A mundane conspiracy at best.
Brad Steele
quote:Originally posted by serf
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by serf
quote:Originally posted by mag00
When do the actually become conspiracy and not just a theory? What does it take to prove it is not a theory any longer?
Oh I don't know how about reporting a building collapsing in prime time and report it before it actually happens in real time in a video perhaps?
serf
ttps://www.metabunk.org/bbcs-jane-standley-premature-reporting-of-the-collapse-of-wtc-7-building-7.t9811/
Reacting to a report that firefighters were pulled from the building because it was going to collapse and not understanding that the building had not yet collapsed seems a pretty mundane conspiracy.
Was that after or before all that gold was confiscated? Mundane you say? Scripted is more like it! Someone slipped up on confirmation it was down & not coming down. More than one reporter said it was down also so it was confirmed down not coming down soon.
serf
(Before 9:59 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Gold Transported Through WTC Basement
Edit event
Large amounts of gold are stored in vaults in the massive basement below the WTC, and some of this is being transported through the basement this morning. Several weeks later, recovery workers will discover hundreds of ingots in a service tunnel below WTC 5, along with a ten-wheel lorry and some cars (which were, presumably, transporting the gold) (see (Mid-October-mid November 2001)). The lorry and cars had been crushed by falling steel, but no bodies will be reported found with them, so presumably they were abandoned before the first WTC collapse, at 9:59 a.m. [New York Daily News, 10/31/2001; London Times, 11/1/2001]
When something gets reported on a day like that, the report can easily take on a life of its own.
The gold?
Well, if I have tons of gold in the basement of a building that is massively on fire, I would seriously consider getting it out.
Hell, maybe it just a few members of the FDNY and/or the NYPD looking for a way to pad their retirement?
Yes.
A mundane conspiracy at best.
Yeah just like all that gold being transported before the attack,
https://www.mintpressnews.com/fema-investigator-claims-world-trade-center-vault-contents-emptied-attack/218111/
After the planes crashed into the building, Kurt was given unrestricted access to ground zero - the site where the buildings once stood.
Armed with camera gear, the 39-year-old was asked to film everything he saw.
His documented evidence was supposed to form part of a report about what happened - but he never handed back the footage.
His life began to unravel in the following months and years, leading to the death of his wife.
She was found dead on a couch in the home the pair shared with a bullet wound to the back of the head.
Fifteen years later, the now-54-year-old is on the run in Argentina.
He filmed an empty vault under WTC 6?
He then says that the vault should not have been empty because he found an inventory of the contents of vaults under WTC 4.
Can't really see how these two have anything to do with one another.
Yes, a mundane conspiracy.
Also:
Why was President George H.W. Bush meeting with members of the Bin Laden family at the very moment of the attacks?
GHW Bush was in a private plane flying from DC to the Midwest at the time of the attacks.
Supposedly he attended meetings with members of the Carlyle Group the day before, and one of those in attendance at one of the meetings was supposedly the brother of Assam Bin Laden.
A non-mundane conspiracy does not have to manufacturer facts.
Brad Steele
Conspiracy (civil), an agreement between people to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights or to gain an unfair advantage
Conspiracy (criminal), an agreement between people to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement
Conspiracy (political), an agreement between people with the goal of gaining political power or meeting a political objective
Hub-and-spoke conspiracy, a conspiracy in which one or more principal conspirators (the "hub") enter into several similar agreements with others (the "spokes") who know concerted action is contemplated, usually where the success of the concerted action depends on the participation of the other spokes
Think the MEDIA as a whole can and does provide and create conspiracies by their "hosts and experts commentary".
My favorite of the linked VIDEO is the "FAKE NEWS REPORTING on Iraq. Looks like the crew was a pack of dopers,,and NO WAY they were in IRAQ. CNN the NAME YOU CAN TRUST (to regurgitate a pack of hooey).
Also armed Iraq soldiers going into a Kuwaiti hospital, taking 14 newborn babies out of their incubators, removing the incubators from the Hospital and leaving the babies on the floor to die.
EVEN THE PRESIDENT WAS QUOTING THIS FAKE NEWS.
Like any theory,, it becomes REAL when proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, but even then some will NEVER BELIEVE THE TRUTH. (Moon landing, round earth)
(Fake NEWS, costly FAKE NEWS).
You should watch this, not the best video but those older than 50 should remember everyone of them.
Oh my God.
He filmed an empty vault under WTC 6?
He then says that the vault should not have been empty because he found an inventory of the contents of vaults under WTC 4.
Can't really see how these two have anything to do with one another.
Yes, a mundane conspiracy.
Also:
Why was President George H.W. Bush meeting with members of the Bin Laden family at the very moment of the attacks?
GHW Bush was in a private plane flying from DC to the Midwest at the time of the attacks.
Supposedly he attended meetings with members of the Carlyle Group the day before, and one of those in attendance at one of the meetings was supposedly the brother of Assam Bin Laden.
A non-mundane conspiracy does not have to manufacturer facts.
Duh, maybe an underground rail line between those buildings with The WTC 7 bldg being the last to go down? Please stay on topic and not veer off with some other subject. GOLD under The WTC is the what I am discussing and how it looted before the 9/11 attack. Someone knew beforehand in my opinion.
serf
https://americanfreepress.net/how-much-gold-was-under-wtc-complex/
The fate of nearly $1 billion worth of gold, silver and other precious metals stored beneath the WTC before 9-11 continues to baffle many.
To this day, only $230 million has officially been accounted for. All of that was retrieved from the previously mentioned, two-level, 6,000-square-foot vault maintained by the Bank of Nova Scotia. They reportedly lost $200 million in gold as a result of the attacks. However, other estimates suggest there was an additional $750 million worth of precious metals that may have been stored in other vaults or hurriedly evacuated from the Nova Scotia vault before the skyscrapers came down.
Even though it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, tastes like a duck, it is chicken?
There is untold amount of proof in three separate cases of duping the public.
WTC, Thermite.
Ford, sitting on info then crying for more time
Obama birth records, where his own staff admits to doctoring the records.
Then Marsha, Marsha, Marsha and it gets all the attention with no evidence.
Clinton Accusers are Bimbos
Ford is a saint
Clinton accusers had hard evidence
Ford can't even remember her name, but is credible
There is so much inconsistency on the conspiracies and the theories.
What will it take for it to actually be a conspiracy and then of course what can the citizens do to get justice?
It is, of course possible for a woman to make a false charge of sexual assault, either out of confusion or another motive, a fact that the question-begging slogan ?Believe Survivors? does not consider.
But, as the number of accusations rises, though, the odds that a an accusation will be one of the hoaxes diminishes. At that point, to believe Kavanaugh is telling the truth is to assume numerous women are engaged in a great conspiracy to slander and libel him. And that all of them risked their reputations and careers in order to sustain a lie, even going so far as committing perjury and facing prison. And somehow they were all controlled and coordinated by whom....Nancy Pelosi ? George Soros ? Barack Obama ?
Feel free to insert the name of whomever you choose to hate the most this week.
To believe this scenario, you also have to explain why Democrats did not attempt this ploy against Gorsuch, who faced no sexual-assault allegations. It is a bizarre and fanciful notion.
The odds that many people are conspiring to lie about Kavanaugh are growing ever more less likely. Instead, the odds are growing that Kavanaugh committed to a lie, and sank ever deeper into it during his testimony, gambling that he would either have a lifetime appointment to the most prestigious legal job in America or be disgraced, and that is why he has refused to concede even an inch regarding his character in the past.
If this is the history of a binge drinking college boy who gravitates to frat houses, he might not remember what he did. The point with such behavior is that behavior is only excusable once. This might also explain his exorbitant personal debt, ostensibly for "football tickets".
That, too, may be why he dodged a question from Fox about letting his friend, Mark Judge, testify under oath. Republicans must surely realize that there are more Federalist Society approved conservative lawyers that can be nominated without his long trail of allegations. Interesting that while POTUS says the ABA does not dictate candidates to him, but apparently he has no problem with others doing so.
Let?s remember that while some clearly want to paint these women as liars, the only person likely to have lied so far was Kavanaugh, who painted himself as a choirboy. That was ostensibly the case, until too many witnesses to his heavy, sloppy drunk behavior came forward.
Only later did he issue a statement admitting to past drunken, cringe-worthy behavior (which he declined to describe).
Also remember that while Swetnick?s story has not yet been corroborated, Mark Judge?s ex-girlfriend Elizabeth Rasor was already on record in a New Yorker article as having stated Mark told her about a story in which Judge and other boys took turns having sex with a drunk woman.
As I said, having multiple accusers does not mean anything by itself.
But if all of them agree to testify under oath, that does boost their credibility. So does a polygraph....reckon Brett has one planned ?
Perhaps the story about how Kennedy allegedly negotiated for Kavanaugh to be his replacement is the key to the Republican intransigence here, and a hint at a real conspiracy.
It was briefly reported in August. Perhaps it ought to be revisited.
Might wish to review the history of DKE at Yale, and their chain of distinguished alumnae, as well.
Now, then, that is how you evaluate what is known, when evaluating any theory or explanation of what we see.
And there is your conspiracy, if you need one.
So, you do believe Kavanaugh was part of a roving unreported gang of rapists. Wow.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
Has released her report to the Republican Senators. She was hired to question Christine Blasey Fraudster.
Read and/or download. It's not long because "there was no there, there". To report on, but lots of inconsistencies and some "forgetlessness"[:p] but not lies, memory lapses, some from two months ago.
https://www.scribd.com/document/389884913/Rachel-Mitchell-s-analysis-of-Dr-Christine-Blasey-Ford-s-allegations#from_embed
Rachel Mitchell, Nominations Investigative Counsel United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary.
Has released her report to the Republican Senators. She was hired to question Christine Blasey Fraudster.
Read and/or download. It's not long because "there was no there, there". To report on, but lots of inconsistencies and some "forgetlessness"[:p] but not lies, memory lapses, some from two months ago.
https://www.scribd.com/document/389884913/Rachel-Mitchell-s-analysis-of-Dr-Christine-Blasey-Ford-s-allegations#from_embed
I read it in its entirety and so should others. It offers balance to the slipshod and speculative reporting we see every day. From the opening statement:
"In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A ?he said, she said? case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard."
A Senate hearing isn't a court of law, however we should remember that a "preponderance of evidence" standard is the level found in small claims court. I found her observations regarding the polygraph test interesting because I know a bit about them via a friend who works for Navy intel and another in federal law enforcement.
A polygraph ought not be administered when a person is subject to emotional distress or significant upset. So I'm told by the above. That Ms. Mitchell is aware and cites it, noting that it was administered so close to the death of her grandmother, is worthwhile information. It is also worth noting the polygraph tested not Ms. Ford's assertions per se, but that the report was itself accurate. There is a difference. I may not have walked on the moon and were I tested suppose that would register false. However, were I to give a statement that I had walked on the moon and be tested "is this an accurate rendering of your statement?" I may test truthful. Ms. Mitchell's memo states Ms. Ford was asked the latter, not the former.
Again, rather than reading speculation, supposition or ancillary fluff such as Ms. Ford referencing gang rape with no mention of the nominee's name, I would suggest people read the dull but precise language and information put forth by someone whose job it was for many years to put bad guys in jail.
It is, of course possible for a woman to make a false charge of sexual assault, either out of confusion or another motive, a fact that the question-begging slogan ?Believe Survivors? does not consider.
But, as the number of accusations rises, though, the odds that a an accusation will be one of the hoaxes diminishes. At that point, to believe Kavanaugh is telling the truth is to assume numerous women are engaged in a great conspiracy to slander and libel him. And that all of them risked their reputations and careers in order to sustain a lie, even going so far as committing perjury and facing prison. And somehow they were all controlled and coordinated by whom....Nancy Pelosi ? George Soros ? Barack Obama ?
Feel free to insert the name of whomever you choose to hate the most this week.
To believe this scenario, you also have to explain why Democrats did not attempt this ploy against Gorsuch, who faced no sexual-assault allegations. It is a bizarre and fanciful notion.
The odds that many people are conspiring to lie about Kavanaugh are growing ever more less likely. Instead, the odds are growing that Kavanaugh committed to a lie, and sank ever deeper into it during his testimony, gambling that he would either have a lifetime appointment to the most prestigious legal job in America or be disgraced, and that is why he has refused to concede even an inch regarding his character in the past.
If this is the history of a binge drinking college boy who gravitates to frat houses, he might not remember what he did. The point with such behavior is that behavior is only excusable once. This might also explain his exorbitant personal debt, ostensibly for "football tickets".
That, too, may be why he dodged a question from Fox about letting his friend, Mark Judge, testify under oath. Republicans must surely realize that there are more Federalist Society approved conservative lawyers that can be nominated without his long trail of allegations. Interesting that while POTUS says the ABA does not dictate candidates to him, but apparently he has no problem with others doing so.
Let?s remember that while some clearly want to paint these women as liars, the only person likely to have lied so far was Kavanaugh, who painted himself as a choirboy. That was ostensibly the case, until too many witnesses to his heavy, sloppy drunk behavior came forward.
Only later did he issue a statement admitting to past drunken, cringe-worthy behavior (which he declined to describe).
Also remember that while Swetnick?s story has not yet been corroborated, Mark Judge?s ex-girlfriend Elizabeth Rasor was already on record in a New Yorker article as having stated Mark told her about a story in which Judge and other boys took turns having sex with a drunk woman.
As I said, having multiple accusers does not mean anything by itself.
But if all of them agree to testify under oath, that does boost their credibility. So does a polygraph....reckon Brett has one planned ?
Perhaps the story about how Kennedy allegedly negotiated for Kavanaugh to be his replacement is the key to the Republican intransigence here, and a hint at a real conspiracy.
It was briefly reported in August. Perhaps it ought to be revisited.
Might wish to review the history of DKE at Yale, and their chain of distinguished alumnae, as well.
Now, then, that is how you evaluate what is known, when evaluating any theory or explanation of what we see.
And there is your conspiracy, if you need one.
Two things stick out here for me. One was the polygraph that Ford took. My understanding is the questions were not direct, and that I could pass the polygraph if I design the questions.
But more importantly you mention Kennedy speaking to Kavanaugh. Would that be conspiracy or passing the torch or grooming for the possible candidate?
Neither of which is illegal, unethical or remotely sinister, which would be part of the definition of conspiracy.
However, Feinstein withholding the information, then crying about not enough time for an investigation sounds more like fact than theory. And the fact that her reasons are suspect, as to intention, falls under an obstruction, which should be investigated as conspiracy or obstruction or both.
I have no issue with them interrogating all involved, and I mean ALL, but would wish that it was done by private investigators with judicial authority to do so, from BOTH SIDES.
The corrupt FBI needs to be left out of this, that would diminish the credibility of any findings imho.
Also believe a timeline, and if Kavanaugh admonished in the investigation, all those clamoring for the investigation resign their positions.
In other words, if they are so sure, they need to put something at stake too. Not just the burden of the accused to clear their name, but a penalty for the unsubstantiated claims that do cause harm.
I hardly think a million dollar go fund me account is penalty enough for making belated unsubstantiated claims. Also, the investigation needs to go after where the money comes from in this particular case. Go fund me may be "laundering" money, inadvertently, and that may be the big takeaway from this fiasco.
And if they did find some connections, new laws to include go fund me campaign contribution laws will need to be looked into.
And here is another thing for everyone to consider, the investigation could resume or continue, but the nomination process should not be impeded.
If Kavanaugh turned out to be pulling a Lance Armstrong, there would be ZERO problem impeaching him and removing him from the bench ZERO.
The Wolf Cried, America Died [V]
Senator Feinstein knew exactly what she was doing and I would suggest two realities.
First, that her fellow Democratic Party legislators and supporters, after publicly uttering requisite public statements of criticism, were privately pleased as could be with the timing and substance of her actions. Second, that if someone in our camp did the same thing but in our favor we'd be equally enthused. It may be overstating things, but a long time ago Joe Kennedy said "there are no mistakes in politics".
quote:Originally posted by mag00
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
.......
Perhaps the story about how Kennedy allegedly negotiated for Kavanaugh to be his replacement is the key to the Republican intransigence here, and a hint at a real conspiracy.
It was briefly reported in August. Perhaps it ought to be revisited.
Might wish to review the history of DKE at Yale, and their chain of distinguished alumnae, as well.
Now, then, that is how you evaluate what is known, when evaluating any theory or explanation of what we see.
And there is your conspiracy, if you need one.
Two things stick out here for me. One was the polygraph that Ford took. My understanding is the questions were not direct, and that I could pass the polygraph if I design the questions.
You have a copy of the polygraph examination questions ?
That is quite remarkable. Link ???
But more importantly you mention Kennedy speaking to Kavanaugh. Would that be conspiracy or passing the torch or grooming for the possible candidate?
No, I did not mention Kennedy speaking to Kavenaugh. My statement was that Kennedy reportedly negotiated (with POTUS) to gain his nomination. Of course Kennedy has spoken with Kavenaugh, Kavenaugh clerked with him for Pete's sake. But was there a quid pro quo with POTUS to get that particular nomination ? That would be ......ummmmm, non-judicial, would it not ?
Neither of which is illegal, unethical or remotely sinister, which would be part of the definition of conspiracy.
A quid pro quo agreement would certainly be more than remotely sinister. Perhaps you should review some of the facts surrounding Kavenaugh's addition to the list of potential nominees, and the DKE fraternity.
However, Feinstein withholding the information, then crying about not enough time for an investigation sounds more like fact than theory. And the fact that her reasons are suspect, as to intention, falls under an obstruction, which should be investigated as conspiracy or obstruction or both.
The information was not disclosed at the informant's request. Perhaps you should review the definition of obstruction in this matter, as you are throwing around a legal term rather carelessly.
I have no issue with them interrogating all involved, and I mean ALL, but would wish that it was done by private investigators with judicial authority to do so, from BOTH SIDES.
Not much chance of that. I think that the FBI would be able to perform reasonably well in such interviews, if given the proper authority to do so.
The corrupt FBI needs to be left out of this, that would diminish the credibility of any findings imho.
You are free to your opinion. My opinion differs.
Also believe a timeline, and if Kavanaugh admonished in the investigation, all those clamoring for the investigation resign their positions.
Errrrrr......do what ?
In other words, if they are so sure, they need to put something at stake too. Not just the burden of the accused to clear their name, but a penalty for the unsubstantiated claims that do cause harm.
I doubt that could be found within the law ?
I hardly think a million dollar go fund me account is penalty enough for making belated unsubstantiated claims. Also, the investigation needs to go after where the money comes from in this particular case. Go fund me may be "laundering" money, inadvertently, and that may be the big takeaway from this fiasco.
See above.
And if they did find some connections, new laws to include go fund me campaign contribution laws will need to be looked into.
Then Kavenaugh would not likely be your choice for SCOTUS.
And here is another thing for everyone to consider, the investigation could resume or continue, but the nomination process should not be impeded.
It is easier to avoid errors, than to go back and try to correct them.
If Kavanaugh turned out to be pulling a Lance Armstrong, there would be ZERO problem impeaching him and removing him from the bench ZERO.
I think you are living in an alternate reality if that is truly your approach.
The Wolf Cried, America Died [V]
Let's try to approach the matter without sloganeering that masquerades as reason, eh ?
Is their a higher standard for Presidents or just Conservative Supreme court justices before a mid-term election is a question to ponder Barz... it's all a political dog and pony show to control the outcome of a vote and stop the nomination process until after the elections.
Why did these women wait until the very end to bring accusations? Because they wanted justice? What a joke. Just a political smear campaign to gain power.
serf
quote:Originally posted by mag00
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
.......
Perhaps the story about how Kennedy allegedly negotiated for Kavanaugh to be his replacement is the key to the Republican intransigence here, and a hint at a real conspiracy.
It was briefly reported in August. Perhaps it ought to be revisited.
Might wish to review the history of DKE at Yale, and their chain of distinguished alumnae, as well.
Now, then, that is how you evaluate what is known, when evaluating any theory or explanation of what we see.
And there is your conspiracy, if you need one.
Two things stick out here for me. One was the polygraph that Ford took. My understanding is the questions were not direct, and that I could pass the polygraph if I design the questions.
You have a copy of the polygraph examination questions ?
That is quite remarkable. Link ???
But more importantly you mention Kennedy speaking to Kavanaugh. Would that be conspiracy or passing the torch or grooming for the possible candidate?
No, I did not mention Kennedy speaking to Kavenaugh. My statement was that Kennedy reportedly negotiated (with POTUS) to gain his nomination. Of course Kennedy has spoken with Kavenaugh, Kavenaugh clerked with him for Pete's sake. But was there a quid pro quo with POTUS to get that particular nomination ? That would be ......ummmmm, non-judicial, would it not ?
Neither of which is illegal, unethical or remotely sinister, which would be part of the definition of conspiracy.
A quid pro quo agreement would certainly be more than remotely sinister. Perhaps you should review some of the facts surrounding Kavenaugh's addition to the list of potential nominees, and the DKE fraternity.
However, Feinstein withholding the information, then crying about not enough time for an investigation sounds more like fact than theory. And the fact that her reasons are suspect, as to intention, falls under an obstruction, which should be investigated as conspiracy or obstruction or both.
The information was not disclosed at the informant's request. Perhaps you should review the definition of obstruction in this matter, as you are throwing around a legal term rather carelessly.
I have no issue with them interrogating all involved, and I mean ALL, but would wish that it was done by private investigators with judicial authority to do so, from BOTH SIDES.
Not much chance of that. I think that the FBI would be able to perform reasonably well in such interviews, if given the proper authority to do so.
The corrupt FBI needs to be left out of this, that would diminish the credibility of any findings imho.
You are free to your opinion. My opinion differs.
Also believe a timeline, and if Kavanaugh admonished in the investigation, all those clamoring for the investigation resign their positions.
Errrrrr......do what ?
In other words, if they are so sure, they need to put something at stake too. Not just the burden of the accused to clear their name, but a penalty for the unsubstantiated claims that do cause harm.
I doubt that could be found within the law ?
I hardly think a million dollar go fund me account is penalty enough for making belated unsubstantiated claims. Also, the investigation needs to go after where the money comes from in this particular case. Go fund me may be "laundering" money, inadvertently, and that may be the big takeaway from this fiasco.
See above.
And if they did find some connections, new laws to include go fund me campaign contribution laws will need to be looked into.
Then Kavenaugh would not likely be your choice for SCOTUS.
And here is another thing for everyone to consider, the investigation could resume or continue, but the nomination process should not be impeded.
It is easier to avoid errors, than to go back and try to correct them.
If Kavanaugh turned out to be pulling a Lance Armstrong, there would be ZERO problem impeaching him and removing him from the bench ZERO.
I think you are living in an alternate reality if that is truly your approach.
The Wolf Cried, America Died [V]
Let's try to approach the matter without sloganeering that masquerades as reason, eh ?
Let's try to Trying is an excuse for not doing.
approach the matter You never even got to it then as you are still approaching, what's the matter?
without Means it's not there, never happened.
sloganeering That word is not in my dictionary, why you gotta make stuff up?
masquerades as Yes, Halloween is coming up.
reason I do question your motives in being such a *.
/red]eh ?[/red]Canadian much eh?
How about quit being a *? Do you like my illustration of your jackassery? I learned from you after all? [;)]
serf
com/politics/pussyhats-galore-inside-the-pink-toppers-thousands-will-wear-to-the-womens-march-on-washington/
The knit pink hats, topped with corners that resemble cat ears, are part of the Pussyhat Project, an initiative formed by two friends, Jayna Zweiman and Krista Suh, who bonded in part through their shared fondness for knitting and crocheting. Their love of knitting fused with their political passions when they launched the project late last year, following the presidential election and the announcement of the Women?s March on Washington.
quote:Originally posted by mag00
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
quote:Originally posted by mag00
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia
.......
Perhaps the story about how Kennedy allegedly negotiated for Kavanaugh to be his replacement is the key to the Republican intransigence here, and a hint at a real conspiracy.
It was briefly reported in August. Perhaps it ought to be revisited.
Might wish to review the history of DKE at Yale, and their chain of distinguished alumnae, as well.
Now, then, that is how you evaluate what is known, when evaluating any theory or explanation of what we see.
And there is your conspiracy, if you need one.
Two things stick out here for me. One was the polygraph that Ford took. My understanding is the questions were not direct, and that I could pass the polygraph if I design the questions.
You have a copy of the polygraph examination questions ?
That is quite remarkable. Link ???
But more importantly you mention Kennedy speaking to Kavanaugh. Would that be conspiracy or passing the torch or grooming for the possible candidate?
No, I did not mention Kennedy speaking to Kavenaugh. My statement was that Kennedy reportedly negotiated (with POTUS) to gain his nomination. Of course Kennedy has spoken with Kavenaugh, Kavenaugh clerked with him for Pete's sake. But was there a quid pro quo with POTUS to get that particular nomination ? That would be ......ummmmm, non-judicial, would it not ?
Neither of which is illegal, unethical or remotely sinister, which would be part of the definition of conspiracy.
A quid pro quo agreement would certainly be more than remotely sinister. Perhaps you should review some of the facts surrounding Kavenaugh's addition to the list of potential nominees, and the DKE fraternity.
However, Feinstein withholding the information, then crying about not enough time for an investigation sounds more like fact than theory. And the fact that her reasons are suspect, as to intention, falls under an obstruction, which should be investigated as conspiracy or obstruction or both.
The information was not disclosed at the informant's request. Perhaps you should review the definition of obstruction in this matter, as you are throwing around a legal term rather carelessly.
I have no issue with them interrogating all involved, and I mean ALL, but would wish that it was done by private investigators with judicial authority to do so, from BOTH SIDES.
Not much chance of that. I think that the FBI would be able to perform reasonably well in such interviews, if given the proper authority to do so.
The corrupt FBI needs to be left out of this, that would diminish the credibility of any findings imho.
You are free to your opinion. My opinion differs.
Also believe a timeline, and if Kavanaugh admonished in the investigation, all those clamoring for the investigation resign their positions.
Errrrrr......do what ?
In other words, if they are so sure, they need to put something at stake too. Not just the burden of the accused to clear their name, but a penalty for the unsubstantiated claims that do cause harm.
I doubt that could be found within the law ?
I hardly think a million dollar go fund me account is penalty enough for making belated unsubstantiated claims. Also, the investigation needs to go after where the money comes from in this particular case. Go fund me may be "laundering" money, inadvertently, and that may be the big takeaway from this fiasco.
See above.
And if they did find some connections, new laws to include go fund me campaign contribution laws will need to be looked into.
Then Kavenaugh would not likely be your choice for SCOTUS.
And here is another thing for everyone to consider, the investigation could resume or continue, but the nomination process should not be impeded.
It is easier to avoid errors, than to go back and try to correct them.
If Kavanaugh turned out to be pulling a Lance Armstrong, there would be ZERO problem impeaching him and removing him from the bench ZERO.
I think you are living in an alternate reality if that is truly your approach.
The Wolf Cried, America Died [V]
Let's try to approach the matter without sloganeering that masquerades as reason, eh ?
Let's try to Trying is an excuse for not doing.
approach the matter You never even got to it then as you are still approaching, what's the matter?
without Means it's not there, never happened.
sloganeering That word is not in my dictionary, why you gotta make stuff up?
masquerades as Yes, Halloween is coming up.
reason I do question your motives in being such a *.
/red]eh ?[/red]Canadian much eh?
How about quit being a *? Do you like my illustration of your jackassery? I learned from you after all? [;)]
Q.E.D.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sloganeering
I'll give you another chance. If you care to explain what you mean with your posted statement using "your" made up word "sloganeering", I'm going to need to hear it from you to make sure I understand what you are talking about in context.
Will you use common words to explain what you mean?
As I have stated, not in my dictionary.
quote:Originally posted by mag00
quote:Originally posted by Barzillia