Widgets Magazine
Page 139 of 144 FirstFirst ... 3989134135136137138139140141142143 ... LastLast
Results 3,451 to 3,475 of 3580
  1. #3451

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    You cannot intimidate a witness if they don't know about it.
    It's not always about the current witness. How can you not see this as a message (and not a new one) from Trump that if you testify against him you're now his enemy.

  2. #3452

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Dustin View Post
    The 2019 dim version of the boy that cried wolf... ‘’the house is on fire! the house is on fire!”

  3. #3453

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post

    You cannot intimidate a witness if they don't know about it.
    Have you ever considered that the intimidation is meant for other witnesses? Other potential witnesses could see how the WB and three Foreign Service Officers with distinguished careers have been treated and decide not to testify. Obstruction 101.

  4. #3454

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Here is an example of what I'm talking about:
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/4214453002/
    The targeted attacks by the president on witnesses who may provide damaging testimony against him are designed to discredit their testimony, to deter them from cooperating, and to cause other witnesses to think twice before coming forward, lest they receive the same treatment. Especially when contrasted with the praise for witnesses who have chosen not to cooperate against him.

  5. #3455

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by catcherinthewry View Post
    Have you ever considered that the intimidation is meant for other witnesses? Other potential witnesses could see how the WB and three Foreign Service Officers with distinguished careers have been treated and decide not to testify. Obstruction 101.
    What exactly was the message again? That they sucked at their job? Good lord the humanity.

  6. #3456

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by catcherinthewry View Post
    Here is an example of what I'm talking about:
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/4214453002/
    The targeted attacks by the president on witnesses who may provide damaging testimony against him are designed to discredit their testimony, to deter them from cooperating, and to cause other witnesses to think twice before coming forward, lest they receive the same treatment. Especially when contrasted with the praise for witnesses who have chosen not to cooperate against him.
    I think they did just fine on their own discrediting their own testimony.

  7. #3457

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    What is the color of the sky in your alt-universe, Eric?

  8. #3458

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by catcherinthewry View Post
    What is the color of the sky in your alt-universe, Eric?
    catcher: Trump isn't fit for office

    also catcher: calls a person a name instead of addressing the point.

    I'd like to suggest that this is a form of forum intimidation.

  9. #3459

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Somehow doubting you see the irony.

  10. #3460

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    Somehow doubting you see the irony.
    His Tweet was directed and specific to the one person. It's giving Trump way too much credit to consider his criticism was really intimidation and a warning to future witnesses.

  11. #3461

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Mob Lawyer: "You're honor, my clients' ordered hits on the first few witnesses were specific to them, and in no way were intended to send a message to the other witnesses."

    Yeah, I don't think that's a good look.

  12. #3462

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by jerrywall View Post
    Mob Lawyer: "You're honor, my clients' ordered hits on the first few witnesses were specific to them, and in no way were intended to send a message to the other witnesses."

    Yeah, I don't think that's a good look.
    He said she sucked at her job. He is her boss. Really not that big of a deal other than saying defensible things that are normally said in private out loud.

    She (as well as all other Obama appointees) should have been removed as soon as he could have. He didn't. He made a mistake on that front in my opinion.

    A threat it is not.

  13. #3463

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by mugofbeer View Post
    His Tweet was directed and specific to the one person. It's giving Trump way too much credit to consider his criticism was really intimidation and a warning to future witnesses.
    Further, it is giving catcher way too much credit to consider his criticism was really intimidation and a warning to future posters who don't share his view of the world.

  14. #3464

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    He said she sucked at her job. He is her boss. Really not that big of a deal other than saying defensible things that are normally said in private out loud.

    She (as well as all other Obama appointees) should have been removed as soon as he could have. He didn't. He made a mistake on that front in my opinion.

    A threat it is not.
    He is working to destroy any future career for her (besides future cable news pundit). It's a threat. It's a consistent pattern that Trump has shown, over and over again. You're a great person until you "turn on him". And by "turn on him" I mean, tell the truth in a way that he decides reflects poorly on him, or have a different position than him based on your experience and you vocalize it, then you "suck at your job". That's a threat, because anyone who is thinking about testifying against this OR ANY FUTURE president, has to be worried about the same treatment.

    I'm willing to give due process, and the presumption of innocence on lots of stuff. The Ukraine stuff by large, is adjudicating intent and using hearsay to try to lay it out. So an argument can be made either way. But this, we're all watching in real time. The revolution may not be televised, but this behavior sure as heck is.

  15. #3465

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by jerrywall View Post
    He is working to destroy any future career for her (besides future cable news pundit). It's a threat. It's a consistent pattern that Trump has shown, over and over again. You're a great person until you "turn on him". And by "turn on him" I mean, tell the truth in a way that he decides reflects poorly on him, or have a different position than him based on your experience and you vocalize it, then you "suck at your job". That's a threat, because anyone who is thinking about testifying against this OR ANY FUTURE president, has to be worried about the same treatment.

    I'm willing to give due process, and the presumption of innocence on lots of stuff. The Ukraine stuff by large, is adjudicating intent and using hearsay to try to lay it out. So an argument can be made either way. But this, we're all watching in real time. The revolution may not be televised, but this behavior sure as heck is.
    According to her testimony, it sounds like she has already been threatened by this WH, so it was probably not a good idea for the President tweet something which could be taken as a threat, while she was testifying about being threatened. Even Ken Starr agreed that was a dumbass thing to do.

    Interesting visit to Walter Reed on Saturday. Do they have a driving range out back?

  16. #3466

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    The Tag Line:

    "Leading Republicans have fled from Trump's racism. But their party has been a white-identity club for 50 years"

    right...


    That pic of Wallace is >50 years ago and Byrd supported the Civil Rights act of 1968 which is also >50 years ago.
    So how does today's GOP fare on civil rights legislation?

  17. #3467

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Jersey Boss View Post
    That pic of Wallace is >50 years ago and Byrd supported the Civil Rights act of 1968 which is also >50 years ago.
    So how does today's GOP fare on civil rights legislation?
    You know Byrd filibustered that bill for 14 hours right? and voted AGAINST voting act a few years prior.

  18. #3468

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    You know Byrd filibustered that bill for 14 hours right? and voted AGAINST voting act a few years prior.
    I believe that fillibuster pertained to 1964. He voted for the 1968 bill.

  19. #3469

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    So the GOP position on the 1968 voting rights provisions negated by SCOTUS is what?

  20. #3470

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    Further, it is giving catcher way too much credit to consider his criticism was really intimidation and a warning to future posters who don't share his view of the world.
    Oh, its just another example of turning to personal attacks in a political chat when he can't come up with a real arguement. Its a standard tactic to try to marginalize your foe when one is incapable of discussion. Just like Trump.

  21. #3471

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Sad state of affairs...


  22. #3472

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    Sad state of affairs...

    Yes, apparently Chick Fil A expects the Salvation Army to discriminate.

  23. #3473

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric View Post
    Sad state of affairs...

    POSITIONAL STATEMENT ON HOMOSEXUALITY The Salvation Army holds a positive view of human sexuality. Where a man and a woman love each other, sexual intimacy is understood as a gift of God to be enjoyed within the context of heterosexual marriage. However, in the Christian view, sexual intimacy is not essential to a healthy, full, and rich life. Apart from marriage, the scriptural standard is celibacy. Sexual attraction to the same sex is a matter of profound complexity. Whether this is the result of genetics, environment, or some combination of both, attempts to deny its reality or to marginalize those of a same-sex orientation have not been helpful. The Salvation Army does not consider same-sex orientation blameworthy in itself or simply a matter of the will. While some Christian believers witness to a reorientation to heterosexuality, this has not been the experience of all. Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex. The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life. There is no scriptural support for same-sex unions as equal to, or as an alternative to, heterosexual marriage. Likewise, there is no scriptural support for demeaning or mistreating anyone for reason of his or her sexual orientation. The Salvation Army opposes any such abuse. In keeping with these convictions, the services of The Salvation Army are available to all who qualify, without regard to sexual orientation. The fellowship of Salvation Army worship is open to all sincere seekers of faith in Christ, and membership in The Salvation Army church body is open to all who confess Christ as Savior and who accept and abide by The Salvation Army's doctrine and discipline. Scriptures: Genesis 2:23-24; Leviticus 18:22; Mark 2:16-17; Romans 1:26-27; Romans 5:8; I Corinthians 6:9-11; I Corinthians 13; Galatians 6:1-2; I Thessalonians 4:1-8; I Thessalonians 5:14-15; I Timothy 1:15-16; Jude 7 Approved by the Commissioners' Conference, May 2001. Approved by International Headquarters July 2001.

  24. #3474

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    POSITIONAL STATEMENT ON HOMOSEXUALITY The Salvation Army holds a positive view of human sexuality. Where a man and a woman love each other, sexual intimacy is understood as a gift of God to be enjoyed within the context of heterosexual marriage. However, in the Christian view, sexual intimacy is not essential to a healthy, full, and rich life. Apart from marriage, the scriptural standard is celibacy. Sexual attraction to the same sex is a matter of profound complexity. Whether this is the result of genetics, environment, or some combination of both, attempts to deny its reality or to marginalize those of a same-sex orientation have not been helpful. The Salvation Army does not consider same-sex orientation blameworthy in itself or simply a matter of the will. While some Christian believers witness to a reorientation to heterosexuality, this has not been the experience of all. Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex. The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life. There is no scriptural support for same-sex unions as equal to, or as an alternative to, heterosexual marriage. Likewise, there is no scriptural support for demeaning or mistreating anyone for reason of his or her sexual orientation. The Salvation Army opposes any such abuse. In keeping with these convictions, the services of The Salvation Army are available to all who qualify, without regard to sexual orientation. The fellowship of Salvation Army worship is open to all sincere seekers of faith in Christ, and membership in The Salvation Army church body is open to all who confess Christ as Savior and who accept and abide by The Salvation Army's doctrine and discipline. Scriptures: Genesis 2:23-24; Leviticus 18:22; Mark 2:16-17; Romans 1:26-27; Romans 5:8; I Corinthians 6:9-11; I Corinthians 13; Galatians 6:1-2; I Thessalonians 4:1-8; I Thessalonians 5:14-15; I Timothy 1:15-16; Jude 7 Approved by the Commissioners' Conference, May 2001. Approved by International Headquarters July 2001.

  25. #3475

    Default Re: The national political landscape

    Quote Originally Posted by jerrywall View Post
    POSITIONAL STATEMENT ON HOMOSEXUALITY The Salvation Army holds a positive view of human sexuality. Where a man and a woman love each other, sexual intimacy is understood as a gift of God to be enjoyed within the context of heterosexual marriage. However, in the Christian view, sexual intimacy is not essential to a healthy, full, and rich life. Apart from marriage, the scriptural standard is celibacy. Sexual attraction to the same sex is a matter of profound complexity. Whether this is the result of genetics, environment, or some combination of both, attempts to deny its reality or to marginalize those of a same-sex orientation have not been helpful. The Salvation Army does not consider same-sex orientation blameworthy in itself or simply a matter of the will. While some Christian believers witness to a reorientation to heterosexuality, this has not been the experience of all. Scripture forbids sexual intimacy between members of the same sex. The Salvation Army believes, therefore, that Christians whose sexual orientation is primarily or exclusively same-sex are called upon to embrace celibacy as a way of life. There is no scriptural support for same-sex unions as equal to, or as an alternative to, heterosexual marriage. Likewise, there is no scriptural support for demeaning or mistreating anyone for reason of his or her sexual orientation. The Salvation Army opposes any such abuse. In keeping with these convictions, the services of The Salvation Army are available to all who qualify, without regard to sexual orientation. The fellowship of Salvation Army worship is open to all sincere seekers of faith in Christ, and membership in The Salvation Army church body is open to all who confess Christ as Savior and who accept and abide by The Salvation Army's doctrine and discipline. Scriptures: Genesis 2:23-24; Leviticus 18:22; Mark 2:16-17; Romans 1:26-27; Romans 5:8; I Corinthians 6:9-11; I Corinthians 13; Galatians 6:1-2; I Thessalonians 4:1-8; I Thessalonians 5:14-15; I Timothy 1:15-16; Jude 7 Approved by the Commissioners' Conference, May 2001. Approved by International Headquarters July 2001.
    Why I intentionally did not excerpt the statement. So to recap, they wll still give you a piece of bread, but will actively speak out against your beliefs and lifestyle and you can't join their church.

    They are entitled to do that. As are people to fund, not fund, support, not support and speak out against them.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Radio landscape in OKC
    By aviastar in forum Ask Anything About OKC
    Replies: 437
    Last Post: 05-28-2019, 01:45 AM
  2. Utility easement and landscape destruction
    By jerrywall in forum Edmond
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-27-2016, 01:03 PM
  3. Landscape Lighting
    By Celebrator in forum Ask Anything About OKC
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-04-2016, 02:40 PM
  4. OKC's Changing Political Landscape
    By soonerguru in forum Politics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 11-11-2014, 03:08 PM
  5. Recommend a Landscape designer/planner?
    By Celebrator in forum Edmond
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-26-2009, 09:17 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO