Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6817

  • DRW50

    5990

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3462

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Ironically, Kavanaugh worked on the infamous Kenneth Starr's team.  The very same team that worked to bring down Bill Clinton with the Monica Lewinsky/Paula Jones controversy.  So, like Ratt once said, "what goes around, comes around."

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I certainly don't have as much as I did before 2016.  That election showed me that there are far more awful people in this country than I ever imagined. Not that I think I'm some saint, but damn.  I never thought I'd see the day Nazi's marched in our streets and POTUS would shrug it off and millions of people would stick with him.

 

  I think there is some hope that democrats are more energized and that more will vote in 2020. Also, maybe some hope that fewer Republicans will vote.  I won't be counting my chickens before I see 45 escorted out of the white house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

So, Kavanaugh was allegedly part of a date-rape ring?  God.  What a shitheel.

 

Thus far, he's been described in all the anecdotes as pitifully drunk (and thus probably unable to become aroused).  But, what if, on at least one occasion, he wasn't drunk and/or he was able to penetrate one of his victims anyway?

 

That's what keeps running through my mind about this case.  (That, and "Kavanaugh secret child" for some reason.)  At some point, I feel that some woman -- maybe it's Avenatti's client, maybe it's someone else -- is going to come forward and say, "No, Brett Kavanaugh did more than try to force my clothes off or make me touch his genitals with my face, he literally held me down, tore off my clothes and came inside me!"

 

(Sorry to be so graphic, by the way.)

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't someone here (marceline?) point out that even if Trump were to pardon Manafort and Cohen, they would still face charges from NY state, which he couldn't pardon them from?  Furthermore, isn't it true that NY would be allowed to use Manafort and Cohen's arranged testimonies as evidence of their guilt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

--But while we wait to see what next chaotic event will unfold in the U.S. government today, let's not forget that Putin-backed candidates suffered massive losses in local elections in Russia. These losses presumably stem from a Putin proposal to raise the age of eligibility for pension benefits (maybe people are sick of Putin's United Russia party?)

 

LibDems crush ruling party rivals in Russian Far East & central regions’ governor elections

 

Do I ever hope for a similar fate for the party of U.S.' Putin-wannabe in the midterm elections here.

 

 

It was probably more than one person on this board, tbh.  I certainly mentioned this at least once.  Yes, a pardon would do nothing to diminish the charges against him from the Southern district of New York, which is likely an outstanding factor in why he decided to cooperate with Mueller's people.  Remember, Manafort was in the process of facing 2nd trial when he cut the plea.

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Alan not reading the book was probably wise because he didn't interrupt as much and the five guests (Caryn and Tom especially) were all talking to one another with little to no input from Alan.  I think Caryn was pretty honest about the common bond of being young, new to soaps, and venting about the confusing structure of their stories that bonded them together.  And she was right that the stories changed left and right... her character alone had several stories/love interests during that two year period. Kin was also a bit bitter and I can't blame him considering he was forced on the soap.. and the show really didn't know what to do with him  and Rauch made him feel unwelcome to boot.  I'm sure he enjoyed hanging with everyone when not at the studio.. but I think he doesn't view his time there fondly.. and I can't blame him.  
    • Bill is super annoying. He had no reason to go to the Duprees house other than to try to stay connected to them. At first I thought Kat was going to play only part of that recording so it would be easier to implicate just Eva. That Cody guy seems like he might end up being a stalker. Still adjusting to this recast and I'm already seeing the character's aesthetic has changed. At one point it seemed like Robinson tried to make his voice sound deeper and it seems like Tricia Mann-Grant slightly dialed her performance style to fit with his less imposing presence. Reminds of how the character of Lionel Jefferson changed when he was recast with Damon Evans after Mike Evans left.
    • Andre having mommy issues is an intriguing thought. Vanessa is quite the thirsty thot.
    • I can see that...especially after her phone call with her mother.
    • LOL!  You're right, I'm out of my mind   This is me reacting to your post (if you know Phaedra Parks at all):  

      Please register in order to view this content

      Anyway, thanks for breaking it down for me. Sounds like I need Friday happy hour!  
    • The post 1795 present day stories started out promising once Victoria came back from the past and she was trying to make sense of the past.. while adjusting to the present.  The scene where she and Liz find Peter's grave and she expressed guilt over her actions in the past causing Peter to be accused of her crime and ending up being hung was well written and acted.   It would have been perfect had she mentioned that two men that were important to her were now dead (Burke/Peter). And Angelique invading the Collins family in the present day was a result of Victoria's visit to the past and realizing that Barnabas was out and about in the 20th century started promising with her causing Liz to become paranoid about death (a call back to her paranoia over 'killing' her husband Paul).. and Victoria instantly knowing who she was and trying to warn Julia. It's a shame that shortly after those first episodes back in the present post 1795 ended up becoming too focused on the ghouls/monsters... and downplaying the more soapy elements.  
    • I recently watched the premiere of Santa Barbara. I had never seen it. Most of my knowledge of the show is from 1988 onwards. I know of the show before that, but it's from recaps or individual clips/stories (having seen some of the carnation killer stuff). I can see why SB was not well thought of during its first year. The first episode is not that good. The acting is all over the place with only Robin Wright and Lane Davies making much of an impression. Everyone else is either given little to do or just too overeager/overwrought. Ava Lazar is beautiful but awful. I don't know how long she stays, but my word she is bad. Peter Mark Richman tries, but he's very one note as C.C. There's very little of the Dobson wit except for the few seconds with Anderson's Mrs. Lockridge. Interesting how Kelly is set up as the show's main heroine at this point and Eden is given just a brief mention.  I will say that Valorie Armstrong is a compelling presence, but I know she doesn't last long based on what I know of the show. A shame as they do set up the show to have different economic backgrounds and they also have the Andrades. That was completely gone by the time I started watching. I don't think the Andrades last long either because I don't remember seeing Rosa or Santana when I started following SB in late 88. Santana comes back briefly at some point (I think to kidnap Brandon) but then disappears and then she reappears when the Dobsons return for round 2 but that's with Wanda De Jesus. Did Rosa return then? I don't remember. This premiere episode would not make me keep watching if I didn't know what was to come. @DemetriKaneI just watch when I feel like watching the soaps. I'm an emotional watcher so sometimes I will watch a batch of episodes and other times I watch one or two a day. As I'm watching Edge of Night and Dark Shadows, I can get two or three a day if I'm disciplined.
    • I love how fast they updated the opening, if this were BOLD it'd take over a year lol  I gotta admit Keith is winning me over 
    • Catching up with the episode now. Is it me or did the addition of the new Ted in the opening titles come with a slight remix of the theme tune?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy