Last edited by walrus; 12-11-2018 at 08:06 PM.
$10,000.00
$1,000,000,000,000.00
You can tell Kirk is trolling. He uses cases under appeal uncertain states to make this grand scheme. In my state if we vote we must show ID and it hasn’t been an issue. I’m still waiting for Kirk to answer me in his words how showing ID at the polls is racist. My state is heavily blue but we must show ID to vote, is that racist?
James Comey's testimony is unhelpful to HIS and his buddies' ends....never knew about Perkins Coie paying for the dossier? That Dossier by the way, old as 2007. Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton's "chance"meeting on the tarmac
He had nothing to say about that? That's cool.....gonna be fun watching that piece of shit's demise.
Robert Mueller is running out of delay tactics.
Wonder what the Huber investigation of the Clinton Foundation turns up....I'm guessing it'll be enough to require a deeper dive if not result in charges immediately.
Things are moving slowly and PRECISELY...gonna be fun to watch. It's already fun seeing Kirkland so upset.
Just to clarify some recent misinformation that (some people keep bringing up like it's true)......
The FBI says the Proud Boys are not an extremist group after all
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...=.8fae9713ce11
A high-ranking FBI agent told reporters that the Western-chauvinist group Proud Boys, which has made headlines for its part in violent clashes in Portland, Ore., and New York, is not considered an extremist group, contradicting a report from a Washington state sheriff’s office that circulated in November.
According to the Oregonian, Special Agent in Charge Renn Cannon said during a discussion with Portland-area journalists that the FBI had not intended to designate the group as extremist during a slide show with the Clark County Sheriff’s Office. That office later released a report that said the FBI considers the group to have ties to white nationalism, an assertion to which the Proud Boys objected.
The FBI says it assesses threats and investigates individuals with the potential to cause violence but does not go after people for being members of particular groups or exercising their free-speech rights.
Last edited by Spicoli; 12-12-2018 at 09:09 PM.
At long last! Vindication for that hugely misunderstood group of white men.
Must be tough having to scrounge high and low to find support for this type of group, who the rest of the world sees as promoting racism and violence. But good find on that FBI guy setting the record straight.
My own opinion is that if you have to constantly walk that tightrope between right and wrong, having to constantly defend your actions, there must be something there.
But we're not supposed to be talking Proud Boys here, only Trump-related issues. So I'll leave it at that.
Again, good find on that article about an FBI guy saying the Proud Boys are not extremists nor do they have ties to White Supremacists.
I'd print that, frame it, and hang it on the wall, along with the halos of each member of the group.
None of these things are going to amount to anything at all. They're all just a load of nonsense dredged up by the GOP to try and distract their voters from the Mueller investigation. And now there's the SDNY investigation which has already implicated Trump in two felonies. Exactly how many felonies have been charged on the Clinton/Obama/Democratic side of this so far Lyle?
So how much do you want to bet on this Lyle? Is there anything specific and any specific amount that you'd care to bet? I'll give you one thousand to one odds that Mueller doesn't face any kind of criminal charges.
And there you have it folks the bigotry of low expectations on display for all to see. Bravo Kirkland, you're SUCH the champion for them, they can't speak or do for themselves, so lucky they are for as great a champion as you
I think the law is specifically targeting VOTERS in general because not 1 fucking person is expected to produce something not expected of another.
Getting a photo ID so you can vote is easy. Unless you’re poor, black, Latino or elderly.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.f573492122e9
HOUSTON — In his wallet, Anthony Settles carries an expired Texas identification card, his Social Security card and an old student ID from the University of Houston, where he studied math and physics decades ago. What he does not have is the one thing that he needs to vote this presidential election: a current Texas photo ID.
For Settles to get one of those, his name has to match his birth certificate — and it doesn’t. In 1964, when he was 14, his mother married and changed his last name. After Texas passed a new voter-ID law, officials told Settles he had to show them his name-change certificate from 1964 to qualify for a new identification card to vote.
So with the help of several lawyers, Settles tried to find it, searching records in courthouses in the D.C. area, where he grew up. But they could not find it. To obtain a new document changing his name to the one he has used for 51 years, Settles has to go to court, a process that would cost him more than $250 — more than he is willing to pay.
“It has been a bureaucratic nightmare,” said Settles, 65, a retired engineer. “The intent of this law is to suppress the vote. I feel like I am not wanted in this state.”
The right to vote is so important.....'$250 is more than I'm willing to pay....as a retired engineer' ....LMFAO...best they could find is a fucking retired engineer who refuses to pay to fix legal issues. Oooooh he's sooooo hard done by. He could cry to a bleeding heart PAC and they'd pay him $250 IMMEDIATELY
Across the country, about 11 percent of Americans do not have government-issued photo identification cards, such as a driver’s license or a passport, according to Wendy Weiser of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.
According to Fairvote.org only about 60% of Americans vote in Presidential elections and 40% in midterms.......so just how much of that 11% with no ID overlaps with the 40% even?
Last edited by El Kabong; 12-12-2018 at 02:58 PM.
I'm going to go with the Supreme Court's view on this.
And also the view of lawyers representing North Carolina in a court case concerning their voter laws. Here they are admitting in court that North Carolina shut down Sunday voting because counties with high levels of Sunday voting were disproportionately black:
https://twitter.com/haroldpollack/st...57219899617280
and
The decision overturned a district court ruling upholding the state voter ID law. Writing for the 4th Circuit, Judge Diana Gribbon called the prior decision “erroneous”:
Socioeconomic disparities establish that no mere “preference” led African Americans to disproportionately use early voting, same-day registration, out-of-precinct voting, and preregistration. Nor does preference lead African Americans to disproportionately lack acceptable photo ID. Yet the district court refused to make the inference that undeniably flows from the disparities it found many African Americans in North Carolina experienced. Registration and voting tools may be a simple “preference” for many white North Carolinians, but for many African Americans, they are a necessity.According to Gribbon, the 4th Circuit court concluded “that the General Assembly would not have eliminated same-day registration entirely but for its disproportionate impact on African Americans,” and said that parts of the law amounted to solutions in search of a problem:
The only clear factor linking these various “reforms” is their impact on African American voters. The record thus makes obvious that the “problem” the majority in the General Assembly sought to remedy was emerging support for the minority party. Identifying and restricting the ways African Americans vote was an easy and effective way to do so. We therefore must conclude that race constituted a but-for cause of SL 2013-381, in violation of the Constitutional and statutory prohibitions on intentional discrimination.
and a whole bunch of Republicans in various different states admitting their voter laws are to target minority voters here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/u...ical-gain.html
The bet Lyle. How much do you want to bet? Go on, put some money where your mouth is. Don't chicken out.
There are currently 24 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 24 guests)
Bookmarks