Total Members Voted: 9
Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM
Amity has no use for Asians
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-6604/122356/20191113172501409_19-11-13_Stay_60b.pdfhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-6604/122360/20191113182410954_cromartie%20op%20cert%2060b.pdfCromartie death penalty case
Quote from: REDSTATEWARD on November 14, 2019, 05:32:54 PMOk. So you don’t like his opinions.But he is an expert on National Security Expert by any definition. He is neither an expert on national security experts, nor a national security expert, by any definition.
Ok. So you don’t like his opinions.But he is an expert on National Security Expert by any definition.
Quote from: REDSTATEWARD on November 14, 2019, 05:32:54 PMOk. So you don’t like his opinions.But he is an expert on National Security Expert by any definition. He is neither an expert on national security experts, nor a national security expert, by any definition.John Yoo is a lawyer who worked in the Department of Justice under W. His seminal work in that role, the torture memo which refuted our obligations to the Geneva Conventions, was panned by actual national security experts for the very real damage it did to our national security interests.
Quote from: NeedsAdjustments on November 14, 2019, 05:38:56 PMQuote from: REDSTATEWARD on November 14, 2019, 05:32:54 PMOk. So you don’t like his opinions.But he is an expert on National Security Expert by any definition. He is neither an expert on national security experts, nor a national security expert, by any definition. LOL. Only if we limit opinions to you and YankGuy.
Quote from: NeedsAdjustments on November 14, 2019, 05:38:56 PMQuote from: REDSTATEWARD on November 14, 2019, 05:32:54 PMOk. So you don’t like his opinions.But he is an expert on National Security Expert by any definition. He is neither an expert on national security experts, nor a national security expert, by any definition.John Yoo is a lawyer who worked in the Department of Justice under W. His seminal work in that role, the torture memo which refuted our obligations to the Geneva Conventions, was panned by actual national security experts for the very real damage it did to our national security interests.And it could be added (because I've just looked it up) that those torture memos were repudiated by the OLC after they were less than a few years old, and are no longer used as guidance. A 2009 report by the Office for Professional Responsibility re: his approval of waterboarding techniques accused Yoo of committing "intentional professional misconduct" and recommended he be disbarred.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/university-of-florida-student-president-faces-impeachment-for-trump-jrs-dollar50k-campus-talk/ar-BBWHR6k?ocid=ientp
Quote from: NeedsAdjustments on November 14, 2019, 05:52:49 PMQuote from: NeedsAdjustments on November 14, 2019, 05:38:56 PMQuote from: REDSTATEWARD on November 14, 2019, 05:32:54 PMOk. So you don’t like his opinions.But he is an expert on National Security Expert by any definition. He is neither an expert on national security experts, nor a national security expert, by any definition.John Yoo is a lawyer who worked in the Department of Justice under W. His seminal work in that role, the torture memo which refuted our obligations to the Geneva Conventions, was panned by actual national security experts for the very real damage it did to our national security interests.And it could be added (because I've just looked it up) that those torture memos were repudiated by the OLC after they were less than a few years old, and are no longer used as guidance. A 2009 report by the Office for Professional Responsibility re: his approval of waterboarding techniques accused Yoo of committing "intentional professional misconduct" and recommended he be disbarred.LOL Those “ torture memos” according to NEEDS are the only criteria permissible to judge John Yoo’s credibility as a National Security Expert.
Yoo never served in a national security role in any administration, nor served in any profession engaged in national security issues over the course of his career.Either you can point to where he has, or explain how "any definition" of a national security expert includes someone who never worked in national security.
Quote from: barton on November 14, 2019, 03:00:27 PMAnother entry from Ambrose Bart's dictionary...sewer (n.) -- any U.S. city that contains a demographic somewhere ideologically to the left of Kid Carter.I like Burlington.
Another entry from Ambrose Bart's dictionary...sewer (n.) -- any U.S. city that contains a demographic somewhere ideologically to the left of Kid Carter.
Quote from: Yankguy1 on November 14, 2019, 05:42:23 PMhttp://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/university-of-florida-student-president-faces-impeachment-for-trump-jrs-dollar50k-campus-talk/ar-BBWHR6k?ocid=ientpMichael Murphy is a great American
Quote from: kiidcarter8 on November 14, 2019, 11:00:06 AMQuote from: barton on November 14, 2019, 10:19:50 AMGiven the Trump/Sondland call was done on private cellphones (thus violating the presidential records act), I would guess there are two options for investigators....aGet a warrant to seize Trump's cellphone, which if it's like most cellphones, at least logs all incoming calls, showing the number from which it originated. Ask Russian intelligence if they would give us a copy of the recording they likely made in Kyiv.Since these options have zero probability of working, I guess it's worth asking if some US branch of the intelligence services might have somehow made a record of the call.But then, all Trump's paranoia and Deep State rant would be gloriously validated. Is there some legal loophole for US intelligence?Seize Trump's cellphone - heh - that's a good one.Hillary says "GET THE HAMMER!"What is the criminal conspiracy Hillary Clinton was accused of that destruction of her old phones would have covered up?
Quote from: barton on November 14, 2019, 10:19:50 AMGiven the Trump/Sondland call was done on private cellphones (thus violating the presidential records act), I would guess there are two options for investigators....aGet a warrant to seize Trump's cellphone, which if it's like most cellphones, at least logs all incoming calls, showing the number from which it originated. Ask Russian intelligence if they would give us a copy of the recording they likely made in Kyiv.Since these options have zero probability of working, I guess it's worth asking if some US branch of the intelligence services might have somehow made a record of the call.But then, all Trump's paranoia and Deep State rant would be gloriously validated. Is there some legal loophole for US intelligence?Seize Trump's cellphone - heh - that's a good one.Hillary says "GET THE HAMMER!"
Given the Trump/Sondland call was done on private cellphones (thus violating the presidential records act), I would guess there are two options for investigators....aGet a warrant to seize Trump's cellphone, which if it's like most cellphones, at least logs all incoming calls, showing the number from which it originated. Ask Russian intelligence if they would give us a copy of the recording they likely made in Kyiv.Since these options have zero probability of working, I guess it's worth asking if some US branch of the intelligence services might have somehow made a record of the call.But then, all Trump's paranoia and Deep State rant would be gloriously validated. Is there some legal loophole for US intelligence?