Post by: Collector218 on November 14, 2024, 12:49:21 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 14, 2024, 01:34:55 PM
Post by: rpoL98 on November 14, 2024, 02:05:47 PM
him and Marjorie Taylor Greene make a wicked tag-team.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 14, 2024, 02:12:10 PM
He was investigated by the DOJ for allegedly having sex with underage girls. No charges were ever filed, because there was no evidence.
Now the House Ethics Committee is preparing to release a report on their follow-on investigation on the exact same allegations. I guess they don't trust the FBI to investigate properly? Or, is this a tactic meant more to harass than to police their ranks?
Instead of charges of boinking underage females, which would probably be along the lines of statutory rape, the ethics committee upped the ante to allegations of sex trafficking, I guess since they have no ethical restrictions against having sex with minors for Congress critters?
The report may or may not be released now that he's resigned, but if there's anything negative in it, you can be sure it'll be leaked.
Nothing like having a member of Congress who was targeted by the DOJ for political reasons to now become their boss!
Priceless!!
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 14, 2024, 03:40:40 PM
Post by: RSN172 on November 15, 2024, 08:22:41 AM
Post by: QUIETShooter on November 15, 2024, 08:26:26 AM
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 15, 2024, 11:34:23 AM
Gaetz's nomination is making a lot of people sh*t their pants. Adam ShiTT in particular.
They are trying to generate public opposition so the Senate GOP majority won't confirm them.
If Trump did his homework, there should be a rubber stamp for his nominations in exchange for a few of the party's requests, whatever they might be.
Art of the deal....
Post by: Jl808 on November 16, 2024, 11:14:24 PM
https://youtu.be/H0OF31I74CY?feature=shared
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 17, 2024, 12:25:17 AM
However as a person Gaetz seems to be a total sh!tbag. Setting aside the investigation into paying a 17 year old for sex which was closed without a public explanation as to why, there are reports from other congressmen of Gaetz showing videos of nude girls he had sex with and bragging about energy drinks and viagra to go all night long. He had also asked Trump for a blanket pardon according to one aide's testimony. (Why ask for a pardon if you didn't do anything wrong?)
Consider this light criticism
"I realize that we are occasionally given to hyperbole about the untoward nature of politicians, but let me be clear: Matt Gaetz is a sex trafficking drug addicted piece of shit. He is abhorrent. His eyes are permanently rimmed with the red rings of chemical boosters. In person, he smells like overexposed Axe Body Spray and stale Astroglide. The fact that he boasted on the floor to multiple colleagues in the House of Representatives of his methods of crushing Viagra and high test Red Bull to maintain his erection through his orgiastic evenings is perhaps the least offensive of his many crimes against womanhood and Christian faith."
https://thetransom.com/p/matt-gaetz-is-a-vile-sex-pest-and
Some have spectated that Gaetz was just a sacrifical lamb to take all the media attention. Whether that is the case or not I hope congress denies his appointment. I hope they also ask for
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 17, 2024, 12:38:10 AM
He was investigated by the DOJ for allegedly having sex with underage girls. No charges were ever filed, because there was no evidence.
Wrong, there was evidence. Maybe not enough to win in court but there was evidence.
Quote
Now the House Ethics Committee is preparing to release a report on their follow-on investigation on the exact same allegations. I guess they don't trust the FBI to investigate properly? Or, is this a tactic meant more to harass than to police their ranks?
Administrative investigations and criminal investigations happen side by side all the time, it doesn't mean the FBI is incompetent or that it is harassment. A teacher could be investigated by police for inappropriate contact with a student and not have charges filed while simultaneously being investigated by the school and fired.
Quote
Instead of charges of boinking underage females, which would probably be along the lines of statutory rape, the ethics committee upped the ante to allegations of sex trafficking, I guess since they have no ethical restrictions against having sex with minors for Congress critters?
The issue was because he allegedly paid for the minor sex. Ages of consent laws don't apply if the minor is being paid for sex.
Quote
Nothing like having a member of Congress who was targeted by the DOJ for political reasons to now become their boss!
Or giving the fox the keys to the hen house....
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 02:26:24 AM
Gaetz has crossed the aisle on a few issues, even siding with AOC and takes some respectable anti-corruption positions. He is too MAGA for my tastes but that is just politics.
However as a person Gaetz seems to be a total sh!tbag. Setting aside the investigation into paying a 17 year old for sex which was closed without a public explanation as to why, there are reports from other congressmen of Gaetz showing videos of nude girls he had sex with and bragging about energy drinks and viagra to go all night long. He had also asked Trump for a blanket pardon according to one aide's testimony. (Why ask for a pardon if you didn't do anything wrong?)
Consider this light criticism
"I realize that we are occasionally given to hyperbole about the untoward nature of politicians, but let me be clear: Matt Gaetz is a sex trafficking drug addicted piece of shit. He is abhorrent. His eyes are permanently rimmed with the red rings of chemical boosters. In person, he smells like overexposed Axe Body Spray and stale Astroglide. The fact that he boasted on the floor to multiple colleagues in the House of Representatives of his methods of crushing Viagra and high test Red Bull to maintain his erection through his orgiastic evenings is perhaps the least offensive of his many crimes against womanhood and Christian faith."
https://thetransom.com/p/matt-gaetz-is-a-vile-sex-pest-and
Some have spectated that Gaetz was just a sacrifical lamb to take all the media attention. Whether that is the case or not I hope congress denies his appointment. I hope they also ask for
Please explain what "too MAGA for my tastes" means. MAGA is an acronym: Make America Great Again. If you find that too partisan, then maybe you're on the wrong side of what this country represents.
i think you've been sipping the liberal Kool-aid and think you know what MAGA means to everyone who lives here. I highly doubt it.
Post by: macsak on November 17, 2024, 07:12:31 AM
Gaetz has crossed the aisle on a few issues, even siding with AOC and takes some respectable anti-corruption positions. He is too MAGA for my tastes but that is just politics.
However as a person Gaetz seems to be a total sh!tbag. Setting aside the investigation into paying a 17 year old for sex which was closed without a public explanation as to why, there are reports from other congressmen of Gaetz showing videos of nude girls he had sex with and bragging about energy drinks and viagra to go all night long. He had also asked Trump for a blanket pardon according to one aide's testimony. (Why ask for a pardon if you didn't do anything wrong?)
Consider this light criticism
"I realize that we are occasionally given to hyperbole about the untoward nature of politicians, but let me be clear: Matt Gaetz is a sex trafficking drug addicted piece of shit. He is abhorrent. His eyes are permanently rimmed with the red rings of chemical boosters. In person, he smells like overexposed Axe Body Spray and stale Astroglide. The fact that he boasted on the floor to multiple colleagues in the House of Representatives of his methods of crushing Viagra and high test Red Bull to maintain his erection through his orgiastic evenings is perhaps the least offensive of his many crimes against womanhood and Christian faith."
https://thetransom.com/p/matt-gaetz-is-a-vile-sex-pest-and
Some have spectated that Gaetz was just a sacrifical lamb to take all the media attention. Whether that is the case or not I hope congress denies his appointment. I hope they also ask for
Post by: macsak on November 17, 2024, 07:14:20 AM
someone was convicted and went to jail
this is public record and has been reported in the media
well, reported in the honest portion of the media...
Wrong, there was evidence. Maybe not enough to win in court but there was evidence.
Administrative investigations and criminal investigations happen side by side all the time, it doesn't mean the FBI is incompetent or that it is harassment. A teacher could be investigated by police for inappropriate contact with a student and not have charges filed while simultaneously being investigated by the school and fired.
The issue was because he allegedly paid for the minor sex. Ages of consent laws don't apply if the minor is being paid for sex.
Or giving the fox the keys to the hen house....
Post by: ren on November 17, 2024, 08:27:56 AM
Post by: zippz on November 17, 2024, 08:58:15 AM
If the report is exaggerated or lies, then he should have the strength to defend himself and counter them. Instead he appears weak.
Post by: macsak on November 17, 2024, 09:43:36 AM
Don't know much about him, but I'm concerned about his resignation to avoid the ethics report being released. He didn't have to resign from Congress yet.
If the report is exaggerated or lies, then he should have the strength to defend himself and counter them. Instead he appears weak.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 10:58:56 AM
Gaetz has crossed the aisle on a few issues, even siding with AOC and takes some respectable anti-corruption positions. He is too MAGA for my tastes but that is just politics.
However as a person Gaetz seems to be a total sh!tbag. Setting aside the investigation into paying a 17 year old for sex which was closed without a public explanation as to why, there are reports from other congressmen of Gaetz showing videos of nude girls he had sex with and bragging about energy drinks and viagra to go all night long. He had also asked Trump for a blanket pardon according to one aide's testimony. (Why ask for a pardon if you didn't do anything wrong?)
Consider this light criticism
"I realize that we are occasionally given to hyperbole about the untoward nature of politicians, but let me be clear: Matt Gaetz is a sex trafficking drug addicted piece of shit. He is abhorrent. His eyes are permanently rimmed with the red rings of chemical boosters. In person, he smells like overexposed Axe Body Spray and stale Astroglide. The fact that he boasted on the floor to multiple colleagues in the House of Representatives of his methods of crushing Viagra and high test Red Bull to maintain his erection through his orgiastic evenings is perhaps the least offensive of his many crimes against womanhood and Christian faith."
https://thetransom.com/p/matt-gaetz-is-a-vile-sex-pest-and
Some have spectated that Gaetz was just a sacrifical lamb to take all the media attention. Whether that is the case or not I hope congress denies his appointment. I hope they also ask for
Why would you "set aside" an allegation of underage sex? And especially for the alleged crime of sex trafficking?
The allegations originated at the same time his father received an extortion demand of $25M. The false allegations were the basis for the extortion. I don't call it blackmail, because that assumes there's something to want covered up.
Matt reported the extortion, assisted the FBI in finding the would-be extortionist, and the man plead guilty.
But, let's just set aside whatever you don't want to know about.
Businessman pleads guilty in
$25M extortion attempt of
Matt Gaetz’s father
11/22/2021
Quote
A Florida businessman pleaded guilty Monday to involvement in an efforthttps://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2021/11/22/businessman-pleads-guilty-in-25m-extortion-attempt-of-matt-gaetzs-father-1394858
to extort $25 million from the wealthy father of Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.)
as part of a bizarre scheme that involved a pledge to secure a presidential
pardon for Gaetz in the high-profile federal sex trafficking investigation
the lawmaker faces.
Stephen Alford, 62, appeared in federal court in Pensacola to plead guilty
to one count of wire fraud in connection with the convoluted shakedown,
which also included securing the release of Robert Levinson, a former FBI
agent who disappeared in Iran in 2007.
Gaetz's mugshot from an October 2008 DUI arrest has been circulated but with a litany of false allegations associated with it. He was 26 and driving back from a nightclub the night before Halloween, The club was ironically named "The Swamp", but it's Florida.The DUI charges were dropped, but people have made several false claims about it, including that there exists up to seven DUI arrests on Gaetz's record and that his roommate allegedly died under suspicious circumstances -- all associated with this photo.
Basically, you need to do a bit more fact checking before jumping to a conclusion about someone's character -- or risk putting your own character in question. Nobody likes a gossip except journalists and gossips, but I repeat myself.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 01:43:06 PM
Don't know much about him, but I'm concerned about his resignation to avoid the ethics report being released. He didn't have to resign from Congress yet.
If the report is exaggerated or lies, then he should have the strength to defend himself and counter them. Instead he appears weak.
You're making an assumption the ethics report is negative. Once he leaves/left Congress, the House Ethics Panel report has no relevance. They can't issue any censures or call for a vote to expel him if he's not there.
I'm sure the topic will come up in the confirmation process. He'll then have a chance to answer questions about it, so he's not going to get a pass on the allegations. But the confirmation hearings do offer a fairer chance to answer any questions.
If the ethics panel's report is damaging to Gaetz, I'm 99% sure it will be leaked. So, given the entirety of the situation, resigning now will not prevent the investigation from becoming an issue.
As MAC said, i think the timing is to ensure his seat in the House gets filled ASAP in case that's the pivotal seat in either a GOP majority or a tie. A vacant seat means the number in the House is an even 434 making a tie possible. It also subtracts a GOP voting member of the House, meaning it helps the Dems numerically.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 17, 2024, 02:12:07 PM
Please explain what "too MAGA for my tastes" means. MAGA is an acronym: Make America Great Again. If you find that too partisan, then maybe you're on the wrong side of what this country represents.
i think you've been sipping the liberal Kool-aid and think you know what MAGA means to everyone who lives here. I highly doubt it.
"On the wrong side of what this country represents"
Sounds like what the bad guys say in a movie right before they kill someone who dares to oppose their dear leader.
BY too MAGA for my taste I mean to Trump-like. Too authoritarian, too divisive, etc.
Not everyone who voted Trump necessarily likes him or supports the MAGA movement.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 17, 2024, 02:14:47 PM
you as a cop should know that allegations and accusations are not "proof"...
I said evidence, I did not use the word proof. Proof is a subjective concept as you use it here and of little use in this conversation.
Witness statements and complainant statements are pieces of evidence.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 17, 2024, 02:17:30 PM
yes, the evidence showed that he and his father were being blackmailed
someone was convicted and went to jail
this is public record and has been reported in the media
well, reported in the honest portion of the media...
Got a link to that story?
The woman who testified before the house committee went to jail for blackmailing or are you talking about some other story?
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 17, 2024, 02:33:01 PM
Why would you "set aside" an allegation of underage sex? And especially for the alleged crime of sex trafficking?
The allegations originated at the same time his father received an extortion demand of $25M. The false allegations were the basis for the extortion. I don't call it blackmail, because that assumes there's something to want covered up.
Matt reported the extortion, assisted the FBI in finding the would-be extortionist, and the man plead guilty.
But, let's just set aside whatever you don't want to know about.
Businessman pleads guilty in
$25M extortion attempt of
Matt Gaetz’s father
11/22/2021https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2021/11/22/businessman-pleads-guilty-in-25m-extortion-attempt-of-matt-gaetzs-father-1394858
Gaetz's mugshot from an October 2008 DUI arrest has been circulated but with a litany of false allegations associated with it. He was 26 and driving back from a nightclub the night before Halloween, The club was ironically named "The Swamp", but it's Florida.The DUI charges were dropped, but people have made several false claims about it, including that there exists up to seven DUI arrests on Gaetz's record and that his roommate allegedly died under suspicious circumstances -- all associated with this photo.
Basically, you need to do a bit more fact checking before jumping to a conclusion about someone's character -- or risk putting your own character in question. Nobody likes a gossip except journalists and gossips, but I repeat myself.
Who said an allegation of sex trafficking was "set aside"?
Stephen Alford's attempts to get money in exchange for arranging a pardon for Matt Gaetz has no bearing on whether Matt Gaetz actually committed the crime in question. All that shows is there was a corrupt official, it doesn't make the allegations fake.
But lets sed aside all the other accounts and whatever possible conclusions you don't want to be true.
Post by: macsak on November 17, 2024, 02:33:10 PM
it's in this thread
https://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=55432.msg493024#msg493024
FOCUS
Got a link to that story?
The woman who testified before the house committee went to jail for blackmailing or are you talking about some other story?
Post by: macsak on November 17, 2024, 02:36:46 PM
and then posed a bunch of allegations and accusations
which are not proof he's a shitbag
so it is no little use in this conversation...
I said evidence, I did not use the word proof. Proof is a subjective concept as you use it here and of little use in this conversation.
Witness statements and complainant statements are pieces of evidence.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 17, 2024, 02:58:50 PM
you said "However as a person Gaetz seems to be a total sh!tbag."
and then posed a bunch of allegations and accusations
which are not proof he's a shitbag
so it is no little use in this conversation...
What would constitute proof for you then if not testimony before congress, if not him asking for a pardon, if not other congressmen reporting witnessing sh!tbag type behavior, etc? Absent video or forensic evidence you can always play the "allegations and accusations" card forever. 100 people say they saw it? Thats not proof I suppose, at least not when it is someone on your side.
One person pops up and makes a claim about a person in power I will be skeptical. When there is a pattern of claims then I start to pay attention.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 17, 2024, 02:59:50 PM
you have lousy investigative skills for someone so high up in HPD
it's in this thread
https://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=55432.msg493024#msg493024
FOCUS
Note my response to Flapp about how little bearing this has as to whether Gaetz actually did anything wrong or not.
Post by: rpoL98 on November 17, 2024, 03:28:19 PM
we need some winning.
(https://i.imgur.com/8ncLoPu.jpg)
Post by: macsak on November 17, 2024, 03:31:03 PM
is way different than "seems to be a total shitbag"
goalposts moved...
What would constitute proof for you then if not testimony before congress, if not him asking for a pardon, if not other congressmen reporting witnessing sh!tbag type behavior, etc? Absent video or forensic evidence you can always play the "allegations and accusations" card forever. 100 people say they saw it? Thats not proof I suppose, at least not when it is someone on your side.
One person pops up and makes a claim about a person in power I will be skeptical. When there is a pattern of claims then I start to pay attention.
Post by: macsak on November 17, 2024, 03:32:47 PM
what other tenets of police investigations do you not believe in?
Note my response to Flapp about how little bearing this has as to whether Gaetz actually did anything wrong or not.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 03:41:19 PM
"On the wrong side of what this country represents"
Sounds like what the bad guys say in a movie right before they kill someone who dares to oppose their dear leader.
BY too MAGA for my taste I mean to Trump-like. Too authoritarian, too divisive, etc.
Not everyone who voted Trump necessarily likes him or supports the MAGA movement.
Those are opinions and conclusions. You have yet to describe what "Too authoritarian, too divisive, etc." means.
You sound ike a trans-activist when asked to define, "What is a woman?" They can't without using the word "woman". Nothing but circular definitions.
Examples; it's a person who identifies as a woman. it's someone who feels they were born a woman.
You describe Gaetz as too MAGA, and your description of that is too Trump-like -- since Trump and MAGA are inseparable, you are also using circular definitions.
You can't list any authoritarian or divisive examples.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 03:48:16 PM
I said evidence, I did not use the word proof. Proof is a subjective concept as you use it here and of little use in this conversation.
Witness statements and complainant statements are pieces of evidence.
That's stupid. you're arguing about a distinction without a difference.
A video of you shooting your dog is evidence -- something a court would consider along with other factors including the elements of the law.
The video is also proof you shot your dog. One item can be both evidence and proof, so no difference.
You never took philosophy or algebra? Were you not taught how to prove something without having direct evidence? Did you also not learn that separate pieces of evidence can join together and provide proof?
Why do you turn everything into your own thought-experiment?
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 03:51:41 PM
Who said an allegation of sex trafficking was "set aside"?
Stephen Alford's attempts to get money in exchange for arranging a pardon for Matt Gaetz has no bearing on whether Matt Gaetz actually committed the crime in question. All that shows is there was a corrupt official, it doesn't make the allegations fake.
But lets sed aside all the other accounts and whatever possible conclusions you don't want to be true.
You did. The ethics complaint is about sex trafficking predicated on the investigation on his alleged sexual relations with a 17 year old.
"Setting aside the investigation into paying a 17 year old for sex which was closed without a public explanation"
You toss out that little grenade implying the investigation was closed secretly and improperly, then pretend it had nothing to do with the ethics probe.
Please try and keep up.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 04:08:42 PM
Both Don and Matt Gaetz had accused former federal prosecutor David McGee of being behind the alleged plot, which McGee has strongly denied.
Don Gaetz told Politico that he had attempted to get Alford to discuss payments he was making to McGee, but added that their planned meeting fell apart after the press reported on the DOJ’s sexual misconduct investigation involving his son.
So, basically, a top DOJ official was involved in the extortion, Don Gaetz tried to get Alford to provide details on the payments being made to McGee, but before that planned meeting could happen, Matt Gaetz is brought up on sexual misconduct charges by the .... wait for it ..... DOJ!
Nothing fishy there. If McGee says he didn't do it, he must be telling the truth, because the DOJ never does anything shady or illegal -- particularly when the people involved are Republican Trump supporters.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/570283-florida-developer-charged-in-alleged-25m-extortion-scheme-offering/
:geekdanc: :wacko:
Post by: rpoL98 on November 17, 2024, 05:47:51 PM
and, fellow firearms enthusiasts, lest we forget, this is 2AHawaii dot com:
(https://i.imgur.com/SThx2XD.png)
https://x.com/WallStreetMav/status/1858222887875887409?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw (https://x.com/WallStreetMav/status/1858222887875887409?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 08:17:30 PM
He can tell congress to go home, then use recess appointments to get his nominees installed. After that, he can tell Congress get back to work.
Recess appointments have a 2 year limit, at which time the appointees have to be confirmed to remain in their positions.
Interesting how the 2 year limit coincides with the midterm election cycle -- as a new Congress may be more inclined to be less obstructive.
Musk and Tim Pool are offering to fund primary challengers to run against any Republican in Congress who tries to obstruct Trump. Trump received the popular and electoral votes handily beating Harris. Anyone playing those games is interfering with the will of the people.
Will of the people in a democracy (the Left keeps reminding us that's what we are) means following the results of a free and fair election. If Kamala had won, do you think there would have been a resistance movement among Democrats in Congress who are mad she replaced Biden? Of course not. In the same way, the GOP in Congress should be supporting the agenda WE voted for -- Trump's agenda.
Post by: Jaco808 on November 17, 2024, 09:52:04 PM
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 17, 2024, 10:04:30 PM
No recess appointments. We have checks and balances for a reason. He is not a dictator. Congress gets a say.
Bless your heart. Too bad that's not how it works.
In 2014, the SCOTUS said Congress has to be in recess for at least 10 days before the president can make recess appointments.
That's your "check and balance".
I'm glad you agree that Trump is not a dictator. Your side's been calling him that since he started politicking in 2015. Happy you've seen the truth.
(https://i.imgur.com/tLE1Mu5.png)
https://www.kttc.com/2024/11/16/digging-deeper-history-recess-appointments-how-they-work/
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 18, 2024, 11:53:13 AM
Marco Rubio will be vacating his Senate seat to take over as Secretary of State.
Thirty-four states authorize governors to select a Senator to fill a vacancy. They hold the seat until the next regularly scheduled general election. Florida is one of those states.
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11907
So, even though Matt Gaetz resigned from the House, and his appointment to Trump's cabinet is not 100% guaranteed, he still may have a job in Congress -- assuming that's part of the plan.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 19, 2024, 01:44:06 AM
IF the senate plays games to block all of his nominees, Trump has the power to force Congress into a recess under Article 2 Section 3. of the constitution.
He can tell congress to go home, then use recess appointments to get his nominees installed. After that, he can tell Congress get back to work.
Recess appointments have a 2 year limit, at which time the appointees have to be confirmed to remain in their positions.
Interesting how the 2 year limit coincides with the midterm election cycle -- as a new Congress may be more inclined to be less obstructive.
Musk and Tim Pool are offering to fund primary challengers to run against any Republican in Congress who tries to obstruct Trump. Trump received the popular and electoral votes handily beating Harris. Anyone playing those games is interfering with the will of the people.
Will of the people in a democracy (the Left keeps reminding us that's what we are) means following the results of a free and fair election. If Kamala had won, do you think there would have been a resistance movement among Democrats in Congress who are mad she replaced Biden? Of course not. In the same way, the GOP in Congress should be supporting the agenda WE voted for -- Trump's agenda.
Theoretically possible but I don't think that will pass constitutional muster. When recess appointments were written into the constitution things were very different. Congress worked only part of the year and couldn't readily come back. Now they work almost year round. A president fenagling a way to force congress into recess so he could make a recess appointment is something I would bet would end up in front of the SCOTUS. It is also something antithetical to conservatism since it is concentrating more power in the presidency.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 19, 2024, 01:47:56 AM
You did. The ethics complaint is about sex trafficking predicated on the investigation on his alleged sexual relations with a 17 year old.
"Setting aside the investigation into paying a 17 year old for sex which was closed without a public explanation"
You toss out that little grenade implying the investigation was closed secretly and improperly, then pretend it had nothing to do with the ethics probe.
Please try and keep up.
That is different. I was saying "setting aside...." for the sake of discussion, not saying the DOJ set it aside.
I didn't imply the investigation was closed secretly or improperly.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 19, 2024, 01:48:40 AM
so much for "innocent until proven guilty"
what other tenets of police investigations do you not believe in?
I didn't say he was guilty.
Biden wasn't found guilty of any crimes either yet I seem to recall you asserting illegal behavior on his part... Is that a selective value you hold?
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 19, 2024, 01:52:22 AM
I'm gonna apply the same sentiment to Gaetz as I do for Trump. We're not looking for somebody holy like The Pope. As Katie Hopkins (batshit bonkers britain) famously said, "I'd rather have a president that grabs a woman by the pu$$y, than to have a pu$$y for a president." I get the impression that Matt Gaetz will kick serious ass at the DOJ and FBI, and believe me, the swamp is deep there, and it's sorely needed. That's my opinion, and I hope he gets confirmed, but if the swamp conspires against him, well, it's the nations' loss, and next man up. I do want somebody that's on fire, has a sense to right some wrongs. The DoJ, the FBI, the ATF, TSA, the whole slew of them, "etc" have all been on the wrong side of We The People for the last 8 years, weaponized lawfare.
When you are talking about someone leading the DOJ I would argue you want someone who respects the law though. Sure, you don't care if a firefighter has a DUI on his record when pulling you from a burning home but you care that someone in charge of the DOJ isn't going to be violating the 4th amendment.
I think he might be capable of making some changes for good but there are many others who have more credentials without the sordid past, who could also do the job.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 19, 2024, 01:55:04 AM
That's stupid. you're arguing about a distinction without a difference.
A video of you shooting your dog is evidence -- something a court would consider along with other factors including the elements of the law.
The video is also proof you shot your dog. One item can be both evidence and proof, so no difference.
You never took philosophy or algebra? Were you not taught how to prove something without having direct evidence? Did you also not learn that separate pieces of evidence can join together and provide proof?
Why do you turn everything into your own thought-experiment?
Wrong. A witness statement is considered a piece of evidence but a witness testifying in court isn't "proof".
Plus you completely glossed over the main point. You had a woman testify before congress of inappropriate sexual behavior by Gaetz. You have other republican congressmen describing witnessing immoral and potentially illegal behavior by Gaetz. Using the word "proof" is so you can move the goalposts because you can always claim a witness statement doesn't amount to proof, thereby leaving an avenue to argue why this shouldn't be used against him. The confirmation process isn't even limited to whether he was convicted or not.
To go on the extortion note further, you incorrectly jump to the conclusion that because he was being extorted that the subsequent investigation being announced means it was all fake. You don't even consider the possibility that maybe he was extorted because he actually did the crime. Plus you paint it as if the investigation into Gaetz is something that only came after the extortion case. Think about it, the investigation into Matt Gaetz is what the extorter tried to use to get the money. He offered to make the case go away in exchange for payment. Without the investigation there is nothing to extort over.
Furthermore you stated Gaetz was brought up on charges when Gaetz was never charged with anything.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on November 19, 2024, 01:57:51 AM
Those are opinions and conclusions. You have yet to describe what "Too authoritarian, too divisive, etc." means.
I don't have to. If you tell me the cake was too sweet do I get to demand you explain what "too sweet" means? No, it is your preference, you don't have to justify your preference to me.
Plus I don't believe your questions are a genuine quest to understand my opinion, you want to bicker.
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 19, 2024, 08:05:46 AM
When you are talking about someone leading the DOJ I would argue you want someone who respects the law though. Sure, you don't care if a firefighter has a DUI on his record when pulling you from a burning home but you care that someone in charge of the DOJ isn't going to be violating the 4th amendment.
I think he might be capable of making some changes for good but there are many others who have more credentials without the sordid past, who could also do the job.
Who would you suggest? Gaetz has the balls to stand up and not go with the flow when people are getting screwed. Like the J6 people he defended (not their lawyer) in a congressional hearing who were being held without being able to see a lawyer, in solitary, etc...
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 19, 2024, 12:19:52 PM
Theoretically possible but I don't think that will pass constitutional muster. When recess appointments were written into the constitution things were very different. Congress worked only part of the year and couldn't readily come back. Now they work almost year round. A president fenagling a way to force congress into recess so he could make a recess appointment is something I would bet would end up in front of the SCOTUS. It is also something antithetical to conservatism since it is concentrating more power in the presidency.
Go read the Supreme Court Ruling on recess appointments. It's not about Conservative or Liberal ideologies. It's about a process that was decided on for a reason.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NLRB_v._Noel_Canning
Speaking of "fenagling" [sic], during Trump's first term, the Senate would hold a roll call every 10 days and do nothing else just to reset the clock and keep Trump from using recess appointments to circumvent the slow-rolling the Senate was engaged in just to prevent Trump from filling his cabinet positions.
Read this. you might learn something important about the confirmation process and why it's in need of a tune-up.
It’s time to fix the broken
Senate confirmation process
Quote
The intention of the framers in establishing the confirmation process washttps://rollcall.com/2021/11/15/its-time-to-fix-the-broken-senate-confirmation-process/
to allow presidents to staff administrations with the very best while limiting
the power of the executive branch to install unsuitable candidates or use
government positions for personal and political gain.
Now the process is used as just another bargaining chip which members of the Senate can use to advance their agendas in exchange for a smooth confirmation of one or more nominees.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 19, 2024, 01:59:32 PM
Gaetz has crossed the aisle on a few issues, even siding with AOC and takes some respectable anti-corruption positions. He is too MAGA for my tastes but that is just politics.
However as a person Gaetz seems to be a total sh!tbag. Setting aside the investigation into paying a 17 year old for sex which was closed without a public explanation as to why, ...
Maybe the fact that there was no admission of any wrongdoing, that the initial reason for the investigation was an association between the actual trafficker and the 17 year old, and the witnesses were deemed unreliable and not credible, lead to the case being closed.
That's a far cry from "without a public explanation."
Quote
The probe intensified following revelations about Gaetz’s ties to Joel Greenberg,https://time.com/7177301/matt-gaetz-allegations-justice-house-ethics/
a former Seminole County tax collector, who pleaded guilty to sex trafficking and
other charges in 2021 and admitted to paying women for sex, including the minor
in question, and introducing her to other men. Gaetz’s name surfaced during the
investigation, with prosecutors examining whether he had paid for sex or had any
involvement in the trafficking scheme.
Gaetz vehemently denies the allegations, calling them part of a politically motivated
extortion attempt. His attorney insisted that no evidence connected him to the crimes,
and in February 2023, the DOJ closed its investigation into him without filing charges.
Prosecutors reportedly struggled with witness credibility, including Greenberg’s
testimony.
i guess nobody facing serious sex trafficking charges ever fabricated a story about someone else in order to cut a deal, huh?
Post by: macsak on November 19, 2024, 04:07:54 PM
biden DOJ has had this info since 2022, and they did nothing
there's no way they would've let this go if it were anywhere near solid
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNDXTr9Zeg0
Post by: macsak on November 20, 2024, 06:57:04 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwLMYxwvO2k
Post by: RSN172 on November 20, 2024, 07:02:12 AM
They are afraid of what he will discover.
Post by: macsak on November 20, 2024, 07:21:49 AM
Post by: QUIETShooter on November 21, 2024, 08:57:06 AM
Post by: Brystont1 on November 21, 2024, 09:05:20 AM
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 21, 2024, 09:49:16 AM
Heard on Tim Cast that since he won reelection, he's still able to take that seat in the House on Jan 3rd.
He is also able to be appointed to the Senate by FL Gov. Ron DeSantis to fill Marco Rubio's Senate seat.
His explanation for withdrawing is the feeling his nomination is an unfair distraction to the Trump transition.
One can't be blamed for wondering whether this was a planned event. Since his resignation, that ethics committee report was finalized. The House voted to prevent its release publicly since he's no longer in the House. It's going to take another vote, I assume, to make it public in Jan. Since the House will have a GOP majority, there's a chance that report stays private.
It's possible Gaetz was a sacrificial nominee. When Trump talked to Senators about his cabinet's confirmation hearings, Matt may have been the bargaining chip he need to get the rest confirmed.
The person I would love to see confirmed is Jim Jordon. He seems to always ask the right questions in hearings and doesn't put up with the time-consuming stonewalling of witnesses.
Post by: rpoL98 on November 21, 2024, 09:57:47 AM
Post by: changemyoil66 on November 21, 2024, 10:14:07 AM
hmmmm.
Heard on Tim Cast that since he won reelection, he's still able to take that seat in the House on Jan 3rd.
He is also able to be appointed to the Senate by FL Gov. Ron DeSantis to fill Marco Rubio's Senate seat.
His explanation for withdrawing is the feeling his nomination is an unfair distraction to the Trump transition.
One can't be blamed for wondering whether this was a planned event. Since his resignation, that ethics committee report was finalized. The House voted to prevent its release publicly since he's no longer in the House. It's going to take another vote, I assume, to make it public in Jan. Since the House will have a GOP majority, there's a chance that report stays private.
It's possible Gaetz was a sacrificial nominee. When Trump talked to Senators about his cabinet's confirmation hearings, Matt may have been the bargaining chip he need to get the rest confirmed.
The person I would love to see confirmed is Jim Jordon. He seems to always ask the right questions in hearings and doesn't put up with the time-consuming stonewalling of witnesses.
I'm wondering about this as well. Art of the deal. Gaetz knew he was only to be used as a bargaining chip as Trump explained it to him ahead of time.
I still liked Gaetz for AG. I hope the next person is just as aggressive for justice.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 21, 2024, 10:29:53 AM
I'm wondering about this as well. Art of the deal. Gaetz knew he was only to be used as a bargaining chip as Trump explained it to him ahead of time.
I still liked Gaetz for AG. I hope the next person is just as aggressive for justice.
Absolutely. The next AG needs to clean house in the DOJ. Too many swamp critters with guns and badges feeling like they can do anything they want, and that anyone who disagrees gets "investigated."
John Bolton spilled the beans when he said on CNN that Tulsi Gabbard and Matt Gaetz should both be investigated by the FBI. For WHAT? Because he doesn't like them? What have they done that the FBI needs to investigate? Tulsi was already on a secret Quiet Skies list of "dangerous people", and Matt was investigated by the DOJ with no charges filed. So again, what for?
Bolton showed how it is SOP to simply use the FBI as a weapon against political opponents, and it has nothing to do with an articulable suspicion of an actual crime.
Post by: drck1000 on November 21, 2024, 10:49:48 AM
the witnesses sound not credible'
biden DOJ has had this info since 2022, and they did nothing
there's no way they would've let this go if it were anywhere near solid
SNIP
you sure? :P
they've "held on" for much less. . . if it served an agenda, but I digress. . .
Post by: macsak on November 21, 2024, 11:16:08 AM
other speculation is that they did his to flush out who was going to go against trump
not shocking that at the top of the list were McConnell murkowski collins (maine) and curtis (utah)
Post by: drck1000 on November 21, 2024, 11:17:52 AM
word is pam bondi, former AG of florida#chatter
other speculation is that they did his to flush out who was going to go against trump
not shocking that at the top of the list were McConnell murkowski collins (maine) and curtis (utah)
Post by: macsak on November 21, 2024, 12:14:57 PM
#chatter
Post by: macsak on November 21, 2024, 01:53:47 PM
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on November 21, 2024, 01:56:41 PM
trump announced pam bondi...
Damned misogynist! Trump is afraid to surround himself with strong, intelligent women!
Post by: zippz on December 23, 2024, 08:40:12 AM
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-report-accuses-matt-gaetz-of-paying-women-for-sex-using-illegal-drugs-accepting-improper-gifts
Report is out. Mostly on the use of drugs and prostitution. It appears to be misdemeanor type of incidents and not too serious. It could even be a non-issue with libertarians who would legalize drug use and prostitution. However, there are many other people Trump could've nominated as AG. It would've been difficult for Gaetz to bring back the war on drugs as a drug user.
I can see how he wasn't prosecuted for it. People are prosecuted for drug trafficking not drug use. Prostitution isn't a priority. And he didn't know the girl was underage at the time.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on December 23, 2024, 11:18:13 AM
House report accuses Matt Gaetz of paying women for sex, using illegal drugs, accepting improper gifts
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-report-accuses-matt-gaetz-of-paying-women-for-sex-using-illegal-drugs-accepting-improper-gifts
Report is out. Mostly on the use of drugs and prostitution. It appears to be misdemeanor type of incidents and not too serious. It could even be a non-issue with libertarians who would legalize drug use and prostitution. However, there are many other people Trump could've nominated as AG. It would've been difficult for Gaetz to bring back the war on drugs as a drug user.
I can see how he wasn't prosecuted for it. People are prosecuted for drug trafficking not drug use. Prostitution isn't a priority. And he didn't know the girl was underage at the time.
Yet, Hunter Biden gets off scot-free with a blanket pardon that covers any and all crimes we have yet to completely uncover.
i think Trump should issue a pardon for Geatz just to make sure he's never attacked for these accusations again.
As some here love to bring up, he was never charged and convicted, so everything he's accused of is one-sided. Unless and until he has a chance to defend himself in a court of law, it's all just accusations.
Hunter, on the other hand, incriminated himself in a book he got paid for. Not to mention all the evidence on his abandoned laptop.
I'm curious about the 264 members of Congress in both chambers who used tax payer funds to pay off people who accused them of, among other things, sexual harassment? Are those people ever referred to the ethics committee? If so, why are their reports not made public?
Quote
In 1995, Congress passed the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA), which
applied civil rights, labor, health and workplace safety laws to the legislative branch.
It established the Office of Compliance (OOC) to administer the act, as well as a
Treasury Department account to pay out settlements and awards.
The OCC reported in 2017 that 264 settlements or awards were paid under the
CAA from FY 1997 to FY 2017, totaling $17.2 million
Of the $17M, we don't know how much was for sex-related allegations and how much was for race, gender, and other discrimination cases.
What we do know is the details of all 264 settlements are not routinely made public.
Quote
In November 2017, Gregg Harper, former chairman of the Committee on House
Administration, requested that the OOC provide statistics on settlements and
awards involving House-led offices, including those relating to sexual harassment.
The agency noted one settlement for sexual harassment costing $84,000 since
FY 2013; between FY 2008 and FY 2012, it listed three sexual harassment settlements
worth $115,000. There were no sexual harassment claims listed for FY 1996 to 2007.
The OOC told The Daily Caller that these cases were not listed out because “sexual
harassment” was not a distinct category in their case records system. Most cases
allege multiple workplace violations.
Quote
TheDC was given the same explanation as to why a separate compilation ofhttps://checkyourfact.com/2019/01/11/fact-check-congress-sexual-harassment-settlements-200-million/
settlements and awards involving Senate-led offices did not list any cases of
sexual harassment.
There has been at least one case in recent years where a notable congressman
did not use the Treasury Department fund, meaning that it was not part of the
$17 million figure. Former Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, once the ranking
Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, spent more than $27,000 from
his office’s budget in 2015 to settle a former employee’s allegation that she was
fired for resisting his sexual advances.
Facing calls for him to resign and other allegations of sexual harassment,
Conyers retired after information about the transaction surfaced in 2017. He
has denied any wrongdoing.
Post by: ren on December 23, 2024, 07:59:29 PM
@realchasegeiser
House Probe into Matt Gaetz Reeks of Political Revenge and Fake Witnesses
It looks like the January 6 Committee and the House Ethics Committee have at least one thing in common: witness tampering.
1. Who’s Behind the Smear?
Meet Joel Greenberg, a convicted felon with a rap sheet longer than the Washington Monument. Dubbed “one of Florida’s most corrupt politicians,” Greenberg is currently serving 11 years in prison for sex trafficking, identity theft, and more. He’s also the star witness in the House Ethics Committee’s investigation into Gaetz. The problem? Even the DOJ found his claims too outrageous to pursue.
2. Greenberg’s Shady Motives
When Greenberg couldn’t secure a pardon for his crimes, he allegedly vowed revenge against those who refused to help him. According to a 2023 lawsuit, Greenberg concocted lies about Gaetz and others to reduce his sentence. Text messages even show him bragging about paying one accuser’s legal fees to ensure her cooperation. If that’s not a red flag, what is?
3. Accuser’s Credibility Collapses
One of Greenberg’s key accomplices, referred to as “A.B.”, has a history as shady as his. She initially lied about her age on a sugar dating site and was involved in Greenberg’s crimes. Now, she’s active on OnlyFans and in adult films, raising serious questions about her reliability as a witness. Even a federal judge referred to her as “essentially a prostitute.”
4. Why Is the House Ethics Committee Reviving This?
The DOJ dropped its investigation into Gaetz in 2022, citing the massive credibility issues of Greenberg and his so-called witnesses. But that didn’t stop the House Ethics Committee from running with the same debunked story. Their timing is suspect, too—just as Gaetz becomes a frontrunner for Attorney General in a potential Trump administration.
5. A Political Hit Job?
Gaetz has made powerful enemies in Washington, D.C., by exposing corruption and suspicious stock trades. Many believe this investigation is payback for his role in ousting Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker and his fearless critique of DOJ corruption. The accusations feel less like justice and more like a coordinated effort to derail Gaetz’s career.
6. Fake News, Real Damage
The media is gleefully running with these recycled allegations, despite their obvious flaws. As Gaetz’s spokesman said, the press is “laundering smears from people in prison.” Sound familiar? It’s a play straight out of the anti-Trump dossier playbook: use salacious, unverified claims to destroy political opponents.
7. The Real Story
This isn’t just about Gaetz. It’s about a system weaponized against anyone daring to challenge the status quo. The House Ethics Committee’s reliance on discredited witnesses shows they’re less interested in truth and more interested in maintaining their grip on power.
Final Thoughts: Don’t Fall for the Smear Campaign
It’s clear this investigation is a desperate attempt to block Matt Gaetz’s rise and protect the swamp. But the American people deserve better. Instead of buying into the lies, let’s demand accountability and an end to politically motivated witch hunts.
Stay vigilant.
Share this story.
Expose the truth.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on December 24, 2024, 12:52:36 AM
House report accuses Matt Gaetz of paying women for sex, using illegal drugs, accepting improper gifts
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-report-accuses-matt-gaetz-of-paying-women-for-sex-using-illegal-drugs-accepting-improper-gifts
Report is out. Mostly on the use of drugs and prostitution. It appears to be misdemeanor type of incidents and not too serious. It could even be a non-issue with libertarians who would legalize drug use and prostitution. However, there are many other people Trump could've nominated as AG. It would've been difficult for Gaetz to bring back the war on drugs as a drug user.
I can see how he wasn't prosecuted for it. People are prosecuted for drug trafficking not drug use. Prostitution isn't a priority. And he didn't know the girl was underage at the time.
Here is a link to the report
https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/6d4191b479034e4e/3c9f42ed-full.pdf
Page 36
VI. CONCLUSION
Based on the above, the Committee determined there is substantial evidence that
Representative Gaetz violated House Rules and other standards of conduct prohibiting prostitution,
statutory rape, illicit drug use, impermissible gifts, special favors or privileges, and obstruction of
Congress.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on December 24, 2024, 01:00:30 AM
i think Trump should issue a pardon for Geatz just to make sure he's never attacked for these accusations again.
What kind of messed up argument is that? Trump should pardon Gaetz so that he is never prosecuted for a crimes and ethics violations that there is "substantial evidence" that he committed? He should be pardoned so the justice system can never even bring the case to trial to see if he could be convicted?
Comparing Gaetz to Hunter is playing whatboutism and pardoning Gaetz doesn't somehow rectify the wrong of Biden pardoning Hunter. Doing show would prove Trump as utterly morally bankrupt as Biden, if not worse.
Post by: zippz on December 24, 2024, 07:29:10 AM
What kind of messed up argument is that? Trump should pardon Gaetz so that he is never prosecuted for a crimes and ethics violations that there is "substantial evidence" that he committed? He should be pardoned so the justice system can never even bring the case to trial to see if he could be convicted?
Comparing Gaetz to Hunter is playing whatboutism and pardoning Gaetz doesn't somehow rectify the wrong of Biden pardoning Hunter. Doing show would prove Trump as utterly morally bankrupt as Biden, if not worse.
Trump couldn't pardon Gaetz since most prostitution, drugs, and statutory rape fall under state jurisdiction. He'd have to be caught in the act of doing those crimes so I don't see the State prosecuting the past acts and the statute of limitations has probably passed anyways. If Gaetz rejoins congress again, he could be censored or expelled and a pardon wouldn't affect those.
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 24, 2024, 08:20:30 AM
What kind of messed up argument is that? Trump should pardon Gaetz so that he is never prosecuted for a crimes and ethics violations that there is "substantial evidence" that he committed? He should be pardoned so the justice system can never even bring the case to trial to see if he could be convicted?
Comparing Gaetz to Hunter is playing whatboutism and pardoning Gaetz doesn't somehow rectify the wrong of Biden pardoning Hunter. Doing show would prove Trump as utterly morally bankrupt as Biden, if not worse.
SSWWOOOOOSSSHHHHHH
Post by: Jaco808 on December 25, 2024, 05:40:33 PM
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on December 25, 2024, 05:50:45 PM
Next up they should release all the info on Tulsi. Trump needs less crooks and spys. I think he still has a chance to build a decent cabinet. Some where good and some where dumpster fires.
Where Wolf?
Post by: zippz on December 25, 2024, 08:05:24 PM
Next up they should release all the info on Tulsi. Trump needs less crooks and spys. I think he still has a chance to build a decent cabinet. Some where good and some where dumpster fires.
There's really nothing new to release on Tulsi, everything has been out there for a decade. And she was already under scrutiny as a congressman and presidential candidate not to mention she has a security clearance in the military.
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 25, 2024, 08:17:07 PM
Next up they should release all the info on Tulsi. Trump needs less crooks and spys. I think he still has a chance to build a decent cabinet. Some where good and some where dumpster fires.What do u imagine there is to release?
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Post by: eyeeatingfish on December 27, 2024, 12:44:11 AM
SSWWOOOOOSSSHHHHHH
Translation: I can't rebut what you said so I will distract with an onomatopoeia
Post by: eyeeatingfish on December 27, 2024, 12:50:13 AM
Trump couldn't pardon Gaetz since most prostitution, drugs, and statutory rape fall under state jurisdiction. He'd have to be caught in the act of doing those crimes so I don't see the State prosecuting the past acts and the statute of limitations has probably passed anyways. If Gaetz rejoins congress again, he could be censored or expelled and a pardon wouldn't affect those.
Some of the things he was alleged to have done could be prosecuted federally, especially if he did it across state lines but you do make a good point about pardons there.
Ultimately I am glad they released the findings of the investigation, the public should be made aware of these types of things when they happen so we can vote with full knowledge of our representative's actions and behaviors.
Post by: macsak on December 27, 2024, 05:21:39 AM
and you should also note that the "findings of the investigation" were all looked into by the DOJ (and probably local/state police) and they did not find enough credible evidence to prosecute...
Some of the things he was alleged to have done could be prosecuted federally, especially if he did it across state lines but you do make a good point about pardons there.
Ultimately I am glad they released the findings of the investigation, the public should be made aware of these types of things when they happen so we can vote with full knowledge of our representative's actions and behaviors.
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 27, 2024, 07:49:26 AM
Translation: I can't rebut what you said so I will distract with an onomatopoeia
Nice try at deflection.
SWOOOOOSSSHHHH cause u don't know what SWOOOOOSSHHHHH is.
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 27, 2024, 07:51:29 AM
Some of the things he was alleged to have done could be prosecuted federally, especially if he did it across state lines but you do make a good point about pardons there.
Ultimately I am glad they released the findings of the investigation, the public should be made aware of these types of things when they happen so we can vote with full knowledge of our representative's actions and behaviors.
U mean how Brandon pardoned Hunter from 2014, which means any crimes he may have committed,but not prosecuted for right? Or did you miss that part of the pardon that was last used in Nixon.
You think that this release was in the best interest of the nation????SWOOOOSSSHHHHH if you do.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on December 28, 2024, 01:28:37 AM
a cop like you should know to say "ALLEGED actions and behaviors"
and you should also note that the "findings of the investigation" were all looked into by the DOJ (and probably local/state police) and they did not find enough credible evidence to prosecute...
If you note, I did mention allegations in the first sentence.
There are many reasons why a prosecution may not proceed that have nothing to do with whether there is enough credible evidence.
And not every inappropriate thing that was alleged involves a DOJ investigation. A fellow republican congressmen publicly stated he witnessed Gaetz show photos of nude girls he was sleeping with, bragging about taking viagra and energy drinks. That is a pretty credible witness in my book.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on December 28, 2024, 01:29:18 AM
Nice try at deflection.
SWOOOOOSSSHHHH cause u don't know what SWOOOOOSSHHHHH is.
Another empty rebuttal. This is getting old.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on December 28, 2024, 01:29:55 AM
U mean how Brandon pardoned Hunter from 2014, which means any crimes he may have committed,but not prosecuted for right? Or did you miss that part of the pardon that was last used in Nixon.
You think that this release was in the best interest of the nation????SWOOOOSSSHHHHH if you do.
#whataboutism....
Post by: macsak on December 28, 2024, 05:24:21 AM
which only speaks as if the testimony is true...
If you note, I did mention allegations in the first sentence.
There are many reasons why a prosecution may not proceed that have nothing to do with whether there is enough credible evidence.
And not every inappropriate thing that was alleged involves a DOJ investigation. A fellow republican congressmen publicly stated he witnessed Gaetz show photos of nude girls he was sleeping with, bragging about taking viagra and energy drinks. That is a pretty credible witness in my book.
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 28, 2024, 07:15:01 PM
Another empty rebuttal. This is getting old.Empty, only to u.
Swoooosshhhh squared.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Post by: macsak on December 28, 2024, 07:41:49 PM
If you note, I did mention allegations in the first sentence.
There are many reasons why a prosecution may not proceed that have nothing to do with whether there is enough credible evidence.
And not every inappropriate thing that was alleged involves a DOJ investigation. A fellow republican congressmen publicly stated he witnessed Gaetz show photos of nude girls he was sleeping with, bragging about taking viagra and energy drinks. That is a pretty credible witness in my book.
"I am more of a logic, numbers, and reason type of person"
yet you speak of a "pretty credible witness" as if it were fact
there are tons of republicans that are pissed and would say anything against gaetz because he got rid of the majority leader...
Post by: zippz on December 28, 2024, 07:46:47 PM
As some here love to bring up, he was never charged and convicted, so everything he's accused of is one-sided. Unless and until he has a chance to defend himself in a court of law, it's all just accusations.
Hunter, on the other hand, incriminated himself in a book he got paid for. Not to mention all the evidence on his abandoned laptop.
I'm curious about the 264 members of Congress in both chambers who used tax payer funds to pay off people who accused them of, among other things, sexual harassment? Are those people ever referred to the ethics committee? If so, why are their reports not made public?
Of the $17M, we don't know how much was for sex-related allegations and how much was for race, gender, and other discrimination cases.
What we do know is the details of all 264 settlements are not routinely made public.
https://checkyourfact.com/2019/01/11/fact-check-congress-sexual-harassment-settlements-200-million/
You don't need a criminal conviction. This was basically a hiring board (Senate) which includes public scrutiny. If this was a commercial business, lets say drug testing, and the applicant for President was accused of drugs and prostitution and background investigations found evidence of it without a conviction, I'm sure the board of directors and shareholders would have a big issue with hiring them.
Gaetz has the opportunity to defend himself to the public and provide counter evidence to the allegations in the report. If he was still up for AG, he would make his case in the Senate confirmation hearings. If he wants to get elected again, he can do it in the media and in debates.
As far as the Congressional settlements, I agree the reports should be put out if taxpayer money was involved.
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 30, 2024, 09:02:17 AM
#whataboutism....
#nicetry #doesntknowhowtousewhataboutism
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 30, 2024, 09:05:45 AM
"I am more of a logic, numbers, and reason type of person"
yet you speak of a "pretty credible witness" as if it were fact
there are tons of republicans that are pissed and would say anything against gaetz because he got rid of the majority leader...
Did he brag that these girls were underage? I know guys who show pics of girls who sent them noods (over 18 of course). It's a bragging thing.
As long as to Gaetz knowledge the girls were 18+, then it's all G. The old saying was "redbull and powerbar". Guess it's "redbull and viagra" for older men.
Maybe EEF isn't in the loop, his coworkers are no different. Besides "lockerroom talk", many coworkers are banging each other or cheating on their significant other (both sexes are).
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 30, 2024, 09:06:49 AM
You don't need a criminal conviction. This was basically a hiring board (Senate) which includes public scrutiny. If this was a commercial business, lets say drug testing, and the applicant for President was accused of drugs and prostitution and background investigations found evidence of it without a conviction, I'm sure the board of directors and shareholders would have a big issue with hiring them.
Gaetz has the opportunity to defend himself to the public and provide counter evidence to the allegations in the report. If he was still up for AG, he would make his case in the Senate confirmation hearings. If he wants to get elected again, he can do it in the media and in debates.
As far as the Congressional settlements, I agree the reports should be put out if taxpayer money was involved.
Many are missing the bigger picture. What those who don't like someone are doing is just accuse them of something, even though it's BS and you can screw them. Reminds me of Kavanaugh.
Post by: hvybarrels on December 30, 2024, 12:13:42 PM
Some Washington insiders warn freshmen that they should never go to any parties, because they might black out and wake up in the morning with Polaroids of themselves having sex with a 5yo pinned to their clothes.
Post by: changemyoil66 on December 31, 2024, 09:08:49 AM
On one hand Gaetz wasn’t the best choice so the whole thing could have been just a fake concession. They could also have some other damaging stuff on him.
Some Washington insiders warn freshmen that they should never go to any parties, because they might black out and wake up in the morning with Polaroids of themselves having sex with a 5yo pinned to their clothes.
If you're a freshman and DNC, you're covered. So you can party as much as you want to. Compare this to the Madison guy in a wheel chair. The fake news used a cruise ship activity against him because he was dressed in womans clothing. This is a common cruiseship game that's played.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on December 31, 2024, 12:40:26 PM
If you're a freshman and DNC, you're covered. So you can party as much as you want to. Compare this to the Madison guy in a wheel chair. The fake news used a cruise ship activity against him because he was dressed in womans clothing. This is a common cruiseship game that's played.It should have been a clue when he boarded the RuPaul.
Post by: MauiAxis on December 31, 2024, 02:26:31 PM
Post by: mrgaf on December 31, 2024, 06:19:35 PM
"On the wrong side of what this country represents"
Sounds like what the bad guys say in a movie right before they kill someone who dares to oppose their dear leader.
BY too MAGA for my taste I mean to Trump-like. Too authoritarian, too divisive, etc.
Not everyone who voted Trump necessarily likes him or supports the MAGA movement.
You playing with your crystal ball again. If you can’t prove it STFU 🤫
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 08, 2025, 10:37:18 AM
You playing with your crystal ball again. If you can’t prove it STFU 🤫
Prove what? I have to prove my preferences to you now?
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 08, 2025, 10:38:06 AM
#nicetry #doesntknowhowtousewhataboutism
Someone needs to learn how to google...
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 08, 2025, 10:39:18 AM
Did he brag that these girls were underage? I know guys who show pics of girls who sent them noods (over 18 of course). It's a bragging thing.
And all those women gave the man permission to share those photos? If not then that is a crime genius.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 08, 2025, 10:43:02 AM
"I am more of a logic, numbers, and reason type of person"
yet you speak of a "pretty credible witness" as if it were fact
there are tons of republicans that are pissed and would say anything against gaetz because he got rid of the majority leader...
We convict people of crimes based on credible witness statements. I guess that means nothing in your book, if we don't have video or physical records then in your book it never happened.
Funny though, I don't remember you pointing out that credible witnesses don't equate to facts when statements about Biden being corrupt come to light. Funny how the weight of a witnesses statement changes depending on which side it helps...
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 08, 2025, 10:45:20 AM
Many are missing the bigger picture. What those who don't like someone are doing is just accuse them of something, even though it's BS and you can screw them. Reminds me of Kavanaugh.
You don't know it is BS, you are just making assumptions.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 08, 2025, 10:58:15 AM
And all those women gave the man permission to share those photos? If not then that is a crime genius.
Can you post the law?
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 08, 2025, 10:59:12 AM
You don't know it is BS, you are just making assumptions.
No, you're making assumptions. He was never charged with anything smarty.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 08, 2025, 11:35:13 AM
Can you post the law?
I'll give you Hawaii's for starters.
https://ag.hawaii.gov/cpja/files/2021/07/file_Online_Safety_HI_Law_Nonconsensual1.pdf
Curious why you are pushing back to defend sharing nude photos of someone without their permission as if it is fine as long as it isn't criminal.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 08, 2025, 11:35:54 AM
No, you're making assumptions. He was never charged with anything smarty.
Not being charged doesn't make it BS, that is your assumption.
You have quite a bit to learn about the justice system.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 08, 2025, 12:06:21 PM
I'll give you Hawaii's for starters.
https://ag.hawaii.gov/cpja/files/2021/07/file_Online_Safety_HI_Law_Nonconsensual1.pdf
Curious why you are pushing back to defend sharing nude photos of someone without their permission as if it is fine as long as it isn't criminal.
Why would you post HI's one? He isn't in HI. Does this mean that you're making a statement based on HI's laws and not any laws that would apply to him? Since you cannot readily post the law that applies to him and used HI's one instead, I will assume my statement is accurate. Now what you're going to do is try to get lucky and look up a federal law. But again, read my last statement about you choosing HI as your 1st choice.
How do you know that permission wasn't given or revoked or statements changed? Have you talked to the person? Were you there at the time when it was taken? That's assuming a lot by your part.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 08, 2025, 12:06:43 PM
Not being charged doesn't make it BS, that is your assumption.
You have quite a bit to learn about the justice system.
Hahahahaha.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on January 08, 2025, 12:20:43 PM
I can play that game, too:
Why would you post HI's one? He isn't in HI. Does this mean that you're making a statement based on HI's laws and not any laws that would apply to him? Since you cannot readily post the law that applies to him and used HI's one instead, I will assume my statement is accurate. Now what you're going to do is try to get lucky and look up a federal law. But again, read my last statement about you choosing HI as your 1st choice.
How do you know that permission wasn't given or revoked or statements changed? Have you talked to the person? Were you there at the time when it was taken? That's assuming a lot by your part.
In Iraq, he would have been executed without a trial.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 08, 2025, 02:03:44 PM
Why would you post HI's one? He isn't in HI. Does this mean that you're making a statement based on HI's laws and not any laws that would apply to him? Since you cannot readily post the law that applies to him and used HI's one instead, I will assume my statement is accurate. Now what you're going to do is try to get lucky and look up a federal law. But again, read my last statement about you choosing HI as your 1st choice.
How do you know that permission wasn't given or revoked or statements changed? Have you talked to the person? Were you there at the time when it was taken? That's assuming a lot by your part.
Your reading comprehension is bad. I said "if" it was done without comprehension.
Your cognitive dissonance for Trump is so strong you can't help but defend a turd like Gaetz.
Here is DC law on the topic.
https://koehlerlaw.net/criminal-defense-dc/non-consensual-pornography/
Again, not sure why you are pushing back so hard on this one. You would have a field day if someone alleged a democrat did the same thing. #doublestandard
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 08, 2025, 02:25:52 PM
Your reading comprehension is bad. I said "if" it was done without comprehension.
Your cognitive dissonance for Trump is so strong you can't help but defend a turd like Gaetz.
Here is DC law on the topic.
https://koehlerlaw.net/criminal-defense-dc/non-consensual-pornography/
Again, not sure why you are pushing back so hard on this one. You would have a field day if someone alleged a democrat did the same thing. #doublestandard
1) Thanks for trying to weassle out again using "if".
2) Field day if a DNC did the same. I have blasted Brandon for his sniffing very often. So try again.
Keep trying to play, nice try. Thanks for posting the DC law AFTER you posted the HI one. My statement is correct.
So, how come Gaetz isn't in handcuffs?
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on January 08, 2025, 02:48:58 PM
1) Thanks for trying to weassle out again using "if".This is a shakedown that caught fire because Matt kicked Kevin McCarthy out of his job.
2) Field day if a DNC did the same. I have blasted Brandon for his sniffing very often. So try again.
Keep trying to play, nice try. Thanks for posting the DC law AFTER you posted the HI one. My statement is correct.
So, how come Gaetz isn't in handcuffs?
The things he was accused of were investigated by the DOJ. Since the crimes he was accused of were not supported by the evidence, there were no charges. He may have engaged in unsavory behaviors in some people's moral judgement, but the things he allegedly did are not the kinds of things the FBI charges people for.
The supposed 17 year old testified she never told him her age and he never asked. Even though it's technically a crime under FL statutory rape law, there's no sex trafficking component, and the event was mutually consensual. There was no coercion, no violence and no interstate travel involved as would normally be the case in someone charged with trafficking.
I remember when the President of the United States committed sexual harassment and adultery then lied about it to the American people before a blue dress appeared. He then confessed to everyone. He was impeached for lying to the special counsel while under oath, but not removed from office. The public's majority opinion was "It's just sex. Who wouldn't lie if they are married?" But somehow Gaetz is made out to be criminally guilty without the benefit of a trial.
If it wasn't for double standards, politics would have no standards at all.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 09, 2025, 11:32:34 AM
1) Thanks for trying to weassle out again using "if".
2) Field day if a DNC did the same. I have blasted Brandon for his sniffing very often. So try again.
Keep trying to play, nice try. Thanks for posting the DC law AFTER you posted the HI one. My statement is correct.
So, how come Gaetz isn't in handcuffs?
Of course I have to use the word if because I have no idea whether the women in the photographs gave consent or not. Again, you seem to not understand criminal law very well.
I have no idea why Gaetz isn't in handcuffs, I have no inside knowledge of the investigation. You act as if him not being charged with a crime is somehow evidence of innocence, again shwoing you don't understand how the criminal system works.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 09, 2025, 11:37:06 AM
.....But somehow Gaetz is made out to be criminally guilty without the benefit of a trial.
Just so I am clear, I am not making the case Gaetz is guilty of a serious crime, just that he is a dirtbag who shouldn't be in such positions of power. You are free to disagree, that is just my opinion of him.
Post by: macsak on January 09, 2025, 11:50:46 AM
https://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=55432.msg493003#msg493003
Just so I am clear, I am not making the case Gaetz is guilty of a serious crime, just that he is a dirtbag who shouldn't be in such positions of power. You are free to disagree, that is just my opinion of him.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 09, 2025, 12:53:14 PM
Of course I have to use the word if because I have no idea whether the women in the photographs gave consent or not. Again, you seem to not understand criminal law very well.
I have no idea why Gaetz isn't in handcuffs, I have no inside knowledge of the investigation. You act as if him not being charged with a crime is somehow evidence of innocence, again shwoing you don't understand how the criminal system works.
It doesn't take much thinking as to why he's not in handcuffs...no evidence of a crime committed. You seem to not understand criminal law or it's process very well.
Thanks for playing and again thinking that I'm the one who doesn't know how the system works.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 09, 2025, 12:54:34 PM
Just so I am clear, I am not making the case Gaetz is guilty of a serious crime, just that he is a dirtbag who shouldn't be in such positions of power. You are free to disagree, that is just my opinion of him.
So besides this non-crime you think he committed since you did post the federal law after a 2nd try at it, why is he a dirtbag ad shouldn't be in power?
Post by: zippz on January 09, 2025, 01:04:42 PM
If a person is looking for a babysitter and you find someone with good reviews. However you also see a few allegations of child abuse in the newspaper by named persons with no relations to each other, stories of the abuse, and photos of minor injuries on children but no arrests or convictions. Would you hire them or find someone else?
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 09, 2025, 01:11:50 PM
Me and EEF are just stating the obvious. You don't need convictions to deny someone a job. Allegations and some evidence is all it needs.
If a person is looking for a babysitter and you find someone with good reviews. However you also see a few allegations of child abuse in the newspaper by named persons with no relations to each other, stories of the abuse, and photos of minor injuries on children but no arrests or convictions. Would you hire them or find someone else?
I'm waiting for Casey Anthony to start OF since her babysitting career is over.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on January 09, 2025, 01:19:42 PM
Me and EEF are just stating the obvious. You don't need convictions to deny someone a job. Allegations and some evidence is all it needs.That depends on whether the accusations are genuine or part of a smear campaign.
If a person is looking for a babysitter and you find someone with good reviews. However you also see a few allegations of child abuse in the newspaper by named persons with no relations to each other, stories of the abuse, and photos of minor injuries on children but no arrests or convictions. Would you hire them or find someone else?
Also, you're basically arguing that babysitting is the same as being the USAG. A babysitter is a potential risk to your family. I don't see the correlation with a USAG. Gaetz is a direct threat to the swamp on both sides of the aisle, as demonstrated when he opposed McCarthy for Speaker.
I'd rather have a bulldog in the USAG's office trying to drain the swamp -- someone who may have allegedly done some things he shouldn't as opposed to someone who's never been accused of bad behavior and toes the party line when told to.
The hard work of fixing these DC problems cannot wait for perfect men. We need men who are PERFECT FOR THE JOB AT HAND. Nothing in the ethics report makes him objectively ineligible to assume the role. If he is the best man to clean up an out of control weaponized DOJ, I'm happy to have him do it.
But, since he withdrew his name from consideration, this is totally moot.
Post by: zippz on January 09, 2025, 01:53:53 PM
That depends on whether the accusations are genuine or part of a smear campaign.
Also, you're basically arguing that babysitting is the same as being the USAG. A babysitter is a potential risk to your family.
The USAG is the top law enforcement officer in the US and one of the most powerful positions in the US. I would say that's way above a babysitter for scrutiny in hiring and safety of the people.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 09, 2025, 02:54:40 PM
The USAG is the top law enforcement officer in the US and one of the most powerful positions in the US. I would say that's way above a babysitter for scrutiny in hiring and safety of the people.
We have seen multiple AG"s in Hawaii disregard the 2nd amendment. They too have no smear campaign against them.
Post by: QUIETShooter on January 09, 2025, 03:43:09 PM
From the movie A Few Good Men.
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on January 09, 2025, 03:46:43 PM
The USAG is the top law enforcement officer in the US and one of the most powerful positions in the US. I would say that's way above a babysitter for scrutiny in hiring and safety of the people.
Really? You'd let someone like Garland who was held in contempt of Congress for not handing over the recordings taken of the Biden interviews babysit? Do you honestly think he's the best person for the top cop position?
Biden was investigated for storing and passing classified information illegally, but the final report said they chose not to file charged because of Biden's poor memory and advanced age -- basically not competent enough to know what he did was wrong.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-vote-merrick-garland-contempt-biden-audio-recordings/
Quote
“Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retainedhttps://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/biden-willfully-disclosed-classified-materials-but-no-criminal-charges-warranted-special-counsel-says
and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a
private citizen,” Hur wrote.
....
The documents have classification markings up to the Top Secret/Sensitive
Compartmented Information Level and were found in a box in Biden’s Delaware
garage “that contained other materials of great significance to him and that he
appears to have personally used and accessed.”
Photographs included in the report showed some of the classified Afghanistan
documents stored in a worn cardboard box stored in his garage, apparently in a
loose collection with other household items, including a ladder and a wicker basket.
Classified documents from the Obama administration were also found in Biden’s
basement den, according to the report. Classified documents from his time in the
Senate in the 1970s and 1980s were also found in his garage.
....
“Given Mr. Biden’s limited precision and recall during his interviews with his ghostwriter
and with our office, jurors may hesitate to place too much evidentiary weight on a single
eight-word utterance to his ghostwriter about finding classified documents in Virginia,
in the absence of other, more direct evidence.”
“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury,
as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with
a poor memory,” investigators wrote.
Funny how Trump was the target of an FBI raid, but Biden was allowed to trickle the classified documents to the investigators as they located them in several locations.
Sorry, but if Garland got confirmed after his past of covering for a fellow judge in an ethics scandal and targeting Biden's political rivals, I see no reason Gaetz can't be confirmed. The part of Gaetz's resume that's most important is not that he was investigated and never charged. It's that he hasn't behaved as a swamp critter.
Maybe you can find Pam Bondi suitable to sit your kids? Any problem with her? Maybe start a new thread for her and let this one die since it's a non-issue now?
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 09, 2025, 03:54:45 PM
Post by: zippz on January 09, 2025, 09:12:15 PM
Post by: Flapp_Jackson on January 09, 2025, 10:03:26 PM
Youre free to stop replying to this thread if you wish.
I felt it was rude to not reply to you when you're quoting my posts.
So, now that you've given me permission .....
:wave:
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 10, 2025, 08:36:18 AM
Youre free to stop replying to this thread if you wish.
I should have been more clear and I hope you didn't take my post as I was talking about you. I was talking about EEF as he often revives dead threads just so he can feel like he gets the last word in.
:shaka:
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 10, 2025, 10:07:31 AM
So besides this non-crime you think he committed since you did post the federal law after a 2nd try at it, why is he a dirtbag ad shouldn't be in power?
I didn't say I think he committed, I pointed out that he may have broken the law based on the allegations. Why do I think he is a dirtbag who shouldn't be in power? I point you towards the results of the congressional investigation. When it is one allegation or behavior I can give someone the benefit of the doubt but when you start to see a pattern then I think the allegations have more credibility.
Interestingly I just came across an old news article covering the fact that in 2015 Gaetz opposed a Florida law making revenge porn illegal and he had killed the same bill the year before when he was chair of the committee... Coincidence?
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 10, 2025, 10:19:09 AM
Really? You'd let someone like Garland who was held in contempt of Congress for not handing over the recordings taken of the Biden interviews babysit? Do you honestly think he's the best person for the top cop position?
Biden was investigated for storing and passing classified information illegally, but the final report said they chose not to file charged because of Biden's poor memory and advanced age -- basically not competent enough to know what he did was wrong.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-vote-merrick-garland-contempt-biden-audio-recordings/
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/biden-willfully-disclosed-classified-materials-but-no-criminal-charges-warranted-special-counsel-says
Funny how Trump was the target of an FBI raid, but Biden was allowed to trickle the classified documents to the investigators as they located them in several locations.
Sorry, but if Garland got confirmed after his past of covering for a fellow judge in an ethics scandal and targeting Biden's political rivals, I see no reason Gaetz can't be confirmed. The part of Gaetz's resume that's most important is not that he was investigated and never charged. It's that he hasn't behaved as a swamp critter.
Maybe you can find Pam Bondi suitable to sit your kids? Any problem with her? Maybe start a new thread for her and let this one die since it's a non-issue now?
I would say some of your criticisms of Gardland are fair and some are not however even if we agree that Gardland was not a good AG, that doesn't make Gaetz a good one.
What makes Gaetz a good pick for AG? He is politically loud and stirs stuff up but that isn't much of a qualification for the job. How much experience does he have in law enforcement, as a criminal attorney, or as a judge? (very little IIRC).
You painted this as an issue whether we want a messy attack dog or a safe but quite guard dog which creates a false dichotomy. It is not the case that Gaetz was the only choice so Trump had to settle for his moral imperfections. There are going to be hundreds of other qualified individuals capable of doing that job without the skeletons Gaetz had. They just wont be loud and proud Trump supporters.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 10, 2025, 10:24:14 AM
I didn't say I think he committed, I pointed out that he may have broken the law based on the allegations. Why do I think he is a dirtbag who shouldn't be in power? I point you towards the results of the congressional investigation.
We all know what you said. And read what I said. Simple, but here you are continuing to argue about it. Thats also a low bar you have and the DNC's plan works on people like you. Just accuse someone with lack of credible evidence and you won't want them for X job. "I point you to the congressional investigation", which lead to no charge or arrest.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 10, 2025, 10:25:28 AM
I should have been more clear and I hope you didn't take my post as I was talking about you. I was talking about EEF as he often revives dead threads just so he can feel like he gets the last word in.
:shaka:
Wrong.
I go on a break, I come back to rebut your reply, and you whine about reviving a dead thread, while simultaneously not letting it die.
You are free of course to not reply... :popcorn:
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 10, 2025, 10:31:25 AM
We all know what you said. And read what I said. Simple, but here you are continuing to argue about it. Thats also a low bar you have and the DNC's plan works on people like you. Just accuse someone with lack of credible evidence and you won't want them for X job. "I point you to the congressional investigation", which lead to no charge or arrest.
You are responding to my post with an argument but asking me why I am arguing? :crazy: I said he was a dirtbag, you asked me why and I responded. Do you want me to answer your question or not?
"lead to no charge or arrest" is an irrelevant argument since it neither means what you think it means nor does it have any bearing on whether we can judge Gaetz is a good pick. Trump was found guilty of 34 felonies so does that mean you will say he shouldn't be president now or are you just using the "not charged or convicted" as a matter of convenience? People can commit terrible crimes and not be charged or convicted but that doesn't mean they are suddenly good people who have never done anything wrong. You also suggested "lack of credible evidence" but I would not agree with that opinion.
Interestingly I just came across an old news article covering the fact that in 2015 Gaetz opposed a Florida law making revenge porn illegal and he had killed the same bill the year before when he was chair of the committee... Coincidence? When it is one allegation or behavior I can give someone the benefit of the doubt but when you start to see a pattern then I think the allegations have more credibility.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 10, 2025, 11:41:17 AM
Wrong.
I go on a break, I come back to rebut your reply, and you whine about reviving a dead thread, while simultaneously not letting it die.
You are free of course to not reply... :popcorn:
Now you're copying me. How original. Hahahahahhaha. We all know that you're on a break from replying, capt obvious.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 10, 2025, 11:44:19 AM
You are responding to my post with an argument but asking me why I am arguing? :crazy: I said he was a dirtbag, you asked me why and I responded. Do you want me to answer your question or not?
"lead to no charge or arrest" is an irrelevant argument since it neither means what you think it means nor does it have any bearing on whether we can judge Gaetz is a good pick. Trump was found guilty of 34 felonies so does that mean you will say he shouldn't be president now or are you just using the "not charged or convicted" as a matter of convenience? People can commit terrible crimes and not be charged or convicted but that doesn't mean they are suddenly good people who have never done anything wrong. You also suggested "lack of credible evidence" but I would not agree with that opinion.
Interestingly I just came across an old news article covering the fact that in 2015 Gaetz opposed a Florida law making revenge porn illegal and he had killed the same bill the year before when he was chair of the committee... Coincidence? When it is one allegation or behavior I can give someone the benefit of the doubt but when you start to see a pattern then I think the allegations have more credibility.
You are responding to my post with an argument but asking me why I am arguing? Asking why you think he's a dirtbag isn't arguing. You keep imagining things that aren't there.
SWOOOOSSHHH to everything else you posted in the other 2 paragraphs.I assume you also haven't read the bills he killed. Maybe you will get lucky again like when you posted HI law about sharing pics, instead of the federal one.
What if you don't respond anymore to this thread?. This is rhetorical as I know you cannot help yourself. So I'll wait and your reply will prob get either swoooshed or be wrong like usual.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 14, 2025, 11:49:54 AM
Now you're copying me. How original. Hahahahahhaha. We all know that you're on a break from replying, capt obvious.
You are under the false impression that me taking a break somehow means you actually won the debate. That would explain why you are so upset over me "reviving a dead thread"
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 14, 2025, 11:54:17 AM
You are responding to my post with an argument but asking me why I am arguing? Asking why you think he's a dirtbag isn't arguing. You keep imagining things that aren't there.
SWOOOOSSHHH to everything else you posted in the other 2 paragraphs.I assume you also haven't read the bills he killed. Maybe you will get lucky again like when you posted HI law about sharing pics, instead of the federal one.
What if you don't respond anymore to this thread?. This is rhetorical as I know you cannot help yourself. So I'll wait and your reply will prob get either swoooshed or be wrong like usual.
I said why I thought he was a dirtbag and you argued with me. #projecting
Feel free to go read the bill he killed and tell me why he was correct in killing it. Feel free to go show me the good reason for voting against the bill despite large bipartisan support for it. Before you do though I will point out to you that he never provided any reason for killing the bill or voting against it the next year. If there was a good reason to vote against it you would think he would justify his decision...
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 14, 2025, 12:09:43 PM
You are under the false impression that me taking a break somehow means you actually won the debate. That would explain why you are so upset over me "reviving a dead thread"
Annnddd he's back to revive a moot thread.
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 14, 2025, 12:10:03 PM
I said why I thought he was a dirtbag and you argued with me. #projecting
Feel free to go read the bill he killed and tell me why he was correct in killing it. Feel free to go show me the good reason for voting against the bill despite large bipartisan support for it. Before you do though I will point out to you that he never provided any reason for killing the bill or voting against it the next year. If there was a good reason to vote against it you would think he would justify his decision...
He's back again. Hahahahahahahha
I'm a future teller. He will be back in this thread again.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 17, 2025, 12:03:58 PM
Annnddd he's back to revive a moot thread.
You are free to stop responding :thumbsup:
Let me try my hand on this future telling thing..... CMO will respond to me on this thread. :popcorn:
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 17, 2025, 12:08:33 PM
You are free to stop responding :thumbsup:
Let me try my hand on this future telling thing..... CMO will respond to me on this thread. :popcorn:
OMG, he did it again. He can't help himself. Hahahahahahha.
And he's trying to copy me once again. "CMO will respond to me..." More proof he cannot think for himself, but relies on what he hears on TV.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 21, 2025, 11:22:03 AM
OMG, he did it again. He can't help himself. Hahahahahahha.
And he's trying to copy me once again. "CMO will respond to me..." More proof he cannot think for himself, but relies on what he hears on TV.
Shucks, I should have put money on my prediction! :popcorn:
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 21, 2025, 12:48:10 PM
Shucks, I should have put money on my prediction! :popcorn:
OMG he's still back! Self control isn't his strong point I guess. But, will he be back again???
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 22, 2025, 10:44:01 AM
OMG he's still back! Self control isn't his strong point I guess. But, will he be back again???
Project harder, maybe it will get you somewhere eventually.
Post by: ren on January 22, 2025, 11:25:45 AM
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 22, 2025, 11:50:53 AM
Project harder, maybe it will get you somewhere eventually.
And he's back again!!!!!!!!!!!!Can we do one more?
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 23, 2025, 04:23:22 PM
And he's back again!!!!!!!!!!!!Can we do one more?
Sure, I just don't understand why you persist in doing the exact same behavior you are attempting to criticize me for. But I don't hold out any hope you will actually answer that query with any substance, just a swoosh or one of your other empty go-to responses
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 23, 2025, 04:25:46 PM
Sure, I just don't understand why you persist in doing the exact same behavior you are attempting to criticize me for. But I don't hold out any hope you will actually answer that query with any substance, just a swoosh or one of your other empty go-to responses
SWOOOOOSSHHHHHH. And you even predicted you getting a swoooosshhh too. OMG this is golden. I'm gonna start a 2nd business of EEF not being able to control himself and feel a need to respond to dead threads. I need to also buy fuel for the F22.
Post by: eyeeatingfish on January 24, 2025, 10:48:03 PM
SWOOOOOSSHHHHHH. And you even predicted you getting a swoooosshhh too. OMG this is golden. I'm gonna start a 2nd business of EEF not being able to control himself and feel a need to respond to dead threads. I need to also buy fuel for the F22.
You really don't know what a hypocrite you come off as do you?
You can always stop responding :thumbsup:
Post by: changemyoil66 on January 25, 2025, 08:54:04 AM
You really don't know what a hypocrite you come off as do you?Omg,another reply and this time with calling me a hypocrite when hes the one being one. This is so golden. Eef keeps digging and digging cause he cannot help his compulsion.
You can always stop responding
Ill wait for the next type of deflection, name calling, pot kettle, etc etc etc...
And then another +1. The fuel truck is on stand by.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk