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.

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?

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.

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

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?

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

we need some winning.

"i start to pay attention"
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.

so much for "innocent until proven guilty"
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.

"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.

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?

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.

So, Matt Gaetz's father, Don, was wearing a wire to gather evidence against Alford, the man who plead guilty to the $25M shakedown.

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/

 

and, fellow firearms enthusiasts, lest we forget, this is 2AHawaii dot com:


https://x.com/WallStreetMav/status/1858222887875887409?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

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.

No recess appointments.   We have checks and balances for a reason.   He is not a dictator.   Congress gets a say.

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://www.kttc.com/2024/11/16/digging-deeper-history-recess-appointments-how-they-work/

Just saw that there's another option if Matt Gaetz fails to become USAG.

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.

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.