who voted in the 1990s, all of whom voted for Bill Clinton if they would have any problem with him spending the rest of his life in jail IF he were guilty of having sex with minors in the continuing Jeffrey Epstein scandal and every one of us said we would have no problem with him going to prison for the rest of his life if he did. I am certain that by a large majority Democrats would take that position. Look at how they dumped Al Franken on the trumped up accusations made against him by a Republican operative.
You can compare that to the reaction of Republican-fascists to the at least as probable if not far more probable possibility that Trump committed that crime and the excuses already being made for him by them.
There is no Democratic equivalent to the Trump cult which rules Republican-fascist politics and politicians.
Those allegations about Clinton are old. Since the 90s, at least. Now that he's served his purpose, they're taken seriously? You're ironically just furthering your own case for the cult-like nature of partisanship.
ReplyDeleteAl Franken, really? Republican operatives? Are these the same Hillary warned us about when they framed her husband?
Can you name one Republican whom the media "whipped up" (to borrow your phrase) allegations against despite a paucity of evidence? Because if not you are doing everything to counter your own point.
This is the Thought Criminal, for some reason my blogger's not letting me log on. I don't remember any allegations about Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein from the 1990s, what are you talking about? "Now that he's served his purpose, they're taken seriously?" What accusations that were investigated by Kenn Starr, the other REPUBLICAN SPECIAL PROSECUTORS, the myriads of Republican controlled House Committees, other prosecutors, etc. from the 1990s resulted in so much as an indictment of either of the Clintons, never mind a successful prosecution and that necessary thing before someone is held to have committed a crime, a conviction? I'm not interested in discussing Bill Clinton but Hillary Clinton has to count as the actually most exonerated person in American history, at this point.
ReplyDeleteIf you're talking about the set up of Clinton during the deposition he gave during the Paula Jones case, in which the judge allowed the crucial question that got him in trouble when, as I recall, many said they were surprised she did, I think it was a pretty clear set up, especially considering who in Arkansas was active in it and who was financing their campaign against him. He was an idiot to try to get out of it the way he did, I've certainly been critical of him. Molly Ivins said it best, that we had a right to expect him to keep his fly zipped. I have expressed my disgust for Bill Clinton quite fully enough.
Leeann Tweeden, a right wing media figure, was obviously in league with Roger Stone in the flimsy accusation she made against Al Franken over something that happened as they were rehearsing a tawdry USO skit, given her behavior during her solo (no doubt controlled only by her) in which she made Lauren Bobert look demure, it was a total set up to take advantage of the the context of #MeToo. Considering what the likes of Jim Jordan and many other Republicans in Congress have been credibly accused of and suffered no consequences from, if anything, it proves that Democrats are, if anything, too quick to believe an accusation.
If you think there's a list of wronged Republicans, I'd like you to name them because as far as I'm concerned, they're on their own. I have no obligation to defend them. As I pointed out in the first weeks I was doing this in 2006, I won't be fair to fascists, I won't be nice to Nazis, and I won't defend the indefensible.
Clinton’s rumored involvement with young women goes back to the 90s. Epstein or not, that’s been whispered softly and said loudly for decades. There's an excellent film made based on those (likely true) rumors, 'Wag the Dog.'
DeleteThe “set up of Clinton” during Paula Jones? You’re doing it again!
The Franken thing. You’re forgetting that several other women, including US Army soldier Stephanie Kemplin, came forward with accusations. And if he is completely innocent, which I don’t buy for a New York minute, he’s no one to blame but himself for not standing up when “#MeToo” stopped being about serious inquiries and turned into “believe all women!”* Franken was an appeaser. But the crocodile ate him sooner than he thought.
You are right about the Dems being too quick to believe an accusation. But so are the Republicans. Provided the OTHER party is being accused.
About people being wronged. I offered the Duke lacrosse team as an example in an unposted response before of “alternative facts” from the left. Several members of the team were accused, falsely, of raping a dancer at one of their parties. Despite, the deeper you dug, the less her story made sense, the DA and left-wing media kept piling on. Once the truth came out, the excuses ranged from, “They had it coming by having a stripper at the party!” to, as I think I quoted, the story was “false, but accurate.”
Which swings round to the beginning. Partisanship is a cult by design. For all your dismissal of the Trump cult, I remind you of Jesus’s warning about motes and beams. Lest you think he’s not talking to you, he is. And me. And everyone else, Republican or Democrat.
“Fascists!” “Nazis!” Etc. are just empty terms. You are correct that perfection does not happen here. But you sure talk like you believe it is that simple. Heck, you’ve defended Claudine Gay’s plagiarism on the grounds that other Harvard staff said and did horrible things, forgetting that precedent will be used by students, not unreasonably, when they’re caught. “Well, if President Gay can do it…” Think of a college like that! I know many people who support Trump but would never dream of acting like him. They don’t get it, either.
*Taking accusations seriously does not mean you believe everyone who makes one. And it also means you accept sometimes there will be no definitive proof either way.
A. "Clinton's rumored involvement," I won't play a game of ever shifting goalposts, the topic is criminality over non-consensual sex, especially among minors. Clinton was never indicted for any sex act, nor did any in that list of extremely hostile prosecutors, some of whom were provided with tens of millions of dollars to dig up evidence, ever indict him for such. The backing of the run up to that by private millionaires, hostile politicians, the likes of Judge Sentelle, etc. is part of the public record, you have not refuted that, nor has anyone else in the past quarter century and longer.
DeleteB. The actual "evidence" to back up any accusation against Al Franken was exactly one photo of him making a weird gesture certainly not even over Tweeden as she slept, as I recall, on a plane. WITH OTHERS OBVIOUSLY PRESENT, SUCH AS THE PHOTOGRAPHER. My only misgiving over Franken was that he worked in the notoriously juvenile show biz industry where such
hijinks are common. Now, if you want admissions of sexual impropriety with loads of evidence, The Trump-Billy Bush tape of him admitting to assaulting women on a regular basis would be one.
C. The friggin' Duke Lacrosse team, I don't recall accusing them of anything, I asked for a list of Republican politicians and you give me the very unmartyred Duke LaCrosse team. I don't recall the accusation lasting long enough for it to even having a preliminary hearing, but I haven't looked it up. You can compare that to the Central Park Five who Trump wanted to execute or that guy who Huckabee-Sanders refused to pardon - even though the actual kill exonerated him decades ago, or many other non-affluent-non-white men and women who have been the actual victims of police, prosecutorial, judicial and political oppression.
Oh, for the love of Mike, how much more obvious to the fascists and neo-Nazis have to be for you to see them? Their presence in the January 6th insurrection, numerous Nazi rallies in a number of states, making arguments to give Trump fascist powers in Congress, in state houses, Trumps own lawyers before IN COURTS. Not to mention on FOX Lies and even more overtly fascist media outfits.
I believe you used to post here under a different name. As I recall you started making abusive comments about other People which is a banning offense on my blog. I'll continue posting your comments if you a. stick to what is being discussed and, b. if you don't make untrue accusations against other people. You can say whatever you like about me as I will answer it.
B.
You: "I don't remember any allegations about Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein from the 1990s, what are you talking about?"
DeleteYou missed my point. Regardless of WHO was the supplier, whispers about Clinton were abundant in the 90s. But the wealthy and powerful often go uninvestigated. And many that do aren't done with the attention they deserve. It's why many people don't bother coming forward with accusations. Sad but true. I never said he was involved with Epstein in the 90s. The truth often trickles through over time. History bears this out. You seem to forget those who work in the law are quite adept at maneuvering around it. Guilty as a moral term is quite different from the legal one.
As was noted but ignored - Franken had several other accusers come forward, including the aforementioned Army officer. THAT is what led to his resignation. Not that stupid photo which even every Republican I know thought was a joke of an accusation.
I think it's sweet you believe straight men never lie about their sexual prowess and exploits. Naive, but sweet.
You asked for a "list of wronged Republicans." Not "...that I condemned." Never said you did. But every major left-wing publication? The DA in the case? Oh yes, they overstepped and went far beyond what an even a lowly, partial (left wing) reading of the evidence could have justified. The coach and players were harassed. The coach was fired, many of the players had to transfer because of the stigma of being a rapist that never would have gone past the investigation stages had those involved even done Hardy Boys-level research. And when the truth came it? The media defended itself because the reports were, "fake, but accurate." Either way, you should look it up before you comment. I can see why Democrats acting like your stereotypical Republican wouldn't interest you, but it's there if you want to read about it.
What has that to do with the Central Park Five? Different states, different crimes, different times...and I hope you're not going by Ava Duvernay's version of those events.
"The actual killer." Right, there's that sweetness again. Believing criminals as being honest and forthright whenever its convenient. Trying to reduce it to a racial issue is base, childish reasoning. There are lots of white people who are over and wrongly punished by our justice system. Just as there are lots of minorities like Colinford Mattis, who get coddled like newborns by the court.
Repeating the phrase, "fascist" isn't an argument. I get that you believe it, but you're not convincing.
You can not identify any crimes charged against Bill Clinton from the 1990s, clearly Ken Starr and the other REPUBLICAN PROSECUTORS who investigated him, the state officials in Arkansas (as I recall many of them his political enemies), the various Republican led congressional committees that held lengthy and numerous hearings against him IN THE PERIOD WHEN NEWT GINGRICH WAS THE SPEAKER, or any since couldn't find anything chargeable. The only fair and rational conclusion is that there was no evidence to support the myriad accusations made against him so the logical conclusion is that there's nothing to them but accusations. You are clearly one of those who has no use for the concept of innocence as long as it's a Democrat who is being accused.
DeleteThe same is true of Al Franken. If anyone had any evidence against him and failed to produce it to a prosecutor or in the form of a law suit, the only rational conclusion is that there's nothing to that, either. You can contrast that to Trump who was found by a judge to be guilty of rape and who was held liable and who faces further charges of defaming the woman he assaulted. To universal support from Republican-fascists.
The Central Park Five were persecuted, were imprisoned for many years, AND THEY WERE ENTIRELY INNOCENT. It's astounding that you keep accusing me of crucifying the affluent white boys who were exonerated immediately in the Republican-fascist media and quickly by the authorities and, I don't believe ever spent much time in custody. That you can't see which case is the real example of injustice doesn't surprise me much, considering the substance of your comments.
You've got real issues with Black People, Women and Democrats. White supremacy is all about special rules based on who people are instead of equal justice under law.
I'm finding it interesting looking into your pseudonym. I don't know if I might not write a post about it.
I have issues with people based on their behavior.
DeleteConsidering how frequently you bring race up, I think you’re projecting a bit.
Not a joke.
Few things in life are simple. You mentioned your reading of the Old Testament offering some insight into the failings of expecting perfection from our leaders. I don't feel obligated to accept that skin color automatically makes someone a victim.
This isn't to say racism isn't real. But you assume the worst and tell anyone who points out your narrative isn't as simple as you think that they have, "issues" with [identity].
I looked into the CP5 case, and no, I'm not comfortable saying they are "entirely innocent." You seem to think the courts that convicted them were heavily biased by social factors couldn't possibly be equally influenced by similar forces from the other side of the aisle. You can believe it, but you're not arguing the merits of your position when all you can do is selectively appeal to authority and call anyone who disagrees a racist. Remember, perfect isn't for this world.
Per Duke lacrosse, here is what that Fascist-Republican Whoopi Goldberg had to say to people who refused to take responsibility for their role in creating a false narrative: "I want you to apologize to them because those kids went through Hell and I think we owe it to them." Yeah, when Whoopi thinks you guys went too far, you should ask yourself how far you went.
The United States Constitution is still riddled with the pro-slavery features that have characterized the government and a sizable chunk of the country since its founding. We are presently in the sustained backlash of our indigenous form of fascism, white supremacy, a backlash from the presidency of the rest of us having twice elected a Black man as president. Only a total idiot wouldn't realize the necessity of focusing on race, after all, your side is obsessed with it.
DeleteI have no notion that you can judge someone's innocence or guilt based on appearance, though it's pretty clear that the NYPD haven't followed that, neither have the prosecutors in that city.
They were not guilty of the crimes charged against them and for which they were convicted, considering about the only physical evidence in the case pointed to the man who eventually confessed and was confirmed to have raped, not only the victim in that crime but in a number of others and they were not tied to any aspect of the case by evidence, to maintain doubts about it is in keeping with your figuring your suspicions can do what Ken Starr, the Republican-led hearings in the House and at least tens of not scores of millions of dollars in investigations couldn't do with Bill or Hillary Clinton, come up with something to even charge them with.
Let me get this through your head I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE DUKE LACROSSE TEAM AND ONCE THEY WERE EXONERATED OF THE ACCUSATIONS I BELIEVE THEY WERE INNOCENT OF THE ACCUSATIONS! As I recall a frat-boy style gang banging may or may not have been something they were involved in, which, if they did, should have gotten them convicted of incredible stupidity.
What “pro-slavery” features are you referring to in the current Constitution?
DeleteI disagree. You talk about “my side” (I don’t have one, politically. Jesus said you can only serve one master I’m not interested in the kings of this world) being obsessed with race yet you’re the one constantly bringing it up.
Example: You reflexively defended Claudine Gay against plagiarism but your defense consisted mainly of talking about things “white” people did that you consider worse. Which isn’t a defense at all. Dershowitz was never the president of the university and Gay, while no longer serving in that capacity, is still on the staff. So even then your comparison is flawed.
You argued it was because of her race, but the former president of the University of South Carolina, Robert Caslen, resigned about two years ago because of…plagiarism. So there’s even precedent for that. And based on a case involving a white man in South Carolina of all places.
There are lots of factors that lead police to erroneously assume the guilt of certain people. Race is merely one of them. Ever heard of the West Memphis Three? A trio of white teens convicted of murder largely because in a small, conservative community they wore black and listened to Slayer? Or Cameron Todd Willingham, a white man executed by Texas because the police decided from the outset the fire that killed his children was deliberately set. What about Daniel Shaver, an unarmed white man shot in the back by a police officer, on video, who was acquitted?
I could go on but the point remains – the system is far from fair for many people. Obsessing on race as the main factor the way you do often leads to far more idiotic conclusions.
All I said was I am not comfortable calling them innocent, as you are. But as you have no background in criminology, law, or any other related field to know cases are rarely so black and white, I understand your naiveté. And as you see people as either Democrat (good) or Republican (bad), it does make sense you view everything through that lens.
I will only say this about why I am agnostic about the case – When the confessions were made, the victim was still in a coma and no one knew what she would remember. She could have come out of it and given detailed descriptions of her attacker[s]. Eric Reynolds, one of the officers, pointed out the absurdity of forcing confessions, from teenagers of all people, knowing the victim could wake up tomorrow and give a completely different description of the events.
If you think that would lead to career advancement…you watch too much Seth Meyers.
Also, the confession by the rapist that he acted alone? There’s that sweetness again, thinking career criminals who murder pregnant women can become good men and true when the time comes.
Let me remind you – you have. You qualified the false accusations by pointing out those jocks (you really hate athletes, that’s a prejudice you own) shouldn’t have had a stripper at the party. And there, you do it again.
Didn't it strike you as odd the "Republican-Fascist" press took the black woman's word as holy writ, no matter how ridiculous or inconsistent her claims were, while condemning the white men she accused? Is it possible maybe the press isn't as white supremacist as you think?
"I've asked every member of my family"
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, right. Like any member of your family talks to you.
Uh, Simps, you shouldn't project your own experience on to other families, there are some which aren't full of jerks.
DeleteAh, Sparky -- I love that your default response to deserved ridicule is always Pee Wee Herman's "I know you are, but what am I?" I mean, the beauty part is that you don't even know you're doing it.
DeleteLook at the Bertrand Russell quote in the side-bar, A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.
ReplyDeletePee Wee might have been as stupid as you but Pee Wee was a make believe character. I'm sure Paul Rubens would understand the difference. You think like Pee Wee did so, of course, you figure I do too.