Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - cinnamon synonym

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5
1
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: September 01, 2015, 11:21:46 AM »

Yawn,

Pardon, but I know nixon wasn't tried nor convicted. Not the point, either.  But he could have been put on trial.

Vos sumo non intelligere.

Cinnamon,

I think that you are failing to understand. You seem outrage and/or entertained. There's only one problem- when everything is an outrage, nothing is. When we can add -gate to every controversy (quick- are you a Brady supporter or hater), then who cares? More importantly, when everything devolves into an undifferentiated mass of "Benghazi / Fast & Furious / Vince Foster / Whitewater / Birth Certificate / Lois Lerner / Unprecedented Executive Power / NSA / whatevs" then people tune out. They tune out even more when the stakes seem so ... petty and small.

More importantly, you make the common mistake of believing that other people care *the exact way* that you care. First, the people that care the same way you care is small. Second, there is another, equally small, portion of people that care an equal, but opposite, direction as you do. Finally, the vast majority of people *don't care.* The can't name the Supreme Court justices, are hard pressed to name their own (federal) Senators, and haven't a prayer of naming their own state legislators ... let alone the ones outside of their district. That's fine- they have better things to do- watch football, make money, play with their children. They will probably start tuning into the election, kinda, sometime next year.

But, sure, the keyboard commandos will have fun. One side will say, "But, but, but, X person violated the law." And one side will say, "Partisan witchhunt." And 99% of the time, it's just background noise. Guess what? Nothing will happen, people will move on, and one side will vaguely remember a partisan witchhunt, and one side will vaguely remember that Hillary Clinton broke the law and got away with it. But most people just won't care, except for the influx of stupid ads during the election.

Same as it ever was. Does that mean nothing will happen this time? I don't know for sure- unlike you, I don't make dramatic and certain pronouncements. But I make probabilistic (Bayesian) assessments based on what I know, and I'm willing to back them up. You? Eh.... It seems you're not as confident in your ability to predict. Because something tells me that deep down, you enjoy making big statements, but fear that like Charlie Brown and Lucy, you've been sold a false of goods. That you're very excited to kick that football, but .... well, you should know enough by now to know you'll end up on your behind.

You are right 👉 this is pure entertainment. Did I forget to enlighten anyone to my delight at Hillary Clinton seriously silly folly.  Bernie sanders is now poised to win Iowa and newhampshire. His polls rise and hers falls.  Continuing to fall every single month.  The donald is a yawner to me. Too many pubs on this block at the moment. 17? 

So. I just buttered some more popcorn. Salt. Lol and I am enjoying watching partisan judges, inspectors general, Obama's doj, and the extremely partisan FBI get to the bottom of her b.s.   lmao.

So, ah yip, its enjoyable.

2
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 30, 2015, 09:28:46 PM »
I understand what you THINK you are trying to get it.
But it all rides on her DOING it. And then them being able to PROVE it.
Where you THERE? Do you know all the rules of admissible evidence?
Did you even finish 1L yet??

Her emails, her missing emails discovered in blumenthals evidenced emails,her deleted emails.  Which we call proof.  The 2 inspector generals discovery of highly classified info in her emails.
The law 18 USC 793 e f.

So, my friend, upon initial examination there IS sufficient corroborating evidence  which appears to exist to support a case?  And guess what? A prosecutor is examining how this will be played out--the prosecutor took out a highly decorated General.  Dum da dum dum.

Percipio percepi perceptum.  ;)
inferences are not convictions.

I am not saying that a jury couldn't (in theory) decide that was enough to be circumstantial evidence and convict on it, but that is all dependent on it even going to trial (it most likely won't-learn about how politics work) and even then, even if convicted, your Nixon comparison is horrible since he was never convicted and left of his own free will. Bill was convicted, rode out his term, and would have been re-elected again but for term limits.

I know you THINK you are smart, but everything you post just keeps showing more and more how you only think so.

And stop female private part footing around it, you complete 1L yet or not??

Yawn,

Pardon, but I know nixon wasn't tried nor convicted. Not the point, either.  But he could have been put on trial.

Vos sumo non intelligere.

3
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 29, 2015, 02:07:49 PM »
I understand what you THINK you are trying to get it.
But it all rides on her DOING it. And then them being able to PROVE it.
Where you THERE? Do you know all the rules of admissible evidence?
Did you even finish 1L yet??

Her emails, her missing emails discovered in blumenthals evidenced emails,her deleted emails.  Which we call proof.  The 2 inspector generals discovery of highly classified info in her emails.
The law 18 USC 793 e f.

So, my friend, upon initial examination there IS sufficient corroborating evidence  which appears to exist to support a case?  And guess what? A prosecutor is examining how this will be played out--the prosecutor took out a highly decorated General.  Dum da dum dum.

Percipio percepi perceptum.  ;)

4
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 28, 2015, 11:12:50 PM »
Cin seems to have "should" confused with "will"

I remember a kid I grew up with telling me once when another kid threatened to kill him "He CANT do that" "what?" "He'd go to jail, so he CAN"T, this isn't some movie, this is REAL LIFE, get a clue!!!!"  (I almost felt the need to pop popcorn and get a rain coat and goggles to sit in the front row for the show)

The kid lived, and no doubt thought that "proof" of his theory, but it blows my mind to this day. Prison is filled with murderers but Ted Kennedy wasn't sharing a cell with anyone of them. Nor will Hillary.

Kids make all kinds of promises they can't keep.  You are right about real life. FBI on your ass is as real as it gets.
The entire point of my post went right over your head
as does the concept of the FBI and what their investigation actually is and what it means. Honestly, did you even take 1L yet? Do you have any clue what due process is or how it works? At all??

Based on the plain language of the federal statute hillary clinton committed a crime, ok?  On the basis of known facts she violated the law, understand? Hillary clinton was "gathering, transmitting and/or losing defense information"  She did this knowingly and actively utilizing her personal email and personal server.  You can review it under  u.s. code 793 check out e. and f. 


If I don't write in Latin can you still grasp some comprehension or are you just an insecure troll?

perhaps I was a tad facetious, regarding your little kid story, so sorry.

5
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 28, 2015, 05:36:20 PM »
But, fwiw, I neither know, nor care, if Clinton is telling the truth, or did something wrong.

You seem to place great valence on certain issues, no doubt influenced by your priors. I could care less. Clinton is not my preferred candidate. I just make Bayesian predictions. That's why I still think that Clinton will be the Democratic nominee - not because I support her, but because I know that Sander and O'Malley will never win the primaries, and no one else has (yet) announced their candidacy, and the Clinton, to date, has gone far past anyone else in the invisible primary. Also? Most voters aren't paying attention right now, so while you might care deeply, unless something real develops (which is unlikely) this will just be considered more partisan smoke- people who don't like her will continue to not like her, people who do like her will think it's a partisan witchhunt, and people in the middle (all three of them) won't be able to tease out the details a year from now.

Based upon what I know, I find it exceptionally unlikely that this will amount to anything. In addition, you have misinterpreted the facts to date (IMO). That doesn't mean you can't be right. Anything can happen. Maybe there will be some smoking gun. Maybe the constant "drip drip" of revelation will erode Clinton's support and cause her to drop out of the race. But I doubt it- and I find wagers tend to clarify matters.
Loki, you know how much I HATE the idea the agreeing with you, even remotely, on anything, but also factor in that this guy already claims to not only know what WILL happen in the future but what DID happen in the past. He was there I guess??? So much for due process. A Republican said she did it. She must have done it.


Lol if a Republican said Clinton did it then she did it?  Really? What if 2 of Obama's inspectors general said she did it then referred it to the FBI?  Then the FBI has to investigate it and finds 18 USC 793 and maybe 1943 has been broken? 

Can we assume on prima facie that Hillary Clinton might have commuted a felony or the FBI is on a partisan witchunt?

Because shucks, golly gee those 'publicans are so powerful they got Obama, his inspectors general and the FBI doing the bidding. 

And btw Hillary is going through due process right now.  Lets see if it ends up being a felony .  She's probably clean like bill Cosby.  Or was his due process squashed like Clinton?

Just sayin. 
Perhaps I'm jumping the gun but what the hell. Clinton is toast, like Nixon was toast.

6
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 28, 2015, 05:23:24 PM »
Cin seems to have "should" confused with "will"

I remember a kid I grew up with telling me once when another kid threatened to kill him "He CANT do that" "what?" "He'd go to jail, so he CAN"T, this isn't some movie, this is REAL LIFE, get a clue!!!!"  (I almost felt the need to pop popcorn and get a rain coat and goggles to sit in the front row for the show)

The kid lived, and no doubt thought that "proof" of his theory, but it blows my mind to this day. Prison is filled with murderers but Ted Kennedy wasn't sharing a cell with anyone of them. Nor will Hillary.

Kids make all kinds of promises they can't keep.  You are right about real life. FBI on your ass is as real as it gets.

7
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 28, 2015, 05:18:46 PM »
Lok,

I'm not wagering anything (I dont think that would be fair to you) but the details of the wager sound interesting.

You do at least acknowledge that basically anything can happen. Perhaps the world will end tomorrow, as we know it.  You even NOW recognize that she could be prosecuted. Good.

Look, Lok---this is already a prima facie case.  This is already out of the barn simply on the sheer facts of the case. 

Whether you want to recognize that this is historically significant it is popcorn popping ready made and enjoyable, prima facie enjoyable.

And it will come down to 18usc 793.

I dont think your belief that the new York times debunking this criminal case holds water. Because the FBI has confirmed illegal activity with regard to Hillary Clinton's government correspondence.

Remember the Republican establishment was going ahead full steam until the FBI concluded its " security investigations" of Richard Nixon.  You should see what those odds that he would win again.  2 to 1.

Like you say Clinton is a sure thing to lock down the nomination right up until she isn't. ;)

Such fun, lok right?  More fun than the Donald's antics because this stuff matters right now.  The Donald's gonna be around for a while.  Clinton's time is nigh.

I love the banter, man.




8
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 25, 2015, 03:49:11 PM »
"Nor will it."

This is what makes no sense.  Mishandling of classified info shouldn't be difficult to grasp; we are just waiting to see in what manner this is prosecuted.  Lets see what the FBI has to say when its done with its investigation.  I guess loki, you already know what they will find.  Amazing.

John Deutsch and sandy Berger compromised classified emails and were just as sloppy as Clinton.  Their cases began with an FBI investigation. The similarities particularly of the former with Clinton's situation are remarkable.

Neither though, had their own unprotected home server.

I guess I dont understand why you don't even see the possibility that Clinton mishandled classified info. Which is a serious crime.  If you could explain why you are so sure she did nothing illegal I think it would explain your point. Do you just feel that she is telling the truth? Help me out.

You must have thought it was strange when they began their investigation since Clinton did nothing wrong.

9
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 25, 2015, 01:04:17 AM »
Older irish american from pennsylvania and mercurial did I say older carrying on the Obama legacy.
Hillary clinton representing the older Scranton, pennsylvania incompetent yet foreboding a pasture of an entitlement democratic establishment sheep herder straight out of Austin powers. Or some early nineties soviet tank inspector.
Then the extremely older Jewish American New Yorker, Bernie sanders who is carrying the young and old super expanding progressive movement on his back to sell out crowds.  He is the income inequality populist.

We got straight up strange fracture.

Or will hillary become the champion of the Obama legacy and Biden carries the working class vote? Who is to tell at this point?

Republican clowns how group is actually greater than typical with one pt Barnum running.
Oh yeah and the diversity of the large group. Not homogenous as dem dems.

10
News Discussion / Re: POTUS
« on: August 25, 2015, 12:53:52 AM »
Oh jeez. Bridgegate Loki, fugedahbatit.  That was much ado about a traffic jam. Nothing like the belt parkway daily grind anyway.  This was about the support people screwing up and getting caught.  Federal crime ok. But not classified info.

I'm telling ya, it's gold. Check  out the usc798 & 1924.  These are about highly classified info mishandling.  You cannot say it isn't fun to watch this pan out. Ok I get it.   Trump is not as compelling at this stage of the game at least for me.   I've watched Bernie sanders smoke clinton in a state she carried.
 and at this point it's more interesting to watch this nixonesque train wreck.

Oh yeah, a sharpening of a bet with uncle joe ready to jump in the race. Maybe.

I think we see who Barak Obama gets behind is your nominee. 8)



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5