|
when you think about it, the law is imaginary and lawyers don't exist, so really hasn't Graham been disbarred already?
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 01:38 |
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:when you think about it, the law is imaginary and lawyers don't exist, so really hasn't Graham been disbarred already? [yelling at a bailiff]: YOU WILL NOT MANUFACTURE CONSENT ON ME SIR
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:19
|
|
|
The first thing we do, let's disbar all the lawyers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:20
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:They do, but only when it serves them. Then they don't. And this has been their playbook for a long time. It's just that their mask keeps slipping and they're not bothering to fix it. You are off your rocker. The mask slipped and whatever charm you had to some ITT is gone. Now you fancy yourself some sort of activist Svengali? What exactly do you base this nonsense on? Oh sure, we could disbar Lindsay if we weren't so dang lazy, eh? What a crock of poo poo. Go write about it on your blog, will ya?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:32
|
|
|
eke out posted:No it's literally not possible. I mean, if he's talking direct action you could presumably put a gun to the head of some functionary to get a complaint prosecuted. Seems excessive though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:32
|
|
|
Lemming posted:"If you succeed in a violent revolution you can do anything you want" is not an intelligent answer to "can he be disbarred for this," you just answered confidently about something you know nothing about which is dumb. “You either die a Prester Jane, or you post long enough to see yourself become an Ice Phisherman” -Harvey Dent
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:38
|
|
|
^ OuchRandomBlue posted:Catholicism, known for it's wealth equality and not hoarding at all. Well, to be fair, they only had two options, hoard wealth or take back the holy lands. They failed at one so defaulted to the other SocketWrench fucked around with this message at 01:49 on Dec 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:42
|
|
|
eke out posted:No it's literally not possible. how about... now
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:44
|
|
|
I have no idea what I am advocating or the factual accuracy of the means and methods, but I'm going to convince ya'll through cold hard word count. Stay tuned to this post!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:45
|
|
|
So is anyone in the DCCC going to get fired for literally getting a Republican elected?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:49
|
|
|
There is literally no way the South Carolina Bar would disbar Lindsey Graham. They didn't disbar Jean Toal even after the second time she left the scene of an DUI accident she caused, and she was just a SC Supreme Court justice.Ice Phisherman posted:
This sentence doesn't even make grammatical sense unless you're using "disbarment" as a euphemism for . . .um, something more violent? Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Dec 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:There is literally no way the South Carolina Bar would disbar Lindsey Graham. They didn't disbar Jean Toal even after the second time she left the scene of an DUI accident she caused, and she was just a SC Supreme Court justice. Especially for something as nebulous as what Graham is doing. It's really, really hard to get disbarred. And even if you did get Graham disbarred, what's the point? He'll be in the Senate til he dies whether he is part of the bar or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:54
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:So is anyone in the DCCC going to get fired for literally getting a Republican elected? lol Well at least if the polls are to be believed he was getting primaried by the Dems next year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MalcolmNance/status/1205735191823695875?s=20
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
SchrodingersCat posted:Especially for something as nebulous as what Graham is doing. Don't you see though? It would MEAN.... something. That'll show 'em!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
Article I, Section 5, of the United States Constitution provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member." Since 1789, the Senate has expelled only fifteen of its entire membership. Of that number, fourteen were charged with support of the Confederacy during the Civil War. In several other cases, the Senate considered expulsion proceedings but either found the member not guilty or failed to act before the member left office. In those cases, corruption was the primary cause of complaint. In the entire course of the Senate's history, only four members have been convicted of crimes. They were: Joseph R. Burton (1905), John Hipple Mitchell (1905), Truman H. Newberry (1920), and Harrison Williams (1981). Newberry's conviction was later overturned. Mitchell died. Burton, Newberry, and Williams resigned before the Senate could act on their expulsion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:04
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:What on earth are you even trying to argue here? You're meandering all over the place. I'll keep my responses short then because apparently people hate it when I type at length. I'm pretty sure that we're hurtling towards a political reorganization. Political legitimacy is low and people largely don't agree on the current order largely due to a crisis in capitalism which is causing massive suffering due to poverty. A nation is more than borders. It's about faith and identity. Not a religious faith, but still, you need to believe in a thing like a nation for it to be real. For what happens when a group of people collectively stop believing in a nation, I'd point to the old USSR which largely collapsed because people didn't believe it was worth believing in. It could have kept limping along for a few more decades before it collapsed due to say, an economic crisis. It didn't. The coup that would have kept it alive failed and then no one rose up to defend the old order. It died and ushered in the Russian Federation that we know today. The huge economic crisis did come, but it came after the fall. So if you wanted to know how someone is disbarred in South Carolina, you could read over this garbage. https://www.gregoryforman.com/publications/ethics-opinions-every-south-carolina-attorney-should-know-march-2011/ Which is long and boring and intentionally byzantine, full of empty ritual that many people don't believe in anymore outside of a select few in their profession. What I'm trying to talk about is a larger point that basically everything is up for grabs. Legal norms are not only being challenged, but ignored. And not just on the right. People are actually talking about stacking the supreme court and that hasn't been anything but a fringe argument since FDR. We're in turmoil like we were say, back in the 1970's pre-Reagan or the 1930's during the Great Depression or pre-civil war. That we're on the cusp of reorganizing, but that reorganization is being intentionally held back. Partially by capital, who benefit heavily from the current social order and are so keen on it not changing that they'd let the planet cook us to death. But also by how we've been socialized. We think that political action is voting. That action has some meaning, but there are counters for that. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, corporate news and now social media. And even then we think that merely being informed is being active and not a trap, because all of this knowing and a lack of action doesn't really do much but make us miserable and eventually check out. I'm saying that getting a feel for collective action is the actual power and one that almost anyone can wield if they can find enough people who will agree with them. It's agreement by average people that this is actually how things run and then challenging the powers that be until they crack and give in to basically whatever you're demanding or decide to rip off the mask and default to violence. There are half a dozen hot spots all over the world that are having open revolts against their government right now. Jack that up way, way higher for non-revolutionary political activism. And then I think, well, why not here? Not revolutionary action, that would be a nightmare. But activist action. Why believe in a political order that serves the few? Why not oppose it? VH4Ever posted:You are off your rocker. The mask slipped and whatever charm you had to some ITT is gone. Now you fancy yourself some sort of activist Svengali? What exactly do you base this nonsense on? Oh sure, we could disbar Lindsay if we weren't so dang lazy, eh? What a crock of poo poo. You really seem to like labels as a shorthand for when you want to compare me to someone vile. I don't think about it as laziness. Many people are stressed out by work and can't afford to commit time to activism. Many are soothed to sleep or a lack of political consciousness through colonizing efforts by the media. Many are just discouraged. And for those who awaken to their political ideology, who refuse to be soothed and gain political consciousness, who want to do something, the police are there to deter any activism. It's not laziness. Activism is hard, especially if you credibly challenge power. I'm saying there's power out there. Not voting power, but the power of direct action. We're in turmoil and things are up for grabs. I'm pretty sure that we're due for a political reorganization if not this presidential election, then the next. That means that if you want to make the world better in the way of your choosing and you have the time and the energy then you can plug into already existing activist organizations and fight for a better tomorrow. I'm not some Svengali-like mesmerist, trying to lull you to sleep. I'd rather encourage activism, for you to go join a political organization that suits your tastes beyond parties, which seem to please no one. I won't say which group you should join, but if it's something non-violent and left-wing would be pretty cool. You'd be surprised at how much a group of dedicated activists can change. And even if you fail, you have still tried and can try again, more experienced than before. Grape posted:"i dont think racism bad people and greedy bad people can do both bads at once, maybe they could but it be very hard!" Nah, it's definitely not that. It's more than the leadership commits to one and the other becomes less important. Racists still grift. Grifters can still be racist. But if you try to equally prioritize both, you fail. Gathering money requires a different kind of rhetoric than spreading hatred. Hatred requires a different kind of rheotric than gathering money, though this is becoming less and less true as we have what's called wingnut welfare, but the amounts are almost always smaller than a successful prosperity gospel grifter. If you do both, your rhetoric becomes disjointed and confusing. I remember an old pastor I used to listen to who turned atheist and talked about his past. He ran an evangelical church in Texas. Now even though he has a home owned by the church, he still has to get gas and food and keep the lights on. So when he was running low at the end of the month, he'd do something he called "pumping the gas". Which put simply, he'd gaybash and this would amp up the crowd and they'd donate more heavily. The fact that he had to do this at all means that he's not using the prosperity gospel. The prosperity gospel uses messages of hope like one might buy a lottery ticket except no one but the pastor actually wins. The rhetoric isn't hateful, or at least not overtly. And using hate will harm their ability to grift. You can be a poor hate preacher. You can be a rich prosperity gospel preacher. The odds of you being a rich hate preacher in the age of the prosperity gospel is actually really low. You have to be charismatic in the extreme and then you're the next Billy Graham. Not everyone is Billy Graham though. If you pump the gas too much, people get used to it and donations drop off. Then you have to go on to the new thing to generate outrage to get money. But that money will never fill the coffers like a successful prosperity gospel grifter will. Again, it's basically the religious equivalent of a lotto ticket, often called "seed money".
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
SchrodingersCat posted:Especially for something as nebulous as what Graham is doing. Yup. I mean, to be fair, at this point openly supporting Trump should be grounds for disbarment as participation in an ongoing criminal scheme. But even there, that's like Guiliani not Lindsey. Lindsey is just a sycophant not a participant. They don't respect him enough to let him sit at the big boy table.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:I'll keep my responses short then because apparently people hate it when I type at length. Now can we see the long version of this post?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:10
|
|
|
For the record I always thought long effort posts sucked rear end even when they weren’t written by a cryptoracist
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
Lindsey graham doesn’t even have an active bar card lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:18
|
|
|
Never Trumpers https://twitter.com/exjon/status/1205991060142346240
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:20
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:There is literally no way the South Carolina Bar would disbar Lindsey Graham. They didn't disbar Jean Toal even after the second time she left the scene of an DUI accident she caused, and she was just a SC Supreme Court justice. No, I don't advocate for violence. I do not want violent action. I do advocate for self-defense if someone is literally being attacked in a violent way, but only then. Violence spreads misery and generally leads to more violence. But in terms of tactics it's also less effective. Non-violent activism works more frequently than violent activism and generally yields better results. To use violence for no reason is to sabotage yourself and undermine your message. As a former South Carolinian who was briefly active in state politics, I'm well aware of just how corrupt the legislatures are. I'm also intensely aware that many of them have low level grifts going on, sometimes for decades. And if they keep it low key they can get away with it. If they get greedy or offend power, they get ousted. The pigs get fat and the hogs get slaughtered. That's not a SC thing, that's an everywhere thing, though we seemed to have a tolerance for it. You say it isn't possible. I say yes it is. This isn't like the secret where you can believe a thing true as if by magic. It's about applying political pressure through solidarity. SC legislature could be cleaned up. You could make someone pay a price for acting like they are above the law or even pulling some dumbass stunt, like when Ralph Normal decided to play cowboy with a loaded gun in front of an audience of donors. That if the political establishment won't hold people to a higher standard, or any standard, demanding that standards get met through direct, non-violent action can work with enough solidarity. Ice Phisherman fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Dec 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:20
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:Lindsey graham doesn’t even have an active bar card lol But he grew up in one?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:20
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:
Political change in SC is possible but getting Lindsey Graham disbarred is a theoretical endpoint of a very long road and that road hasn't even been built yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
It's also loving pointless because the reason Graham has power is that he is a Senator and getting him disbarred wouldn't take away any of his power as a Senator, it would at worst be personally embarrassing. We have ample evidence that Graham does not have the capacity to feel shame so trying to embarrass him isn't going to work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
VH4Ever posted:Don't you see though? It would MEAN.... something. That'll show 'em!! I mean, if you could actually get it done it would be a pretty good way of telling Graham what a worthless codpiece of a human being he is. The bar really only exists in the modern day and age as a entryway into law practice, not as a meaningful or practical way of regulating and policing lawyers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1206012960285642753?s=19
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:27
|
|
|
SchrodingersCat posted:I mean, if you could actually get it done it would be a pretty good way of telling Graham what a worthless codpiece of a human being he is. The bar really only exists in the modern day and age as a entryway into law practice, not as a meaningful or practical way of regulating and policing lawyers. oh, that's not true Plenty of attorneys are disciplined and monitored by the bar and many are disbarred and a lot of unethical conduct is prevented by that deterrence It just doesn't deter anyone who has political power already
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
I hope this rear end gets voted the gently caress out in 2020 https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/14/politics/jeff-van-drew-democrat-switch-parties-republican-trump-impeachment/index.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:oh, that's not true Yes, monitored, but not disbarred. And most lawyers who get suspended just hop to another state. In the medical fields, if you lose your license in one state they immediately communicate the information to every state licensing board, and then you (most likely) lose the ability to practice in every other state, and most/all other states you are licensed in will also revoke your license. And like you said, to someone who is an elected official it's a minor irritation at best.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:33
|
|
|
RandomBlue posted:Now can we see the long version of this post? I think that we have different versions of what is long and what is not. I'm largely tired of zero content shitposts and the RSS feed that serves as a kind of ongoing outrage porn. If I wanted that, I could go to reddit and gaze into the abyss. Hieronymous Alloy posted:Political change in SC is possible but getting Lindsey Graham disbarred is a theoretical endpoint of a very long road and that road hasn't even been built yet. I agree. I think that you could get it packaged in a larger anti-corruption thrust though which would punish him. If not disbar him, which I think is unlikely, then punish him for say, working for the Russians. What I think is more possible, though still unlikely, would be a democratic challenge from Jaime Harrison (who's running D for senate) by mobilizing the African-American and Latino vote. And before you say that's not possible, remember how Roy Moore lost in Alabama. If there's a Sanders win, I think it would be possible when a few percentage points of republicans break for Bernie. It would require snagging some republican votes. The Solid South isn't so solid as it used to be. South Carolina has a long history of being really lazy about voting where they vote in the primaries and people just sort of maybe show up to vote republican in the main because their district is assumed to be safe. Especially for the older people. Archie Parnell for example got within three percentage points in 2017 during the runoff against Ralph Norman, and Parnell was a nobody. The South is changing. Slowly, yes, and they hate it, but it is changing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:34
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/nytimesarts/status/1205867849568403457?s=21 Hallmark channel base must be a terrifying group of people
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:40
|
|
|
bobjr posted:https://twitter.com/nytimesarts/status/1205867849568403457?s=21 You know it's the most sheltered of white fright types.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
Some "short" response this was. And for all these words I still haven't the slightest idea what it's all for. Direct action is important! Wow, really? You know I never, ever heard that before you spent 1500 words telling me about it. Literally never before. It's so powerful we can actually accomplish rarely performed, esoteric bureaucratic punishments like disbarment. If only we'd realize our own power. Just throwing a ton of words back at us isn't proving any of the ham-fisted points you're trying (and failing) to make. But I am glad to see the thread is tired of your act, all the people blowing smoke up your rear end before about what a wise sage you supposedly were got under my skin. Wordiness does not a genius make, folks! This post is too long already.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
VH4Ever posted:Some "short" response this was. And for all these words I still haven't the slightest idea what it's all for. Direct action is important! Wow, really? You know I never, ever heard that before you spent 1500 words telling me about it. Literally never before. It's so powerful we can actually accomplish rarely performed, esoteric bureaucratic punishments like disbarment. If only we'd realize our own power. So I was going to respond in a different way, but then my eyes drifted to the left and saw your George Carlin Button. Do you really believe that the public sucks, gently caress hope? And if so, why are you interested in politics? I ask because I hope that we're all getting past our nothing matters phase. Ice Phisherman fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Dec 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:50
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:So I was going to respond in a different way, but then my eyes drifted to the left and saw your George Carlin Button. Well I don't have it there for NO reason if that's what you mean. Sort of depends on the day, honestly. Today, after seeing the UK election results? Yeah maybe I mostly do believe that right now. Speaking generally and broadly, especially lately, the public does suck. But it continually has the ability to surprise. What gets me up in the morning is hoping on some level that it does. Edit But being prepared constantly to be disappointed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:53
|
|
|
bobjr posted:https://twitter.com/nytimesarts/status/1205867849568403457?s=21 It's Karens wall to wall.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
His attempted burns are so badddd
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 01:38 |
|
|
Watching Greatest Events of WWII in Color and it flat out points out how Goebbels knew people would care about the truth but rather a more convenient and easy lie and it had to be repeated over and over until people succumbed to it and took it. Which is pretty much how Trump and the right wing operate. Both in the way Trump keeps repeating his phrases and how people become drained and used to the crime and corruption and expect it from them so it doesn’t shock them but they are somewhat numb to it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:59
|
|
