It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I am just too cynical.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: dragonridr
I think you are right there. I remember hearing him call into Limbaugh's show and Limbaugh asked him why he spent so much time battling accusations instead of staying on message, and his answer was that he wasn't accustomed to letting blatant lies go by like that without answering them.
So if that's the case, and this is a case where he is being pulled into a lawsuit over essentially a paid endorsement as though he had something to do with the day-to-day running of the business, then I can well see him not letting it go. He would feel like he had done nothing wrong and expedience would be an admission that he had done something he shouldn't have.
originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Whatever we're in for I would bet they aren't just rolling over.
originally posted by: diggindirt
Wow! I thought I was probably the most distrusting of political personages of any who live today.
While I don't doubt that the Clinton Cabal is furiously scheming, I just can't see how they could bribe or threaten enough electors to change the results of the election.
Do you not realize that the electors are the most partisan of the parties? The phrase "die hard" comes to mind because the people chosen for those positions are willing to die hard to uphold the party. Take a look at the names of the people chosen as electors for your state. These people are picked for their party loyalty. They are not in positions of power other than this one time. I honestly don't think even the Clintons could find enough dirt on them to threaten enough of them to make a difference.
Unless the Republican leadership were in on this plot, I simply can't see it happening. It would make an excellent tv plot but as a practical matter, I think it is the least of our worries. It doesn't even give my tinfoil hat a tingle. I think the Republicans have the best of all possible worlds with the entire legislature, the Supreme Court and the White House in their control. With Ginsburg leaving the US, the Donald will have to find two Supreme Court justices quickly. May the Creator guide his choices.
originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: MotherMayEye
So you actually believe they would give up the chance to appoint justices to the Supreme Court?
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: MotherMayEye
So you actually believe they would give up the chance to appoint justices to the Supreme Court?
Wait...let's start here...who are we talking about giving up the chance to appoint Supreme Court justices?
Republicans? Yes, I think they really would do whatever is necessary to work with Democrats, behind our backs, to slowly set up crises and *solutions* in elections that help the two parties hijack our election systems.
They would benefit from it.
Obstructionism and the two party divide are useful..and also profitable in money and power to those leading this federal government.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: BubbaJoe
Don't know what you are getting at. I'm just kind of pissed that Senate Democrats didn't force a vote on Garland. Would have been a fight they probably won, but they didn't fight for it. I think it was worth fighting for.
But it was probably so much better to leave his seat vacant and try to extort the women's vote for Hillary with it.
Not willing to blame one party on this, sorry. Democrats put up no fight to try to force a vote.
originally posted by: BubbaJoe
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: BubbaJoe
Don't know what you are getting at. I'm just kind of pissed that Senate Democrats didn't force a vote on Garland. Would have been a fight they probably won, but they didn't fight for it. I think it was worth fighting for.
But it was probably so much better to leave his seat vacant and try to extort the women's vote for Hillary with it.
Not willing to blame one party on this, sorry. Democrats put up no fight to try to force a vote.
You do realize while in the minority, the democrats in the senate cannot do anything.
ETA: amazing how this political thing works, you must keep up, or you fall behind.
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
It's no secret that I suspect Trump is a plant
originally posted by: BrianFlanders
originally posted by: MotherMayEye
It's no secret that I suspect Trump is a plant
I would say that's a really good guess. But I suspect FAR more than that. I suspect the whole thing is a circus and every single one of these clowns is in on it. While we're busy out here squabbling over which team won the last round, they're really all on the same team. Every. Single. Time.
originally posted by: diggindirt
You may be right but I still doubt they will give up one whole branch of government when they have the opportunity to control all three.
What people seem to be failing to consider here is the electors themselves. They are appointed by the party faithful. They aren't politicians, just hard workers for the party. At this point it would take turning nearly 40 people away from their party dedication. I have far more faith in the people who aren't politicians than to think that they could be turned to vote against their party.
originally posted by: diggindirt
Again, I think this issue is a red herring to keep us chasing our tails while they have something entirely different up their crooked sleeves.
originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: MotherMayEye
Isn't the vote December 19th?
Judge recommended parties settle
Just hours after Trump met with President Barack Obama in the Oval Office on Thursday, lawyers for the President-elect appeared in court to prepare for the upcoming trial on Trump University.
US District Judge Gonzalo Curiel took a strong stance Thursday and recommended the parties settle the case to avoid the immense complications of a President-elect facing trial while preparing to take office.
"It would be wise for the plaintiffs, for defendants to look closely at trying to resolve this case given all else that is involved," Curiel said.
But Trump has previously refused to settle the cases and has defended the quality of the real estate program, which enrolled about 10,000 students from 2005 until it closed in 2010.
"This is a case I could have settled very easily, but I don't settle cases very easily when I'm right," Trump said in March.
However, Trump's top lawyer on the case, Daniel Petrocelli, alluded to a possible settlement Thursday, noting the unique responsibilities his client now carries.