Forum posts made by principessa

Netflix has announced that the production of the final season of "House of Cards" is now suspended indefinitely. As well, an award Spacey was to receive from the Emmys - the Founders' Award - has now been rescinded.

Back to the original question.

"This is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end, but it is perhaps the end of the beginning." Winston Churchill

The first indictments are public now as well as a plea deal. Mueller and his team have been working methodically layer by layer to find out where the collusion was and by whom. This is a good start and I have no doubt that Trump and his team are nervous tonight. It is the first time since Watergate that a campaign chair has been indicted. I wonder if Don Jr. and Jared Kushner will be next. I think that Don Jr. is Trump's Fredo, the dumb weak link.

This is not just about money and misinformation and collusion with Russia. There is another thread regarding obstruction of justice. Both undermine American democracy by efforts to skew an election and pervert the rule of law respectively. No one is above the law, including Donald Trump.

If the US survived Watergate and Richard Nixon, it can survive this. Trump will eventually be impeached or retire early to spend more time with his family and play golf unless of course he is charged with obstruction of justice.

We just have to be patient. Another quote: The mills of the gods grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine.

I hope that everyone will focus their attention locally to defeat vulnerable GOP candidates. What Sprite described is beyond anything even conservatives have ever contemplated doing. Human rights and civil liberties are the basic elements of western democracies and they are in danger under this administration, more so if Pence replaces Trump.

It's a valid point, Trinks. I should have been more clear. When I say I'm opposed to those "in-the-know" doing nothing, I don't necessarily mean they should go to the police or name any victim. They could do something though. Like warn other actresses, refuse to do work for his studio, privately speak to directors and tell them they should be on the lookout for the safety of their actresses. Let directors know, you've been told there is a potential problem, if you intervene between HW and some actress and something happens, you're just as culpable.

Each offense is different, how it should be dealt with is different. There's the well being of the victim, to be sure. All I know is, doing nothing isn't the right thing. Decades of doing nothing has left us with loooong list of people who have been victimized.

edit... might I add.. Kevin Spacey's "apology" for attempted molestation of a 14 year old is utterly horrendous. For decades, gay men were viewed as pedophiles and perverts, by piggy-backing his apology with coming out, he reaffirmed those stupid stereotypes. What an asshole.

Excusing his behaviour because he was drunk only adds to my disgust. And I have to add that there was no necessity for him to announce he is gay. It was not exactly news.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/vckz6EAn30Y?rel=0

I think your response proved my point.




I took your angel away because you did not begin this argument with clean hands. It was you doing the labeling. You called anyone who disagrees with you as much more left, Marxist and Stalinist - the furthest point on the spectrum. Not true. Not appropriate. I tried to compare that to calling right wing GOP supporters white nationalist neo-nazis, but did not label you that way. You also implied that Canadian commenters who disagree with Trump are the Canadian antifa. Again a gross exaggeration. The person name calling here is you.

What is going on on US campuses may be related to the poisonous atmosphere of US politics. However, do not assume that we all agree with the suppression of free speech. In any event that is an entirely different discussion.

As to getting away from Seax's topic, you did that with your post, immediately following his.

If it bothers you that you get pushback on your politics and support for Trump, you are probably in the wrong place. I am certain that there are right leaning sites and fora where you can have your opinions echoed to your satisfaction.

I did not prove your point. I identified your skewed views of those who oppose you. You proved your own point by not being respectful or rational. The only hateful words I read were yours.

Bloody lovely!

Washington, DC has never had any shortage of scumbags. But some carry on as if Trump is the first they've ever seen. Any attempt to point out that they're wrong becomes an attempt to divert attention to Hillary. You do realize that Hillary was no Mother Teresa, right?

I do. Even Mother Teresa was no paragon of virtue. However, countering every charge against Trump/Clinton with one against the opposite party does not make the charges any less or more believable or true. Charges against either should be judged based on the evidence presented and the proved veracity of that evidence.

You should post this in the Spa. Impossible to get a rational discussion in this place. It's full of Marxists who act like Stalinists, all gathered under the umbrella of Democrat. Hope you have your crash hat on for the arrival of the Canadian antifa, fully masked. Brave post Seax!


https://upload.lushstories.com/1165536983-forum free speech anti.jpg

You're right. No rational debate is possible in an arena where anyone who does not agree with Trump is labelled a Marxist/Stalinist. That is as appropriate as labeling his supporters as white nationalist neo-nazis. I believe both are wrong. I guess I am member of the Canadian antifa in your view. Also wrong. Your posted cartoon is ironic given what you said. This is how politics gets hateful rather than being a meaningful and respectful debate.

Maybe we should just do away with elections and debate, rip up the Constitution, and crown Trump. He could then rule by fiat and make all your dreams come true. Who needs democracy and free speech anyhow if you have to tolerate alternate points of view?

This thread is so interesting. It demonstrates that there is no accusation against either President Obama or Hillary Clinton that a segment of the electorate will not unquestionably believe. In an era where truth is fake news and lies are alternate facts, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

I am reminded of something that the late Senator Patrick Moynihan said, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."

I trust that Robert Mueller, a man of impeccable integrity, will get to the truth, layer by layer, as high up as it goes.

In the law, one usually starts with a crime and works the trails of breadcrumbs till they lead to one or more suspects. Here we're seeing that turned on it's head. Mueller has a list of suspects, and is following the breadcrumbs hoping to find a crime.

But what happens if one or more of the trails he's following lead to a certain residence in Chappaqua, NY? Are we going to play fair and demand a hanging after a fair trial? Or does the resident of that house get a pass because it's old news?

This is the standard play of Trump supporters: in the face of any allegation against him or his team divert attention to Hillary Clinton. Adele has provided a response already to that canard.

Nobody is demanding a hanging. Just that the justice system do its job and that Congress does the same with impeachment proceedings if there is sufficient evidence to go forward.

Speculation is rampant as to who it might be... mannafort and flynn are certainly good guesses, and it would surely be amazing if it were kushner or little trump. However, it is just as likely to be someone less obvious like flynn's son, or carter page, or one of the lawyers entangled in the mess, or even some minor player we never heard of. Mueller is more likely to start with the smaller fish and work his way up the line (which also sends a message to some of those further up the food chain he is getting closer). Some of the bigger fish could end up have multiple charges brought against them, and one line of thought is that Mueller would want to have all the info tied up so a whole list of charges could be filed at once, rather than piecemeal.

In view of the fact that new information continues to surface nearly daily. it is still too early to assume he is ready to start hitting the higher ups just yet. UNLESS, one of them has info and he knows it, and is using the indictment as a bargaining tool to get the info. Also, there is a chance that the indictment will not be unsealed and served on Monday, but at a later date.

I agree with you. It is too early for it to be high on the food chain. Mueller and his team are building cases from the outer rim of the circle inward, slowly and methodically, and will uncover what actually happened. I would be shocked if there weren't both links and collusion with the Russians on the part of Manafort, Flynn, and others, possibly even Don Jr. and Kushner. Let us remember that information, or in this case disinformation, has value skewing the perceptions of the electorate. It does not have to be money contributed illegally to a campaign. They will follow the Watergate rule and follow the money and see where and to whom it leads.

And if it is on your side of the fence, it would be interesting to see the spin.

As opposed to the constant spin from the WH and their proxies on Fox to divert attention to Hillary Clinton. What will be interesting will be the reaction to the indictments and how far into the WH they reach. There may well be people who plead to lesser charges in exchange for testimony against higher ups. I have no doubt that this leads to the Oval Office.

#IndictmentMonday ..... October 30th, 2017

Can't wait for Monday!!



Me, too. I hope that it is the beginning of the undoing of the Trump administration with criminal indictments against several members of his team, perhaps even a family member, and lay the ground for impeachment against Trump.

Any guesses as to who might be first? I think Manafort or Flynn for financial crimes and their connection to and collusion with the Russians during the election.

Why is this necessary?

I wondered about it not being a response to the previous post, but rather indicating that the poster wanted to sit back and watch the show/fight.

We have had a private discussion about it.

Several people on this thread have attacked me for suggesting that if more victims had come forward, HW might have been stopped earlier. That others who knew couldn't come forward without naming the victim so they stayed quiet too. Does your comment now mean what I said isn't as offensive as you first said it was?

So now you're saying they did the wrong thing by keeping quiet. Which is it?

And to answer your ridiculous question, no, heymoe's post was not ok. his post was more than disgusting yet you posted at me and not him. Interesting.

You may think that you are the center of the universe, but actually not everything is about you.

I was talking about those who were aware and stood by, not his victims. Some have come forward now, like Matt Damon, saying that they regret keeping quiet. Read carefully. I was not contradicting myself. You accuse others of seeing what they want to see rather than reading your posts carefully. Do the same.

I posted a response to heymoe's post separately from yours.

As for your post, I thought you might confront him rather than metaphorically sit back to watch the fight. We all have our own sense of what is important, I guess.

No, that's just too easy. He's a man like me, a homo sapiens sapiens like you and me. But he's just one who seems to lack empathy or control over his basic impulses. He's an ass.


He is a rich and powerful man. He is an entitled bully who has behaved in an obnoxious manner to both men and women over and above the sexual assaults. He has operated in an environment that allowed him to get away with it all until now. There are many actors, producers, directors and writers who were well aware of what he was doing. It is disgraceful that they looked on and said nothing. This has apparently been going on for decades. There is plenty of guilt and shame to go around, especially including those who were powerful enough to be heard if they had outed him.

The Neanderthal is heymoe, the one who posted that ignorant opinion.

think about what happened . --A powerful man granted favors to people he liked . Sorry folks , I consider that to be instinct in the animal kingdom. That has been going on since the dawn of time ! That is called -"the real world". Now, remember , those actresses got what they wanted also. Actually that is a distinct advantage that women have over men . Nothing new here ! lol .
Now, please realize I don't condone it , BUT -----that is the way it is ---INSTINCT.

So, your opinion is that men are hard wired to rape women and assault them sexually, and that women use this to get what they want. Somehow, in your view, being victimized is an advantage for women over men. What planet do you live on? There are myriad ways that this is offensive but I have a feeling that explaining it to you would be a waste of my time. I wonder how you explain this to women in your life.

I would like to see some responses from men here about this assertion.

https://upload.lushstories.com/1996621215-IMG_7466.GIF

Was the preceding post okay with you?

If you get information somewhere other than Fox and Breitbart you will be aware that Trump and his administration are doing. They are not draining the swamp or helping the people who voted for him because of his populist appeal. He and the GOP as always are working for the wealthy and large corporations. This is from the NYTimes:

At his inauguration Mr. Trump said his presidency was about “transferring power from Washington, D.C., and giving it back to you, the American people.” But he and his allies in Congress are transferring power to Wall Street, fossil fuel companies, the chemical industry and other special interests, and are stoking an anti-populist bonfire to incinerate protections for consumers and workers.

On Tuesday night the Senate, with a tiebreaking vote from Vice President Mike Pence, followed the House in voting to overturn a rule that would have allowed consumers to file class-action lawsuits against banks and other financial institutions, rather than be forced to take their disputes to arbitration. The regulation, created after fraud and malfeasance by those businesses financially ruined thousands of Americans and almost wrecked the world economy, joins a series of Obama-era rules that Congress and Mr. Trump have shredded. Meanwhile, they have taken several actions to benefit the well-off at the expense of average Americans.

Health care sabotage.

Mr. Trump signed an executive order allowing insurers to sell skimpy health insurance plans that do not protect people with pre-existing conditions and that will destabilize the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces. He also said he would stop making payments to insurers that were authorized by the 2010 law, which will cause companies to increase premiums, hurting middle-class families. His administration shortened the open enrollment period when people can buy insurance policies for next year, and slashed spending on advertising and outreach efforts.

The administration made it easier for companies to stop providing no-cost birth control to employees if they have religious or moral objections to doing so. It announced that teenage pregnancy prevention grants would end two years early. Congress repealed an Obama-era rule that forbade states to deny family planning funds to Planned Parenthood.

Environmental harm.

Congress overturned a rule restricting the ability of coal companies to dump their mining debris into streams and other waterways, threatening rural communities, forests and wildlife.

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, rejected a staff recommendation to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos, which has been linked to developmental problems in children, and started the process to overturn the Clean Power Plan, the Obama-era proposal to reduce planet-warming emissions from power plants.

Hurting workers.

Congress repealed an Obama-era rule that would have required companies seeking federal contracts of $500,000 or more to disclose and fix serious labor and safety violations. It also struck down an Obama-era rule that would have required employers to keep records of workplace injuries for five years, to make sure employers did not hide such information. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration proposed changes that would weaken a rule intended to limit workers’ exposure to beryllium, an industrial mineral linked to lung damage and estimated to cause about 100 deaths a year.

The Education Department has delayed implementation of an Obama-era rule to ensure that for-profit colleges seeking federal funds were preparing students for good jobs and they made sure students’ debt was not too burdensome.

Even though Republicans often describe themselves as champions of states’ rights, Congress made it harder for states and local governments to create retirement accounts for workers whose employers do not provide 401(k) accounts and pensions.

Making housing less affordable.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development delayed by two years a rule that would help poor people in high-cost areas by changing how the value of housing vouchers is calculated.

Helping big corporations.

Congress repealed a Securities and Exchange Commission rule that sought to expose and limit corruption by requiring oil and mining companies to disclose payments to foreign governments. Under the direction of a Trump appointee, the Federal Communications Commission has eased the cap on how many local TV stations one company can own — and is considering relaxing it even further — helping the conservative broadcaster Sinclair and limiting the diversity of voices on the nation’s airwaves. Congress overturned an F.C.C. rule requiring telecommunications companies to get consumers’ permission before collecting, using and selling personal information.


The House and Senate repealed a regulation that would have barred about 75,000 people suffering from conditions like schizophrenia and psychotic disorders — when such conditions prevent them from managing their own financial affairs — from buying a gun.

Still, Republicans in Congress have yet to achieve some of their grandest dreams, like huge tax cuts for the wealthy, and they are counting on Mr. Trump to deliver. Spoilsports like Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, may fret about the small stuff, like, as he said on the Senate floor on Tuesday, “the threats against principles, freedoms and institutions, the flagrant disregard for truth and decency.” But what’s all that compared to a bonanza for special interests?

Harvey needs to have a talk with this guy. Steps in shit, makes an apology, comes up smelling like a rose.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/arts/leon-wieseltier-magazine-harassment.html

Not exactly. The new magazine he was spearheading will not go forward. His reputation in that industry is tainted now.

I saw an ad on CNN tonight encouraging Trump's impeachment. It is funded by Tom Steyer, a billionaire and Democratic donor. He is spending $10 million on this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXl8vRmLeJk

Don't forget that the standard of proof required in a criminal trial is higher than that in a civil trial. Weinstein does not have to be found guilty of criminal charges for him to be judged appropriately fired from his job. In the United States legal system, there are two standards of proof that must be met before the judge decides who wins a case. Civil courts use a lower standard of “preponderance of evidence”, while criminal courts use a higher standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”.

A wrongful dismissal suit will cover a lot of territory including that there are many allegations of bullying and mistreatment by him over and above the sexual harassment and assault allegations. Many employment contracts have clauses that are broadly interpreted against the employee if, for example, they have brought their employer' standing into disrepute. Of course without knowing the contents of Weinstein's employment contract we can't have an informed opinion, but I would caution against predicting he will merely go on with his life unscathed.

As an aside I want to mention something I heard yesterday in a discussion about sex addiction. Several psychiatrists stated that it is not like alcohol or drug addiction. It is a label used mainly by wealthy, white, middle-aged men as a reason for their unsavoury behaviour. One said that going to camp for a couple of weeks and doing group therapy doesn't end this for Weinstein. It is a kind of sociopathy, where he exerts his power and sees no reason to tell himself "no" when he sees someone or something he wants.

Don't you need more than a petition to impeach a President? Impeach him for what exactly?

I'm just asking a question. There is NO hidden message in my question and I'm not supporting Trump by asking the said question. Just so you know.

The material in the link lays out the authority to impeach and how it would work. The reasons are listed if you click on the red box under "grounds for impeachment".

The most obvious is the conflicts of interest and enriching himself in his office. He has not put his business interests and investments into a blind trust as is required. Having his sons run his business is not even arm's length away from him.

He may well have committed obstruction of justice in connection with his firing of James Comey as he first asked Comey to go easy on Flynn (who later was fired and is under investigation). He stated publicly that he fired Comey to shut down the investigation into Russian interference in the election and the possibility that members of his team and family, himself included, conspired to skew the election in his favour.

He talked about firing AG Sessions for recusing himself from the Russia investigation as he was ethically obliged to do.

There is probably a list of fifty things that could be included in grounds for impeachment given Trump's lies and unethical behaviour and choices. If we look back at Nixon he was going to be impeached for colluding in criminal behaviour to win the election. He resigned rather than go through the process, but the votes were there to impeach him. Illegal and unethical behaviour is not tolerated for a president.

Another thing to be considered is that many people see him as unhinged and out of touch with reality as well as incapable of functioning as president. The 25th Amendment to the Constitution is the mechanism to remove a president unable to fulfill his obligations and responsibilities.

Most likely is that the Mueller investigation will uncover evidence that Trump himself was involved in Russian collusion or ordered others to do it on his behalf. Mueller has a talented team of lawyers who have specialized in many areas of white collar and financial crimes. Mueller is known as a man of great integrity.

You can say thank you now.

Simmie, the link isn't working. I concur, though. Impeach Trump, but then we'd have Pence and he may be even more dangerous. Spence is slicker than Donald the Goober.

Try again. It worked for me but unfortunately I can't sign because I am not an American.

Two quotations:


"Come the second millennium, In the home of greatest power, The village idiot will come forth to be acclaimed the leader." - Nostradamus, 1555


"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein


And a third that seems relevant:


"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." - Martin Luther King Jr.

It has now been reported that Fox News paid $32 million in a settlement last January to a network analyst to settle new sexual harassment allegations against Bill O'Reilly. This is six months after Roger Ailes, its chairman, was ousted for years of such conduct. The woman’s complaints about Mr. O’Reilly included allegations of repeated harassment, a nonconsensual sexual relationship and the sending of gay pornography and other sexually explicit material to her. It was at least the sixth agreement — and by far the largest — made by either Mr. O’Reilly or the company to settle harassment allegations against him. Despite that record, 21st Century Fox began contract negotiations with Mr. O’Reilly, and in February granted him a four-year extension that paid $25 million a year. As more and more allegations against Ailes and O'Reilly were revealed over the spring and summer, the Murdochs, who own Fox, decided that they had to let O'Reilly go. They had originally wanted him to stay after losing Megyn Kelly but that became untenable.

I posted this for information's sake. It is a shocking amount of money and shows how pervasive this behaviour is in all sorts of businesses and at their highest levels. Perpetrators come in all political stripes.

Perhaps. I think it would be hard to find someone not familiar with that particular story but not impossible.

Hmmm.... reading something into a comment that wasn't there. There seems to be quite a lot of that going around.

Some benefit of the doubt may be in order. It's a shame there isn't more of that going around as well.





I don't know who you are or if you grew up in another culture. It is very possible that a story I heard as a child was not one you heard in your past. I truly meant no offence and regret you took it that way.

#MeToo

I can't share details but can join the list.

I found out something quite distressing when I discussed it with my GP. He told me that he was shocked and heartbroken by the number of his patients who have told him that they had been abused. We have been living in a world where this has been and is going on all the time. It takes a lot of courage to share this with anyone else. It leaves scars that last a lifetime.

I thought we agreed not to be condescending.

Sprite is right. I really thought you might not be familiar with the story.

I am just answering him back.What is he your lover or something?

NO, neither lover nor something.

That wasn't answering him regarding the opinion he expressed. It was just invective.