Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 160

Thread: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

  1. #81
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    As for "day in court," even if what Hill said was true, there was no crime, so that's pretty silly.
    See what I mean about the mindless support? You don't need a crime to impeach a SCOTUS Justice, they serve during "good behavior." I'd say this qualifies as bad behavior.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    This McEwen thing was going to hit whether Virginia Thomas did that or not. VT's phone message had nothing to do with it.
    I'm just taking McEwen at her word that she was motivated by the phone. Either way the phone call was a reopening of the Anita Hill scandal by a member of the Thomas family. The fact is that the Anita Hill and Virginia Thomas interaction is central to this issue, and you're just using it as a distraction from the fact that you have no legitimate reason to defend Thomas.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    "Deep denial," eh? I guess you've made up your own mind unshakeably.
    I've made up my mind, but not unshakably. If I see evidence to the contrary then maybe I'll reconsider.

    But the evidence is pretty damning against Thomas. It's unfortunate that some people will let their political position dictate what is true rather than the actual evidence. Thomas is a right winger, therefore he gets shielded no matter what. Clinton, on the other hand, gets nailed to the wall at the earliest opportunity. Real principled of you guys

  2. #82
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,592

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    See what I mean about the mindless support? You don't need a crime to impeach a SCOTUS Justice, they serve during "good behavior." I'd say this qualifies as bad behavior.
    A) That has nothing to do with a "day in court."

    B) Anything Anita Hill alleged happend 1) before Thomas was on the Court and 2) wasn't a crime. "Good behavior" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.



    I'm just taking McEwen at her word that she was motivated by the phone.
    Right, and she didn't have a book to push.

    Either way the phone call was a reopening of the Anita Hill scandal by a member of the Thomas family. The fact is that the Anita Hill and Virginia Thomas interaction is central to this issue, and you're just using it as a distraction from the fact that you have no legitimate reason to defend Thomas.
    How am I using it as a "distraction"?

    I have no legitimate reason to IMPUGN Thomas.

    I've made up my mind, but not unshakably. If I see evidence to the contrary then maybe I'll reconsider.

    But the evidence is pretty damning against Thomas. It's unfortunate that some people will let their political position dictate what is true rather than the actual evidence. Thomas is a right winger, therefore he gets shielded no matter what. Clinton, on the other hand, gets nailed to the wall at the earliest opportunity. Real principled of you guys
    What, the testimony of a single person whose story broke apart during the hearings? That's your standard of evidence?
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  3. #83
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-04-10 @ 07:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    588

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    See what I mean about the mindless support? You don't need a crime to impeach a SCOTUS Justice, they serve during "good behavior." I'd say this qualifies as bad behavior.






    I'm just taking McEwen at her word that she was motivated by the phone. Either way the phone call was a reopening of the Anita Hill scandal by a member of the Thomas family. The fact is that the Anita Hill and Virginia Thomas interaction is central to this issue, and you're just using it as a distraction from the fact that you have no legitimate reason to defend Thomas.



    I've made up my mind, but not unshakably. If I see evidence to the contrary then maybe I'll reconsider.

    But the evidence is pretty damning against Thomas. It's unfortunate that some people will let their political position dictate what is true rather than the actual evidence. Thomas is a right winger, therefore he gets shielded no matter what. Clinton, on the other hand, gets nailed to the wall at the earliest opportunity. Real principled of you guys


    YOU want him out so Barry can appoint a relacement - Right(???)

  4. #84
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    A) That has nothing to do with a "day in court."

    B) Anything Anita Hill alleged happend 1) before Thomas was on the Court and 2) wasn't a crime. "Good behavior" doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.

    I think it doesn't mean what *you* think it means. It's the equivalent of the high crimes and misdemeanors standard. I'm not just talking about the pubic hair incident, mind you, but the fact that Thomas actually perjured himself during his confirmation hearings. This is precisely analogous to the Clinton impeachment issue. Am I correct to assume you supported the impeachment of Clinton? If so you are logically compelled to apply the same principle to Thomas's perjury.



    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    What, the testimony of a single person whose story broke apart during the hearings? That's your standard of evidence?
    Coupled with McEwen's testimony to lend credibility, I'd say you've got a pretty good case. I wonder what interesting things a special prosecutor would turn up on Clarence Thomas's computer?

  5. #85
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Ned Racine View Post
    YOU want him out so Barry can appoint a relacement - Right(???)
    Nah, that's irrelevant. It's a simple application of a minimal standard of conduct for people serving in our highest offices. It's a shame that people will let politics trump principle.

  6. #86
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,358

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Do people on this site ever tire of the politics of personal destruction. It was crazy when it was against Clinton just as it is crazy now!

  7. #87
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,592

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post

    I think it doesn't mean what *you* think it means. It's the equivalent of the high crimes and misdemeanors standard. I'm not just talking about the pubic hair incident, mind you, but the fact that Thomas actually perjured himself during his confirmation hearings. This is precisely analogous to the Clinton impeachment issue. Am I correct to assume you supported the impeachment of Clinton? If so you are logically compelled to apply the same principle to Thomas's perjury.
    Ummm . . .

    You're saying that simply by denying the charges made against him, he committed "perjury"? Really?

    I don't think you should assume anything concerning things about which I have said nothing.





    Coupled with McEwen's testimony to lend credibility, I'd say you've got a pretty good case.
    I'd say twice nothing is still nothing.

    Hill's testimony broke down. And McEwen wouldn't last five minutes on cross-examination.


    I wonder what interesting things a special prosecutor would turn up on Clarence Thomas's computer?
    Nope, you haven't made up your mind unshakeably about anything. Nope.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  8. #88
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,592

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    It's a shame that people will let politics trump principle.
    That thought had crossed my mind reading your posts.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  9. #89
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    Do people on this site ever tire of the politics of personal destruction. It was crazy when it was against Clinton just as it is crazy now!
    I disagree. Clinton tarnished the dignity of the presidency. Not by his liaisons but his perjury and misleading the American people. I don't subscribe to the idea that politicians should be able to do as they please and rely on their partisans to exculpate them. That's the politics of societal destruction.

  10. #90
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Lillian McEwen breaks her 19-year silence about Justice Clarence Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    That thought had crossed my mind reading your posts.
    Indeed, maybe you'll reevaluate your partisan hackery then and join the call to bring Thomas to justice.

    By the way, you still haven't mentioned your stance on the Clinton impeachment. Can't say I blame you... who would want their hypocrisy to be exposed?

Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •