WrestlingClassics.com Message Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» WrestlingClassics.com Message Board » Political Discussion » Nicholas Sandmann's 250 mil grift failed.

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Nicholas Sandmann's 250 mil grift failed.
Cory
Member
Member # 6097

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Cory     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
https://nypost.com/2019/07/26/covington-teens-250m-suit-against-the-washington-post-dismissed/

The judge said WAPO was perfectly in their right to publish what they did under 1A. This will reflect the grifter family's law suits against CNN and NBC as well.

IP: Logged
The Fake J.D. McKay
Member
Member # 24269

Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Fake J.D. McKay     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In a day and time where we had an administration that actually followed our constitution, this might be a real yawner. But in the MAGA day it’s night to see someone recognize the actual damn law.
IP: Logged
Red Wings Fan I
Member
Member # 2068

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Red Wings Fan I     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Good. I would have loved to have seen that punk's smirk wiped off his face when this was announced.

--------------------
"I came to smell that fresh Detroit air!" Vince McMahon

IP: Logged
Cory
Member
Member # 6097

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Cory     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wait for the CNN and NBC ones to fail too.
IP: Logged
The Fake J.D. McKay
Member
Member # 24269

Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Fake J.D. McKay     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cory:
Wait for the CNN and NBC ones to fail too.

Honestly, it depends on the judge anymore. Some of these judges no longer read the constitution. They make it up as it goes, depending on what Trump's position it. I am serious as it gets. We no longer have a judiciary. We have a wing of the party.
IP: Logged
PsychoSem
Member
Member # 119

Icon 1 posted      Profile for PsychoSem     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Fake J.D. McKay:
quote:
Originally posted by Cory:
Wait for the CNN and NBC ones to fail too.

Honestly, it depends on the judge anymore. Some of these judges no longer read the constitution. They make it up as it goes, depending on what Trump's position it. I am serious as it gets. We no longer have a judiciary. We have a wing of the party.
The same could be argued for the other side too in all fairness and for longer. That's why I am for actually following the constitution over interpreting it. The judiciary was never intended to be political and sadly now it seems to be in lots of instances.

--------------------
The future's uncertain and the end is always near...

IP: Logged
Dragonstone
Member
Member # 129157

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dragonstone     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
That's why I am for actually following the constitution over interpreting it.

I don't know what that sentence even means. Who decides what the correct way to "follow" the constitution is? If you or I or anybody else says, "this is the correct way to follow the constitution", is that not, in fact, simply you or I or someone else's interpretation of how to correctly follow the constitution?

Everything is interpretation. We just don't always agree on what the correct way to interpret something is.

IP: Logged
PsychoSem
Member
Member # 119

Icon 1 posted      Profile for PsychoSem     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dragonstone:
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
That's why I am for actually following the constitution over interpreting it.

I don't know what that sentence even means. Who decides what the correct way to "follow" the constitution is? If you or I or anybody else says, "this is the correct way to follow the constitution", is that not, in fact, simply you or I or someone else's interpretation of how to correctly follow the constitution?

I'm an originalist. I don't believe in 'living document'.
Everything is interpretation. We just don't always agree on what the correct way to interpret something is.



--------------------
The future's uncertain and the end is always near...

IP: Logged
PsychoSem
Member
Member # 119

Icon 1 posted      Profile for PsychoSem     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
quote:
Originally posted by Dragonstone:
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
That's why I am for actually following the constitution over interpreting it.

I don't know what that sentence even means. Who decides what the correct way to "follow" the constitution is? If you or I or anybody else says, "this is the correct way to follow the constitution", is that not, in fact, simply you or I or someone else's interpretation of how to correctly follow the constitution?


Everything is interpretation. We just don't always agree on what the correct way to interpret something is.


I'm an originalist. I don't believe in 'living document' aka loose interpretation.

[ 07-28-2019, 02:09 PM: Message edited by: PsychoSem ]

--------------------
The future's uncertain and the end is always near...

IP: Logged
Travlr
Administrator
Member # 4304

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Travlr     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Huh.

A Statute -- which, when you boil it down, is what the US Constitution really is -- that is not readily applicable to the current times must either be, 1) re-interpreted; 2) modified/amended, or; 3) done away with.

Which one would you like to have happen to the Constitution again? Because #1 is easy (and the purpose to which SCOTUS was at least partially created for), #2 is nearly impossible to have happen, given the ideological division of the States today, and #3 should properly scare you bloodless as an option.

So....which one do you want to happen again, Psycho.....?

[ 07-28-2019, 04:02 PM: Message edited by: Travlr ]

--------------------
The Traveller
a fan since '68....

"Reputation is what others think about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. The friction tends to arise when the two are not the same.... Guard your honor; let your reputation fall where it may."

IP: Logged
PsychoSem
Member
Member # 119

Icon 1 posted      Profile for PsychoSem     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Travlr:
Huh.

A Statute -- which, when you boil it down, is what the US Constitution really is -- that is not readily applicable to the current times must either be, 1) re-interpreted; 2) modified/amended, or; 3) done away with.

Which one would you like to have happen to the Constitution again? Because #1 is easy (and the purpose to which SCOTUS was at least partially created for), #2 is nearly impossible to have happen, given the ideological division of the States today, and #3 should properly scare you bloodless as an option.

So....which one do you want to happen again, Psycho.....?

I would prefer it be amended, but I get your point about state division .

[ 07-29-2019, 06:26 AM: Message edited by: PsychoSem ]

--------------------
The future's uncertain and the end is always near...

IP: Logged
The Fake J.D. McKay
Member
Member # 24269

Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Fake J.D. McKay     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That was poorly worded. My point was meant to be that the "interpretations" that are being done today are based on who the president appointed and the judges are no longer impartial. They are wings of the parties. Of course, the constitution must be interpreted in specific instances. However, I do not trust the courts appointed by Trump to do anything other than the bidding of the Nazi party of the USA. This is not an issue for anyone else, I suppose. With the rise of Trumpism, I have lost any semblance of trust.
IP: Logged
Dirko
Member
Member # 125609

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dirko     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
quote:
Originally posted by Dragonstone:
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
That's why I am for actually following the constitution over interpreting it.

I don't know what that sentence even means. Who decides what the correct way to "follow" the constitution is? If you or I or anybody else says, "this is the correct way to follow the constitution", is that not, in fact, simply you or I or someone else's interpretation of how to correctly follow the constitution?


Everything is interpretation. We just don't always agree on what the correct way to interpret something is.


I'm an originalist. I don't believe in 'living document' aka loose interpretation.
Why are you an originalist? Do you believe the founding fathers to be infallible? No stone tablets were handed down from the mountain (not even gold tablets found in a garden).

The Constitution was a pretty great document for something written in the 18th Century, but I am sure that even people on this message board can come up with an improved version.

--------------------
"Evil is just a measure of how much YOUR choices take away other people's."
(Simon Spurrier)

IP: Logged
PsychoSem
Member
Member # 119

Icon 1 posted      Profile for PsychoSem     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dirko:
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
quote:
Originally posted by Dragonstone:
quote:
Originally posted by PsychoSem:
That's why I am for actually following the constitution over interpreting it.

I don't know what that sentence even means. Who decides what the correct way to "follow" the constitution is? If you or I or anybody else says, "this is the correct way to follow the constitution", is that not, in fact, simply you or I or someone else's interpretation of how to correctly follow the constitution?


Everything is interpretation. We just don't always agree on what the correct way to interpret something is.


I'm an originalist. I don't believe in 'living document' aka loose interpretation.
Why are you an originalist? Do you believe the founding fathers to be infallible? No stone tablets were handed down from the mountain (not even gold tablets found in a garden).

The Constitution was a pretty great document for something written in the 18th Century, but I am sure that even people on this message board can come up with an improved version.

Not at all. They are all human. I just believe the language is clear and they have a system for handling things not covered or changes in the world not foreseen. Amend it as much as you want to and those amendments can be used to change/fix things.

Maybe if politicians had to get along and work together in order to mandate change we wouldn't be in this mess we are in now. Too much time is spent trying to 'backdoor' change from both sides with all of the 'extras' that get included in every bill as part of 'compromise'.

The only compromise I see there is both sides continuing to spend money and it usually ends up not even being spent as appropriated.

I've always been for 'small government' and 'power to the states', but I'm afraid the small government part no longer exists with the way both sides spend.

That's why I've always identified as a moderate/fiscal conservative and generally voted for who I thought the best candidate was.

[ 07-29-2019, 07:52 AM: Message edited by: PsychoSem ]

--------------------
The future's uncertain and the end is always near...

IP: Logged
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | WrestlingClassics.com Home Page

Click here to see the WCMB Rules and Regulations

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3