"Theatre of the Absurd"

[Grampaw Willie, SASS No.26996]

Quote

Dianne Feinstein: ‘Hundreds’ of School Shootings with ‘Assault Weapons’

 

reference: Source: URL: / Breitbart News / awr hawkins / Sept.5 2018 //

 

excerpt

 

Quote

Ironically, her claim is a vast departure from academic research that shows there were only been 90 mass shootings of any kid—schools included—between 1966-2012. The research was done by University of Alabama associate professor Adam Lankford.

 

Dianne knows exactly what she's doing: it's an appeal to emotion.   The fuel for propaganda.

 

Also:

Dianne Feinstein Admits Coordinating with Anti-Trump Parkland Dad Before Kavanaugh Hearing

Source: URL: / breitbart / josua caplan / Sept. 4 2018 //

 

excerpt

Quote

“I invited @Fred_Guttenberg to sit in the audience at today’s hearing because the Supreme Court affects the lives of real people,” Feinstein wrote on Twitter “He knows firsthand how Brett Kavanaugh’s extreme views on guns could lead to more massacres. Thank you Fred, for honoring your daughter.”

 

[Sedalia Dave]

This ties in with the above.

 

Mass Shootings in America: Anatomy of a Hyped Statistic

 

 

[Grampaw Willie, SASS No.26996]

for those interested in this sort of thing let me suggest the Daniel Greenfield Video that you'll find in

this essay By Linda Goudsmit

 

my old boss was fond of saying "Every man has to chew his own stick" and i certainly think this applies do Daniel's video

 

 

[Grampaw Willie, SASS No.26996]

more of the same

Grieving Parents' Policy Preferences Are Irrelevant to the Constitutionality of Gun Laws

Kamala Harris wants Brett Kavanaugh to give gun violence victims "a fair shake," by which she means adopting her view of the Second Amendment.

 

Source: URL: / reason / Jacob Sullum / Sep. 5, 2018 3:30 pm //

 

Excerpt

Quote

Whether or not Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh deliberately spurned a handshake with the father of a teenager who died in the Parkland massacre, the response from Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) was puzzling. "If Kavanaugh won't even give him a handshake," she tweeted, "how can we believe he would give gun violence victims a fair shake in court?"

 

remember ( from above )  Guttenberg was at the hearing as a guest of DiFi

[St. Louis Suomi SASS #31905]

The hearing was a dress rehearsal for the new BOZO's Circus.  I have never been so disappointed and embarrassed by such juvenile behavior save the time when the Gang of Geese held a sit in in Congress.  It is beginning to look like we have a third world democracy with illiterate and uneducated twits running the show.  I know now that those responsible and their supports in the Senate will never see my mark on their name in any ballot.  This type of behavior is just appalling, undignified, and not acceptable - it demeans the offices they hold.

 

STL Suomi 

[Grampaw Willie, SASS No.26996]

2 hours ago, St. Louis Suomi SASS #31905 said:

The hearing was a dress rehearsal for the new BOZO's Circus.  I have never been so disappointed and embarrassed by such juvenile behavior save the time when the Gang of Geese held a sit in in Congress.  It is beginning to look like we have a third world democracy with illiterate and uneducated twits running the show.  I know now that those responsible and their supports in the Senate will never see my mark on their name in any ballot.  This type of behavior is just appalling, undignified, and not acceptable - it demeans the offices they hold.

 

STL Suomi 

 

it does

 

but watch the Daniel Greenfield video and you'll get a better understanding of our situation.  I'm still trying to get my head around the whole thing but where we have judges countermanding the legitimate actions of our President -- it ain't good.   at least "IMHO",-- which is just that: "MHO".

[Charlie T Waite]

58 minutes ago, Grampaw Willie, SASS No.26996 said:

 

but where we have judges countermanding the legitimate actions of our President -- it ain't good.   at least "IMHO",-- which is just that: "MHO".

 

The job of a judge is to apply the law as written and as precedent set by the state and federal supreme courts without prejudice / bias and to be open minded and fair.  The best legal argument under the written law should be the one to win the case.  A judges personal opinions or beliefs are not supposed to enter into the decision processes.  If the judge is unable to do that then they are supposed to recuse themselves from the case before them.  Their is a judicial code of conduct that is to be followed and a judge can be removed from office by a judicial board of review if this code is violated.  Many people are wondering why some of the actions and decisions they have seen have not been brought before any judicial review board.  Most anyone can connect the dots and see a clear line of personal opinions, beliefs or political bias involved in some of the decisions that have been made and this is a violation of the code of conduct.