What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Extreme Left Threats against Supreme Court (1 Viewer)

Wait...you have de-facto medical evidence to say his stroke was brought on by the riots?  WTF?  You know that's not how strokes work, right?  TELL me you don't know that because then you can at least hide behind ignorance instead of a willful twisting of facts, logic truth and omission of context to push a false narrative.

As far as "being better", I'm specifically talking about using the previously mentioned facts, logic, truth and context when taking a position instead of using a made up statements.  At least you would be arguing from a position of strength.

My posting history only suggest that I don't let others get away with false statements but, I admit, I have my moments.  
I did not assert that the strokes were definitively brought on by the riot.  In fact I asked you if your position was they were definitively not.  I feel confident asserting it is "more likely than not" that the two events were linked.  What's your opinion?

 
When someone is smashing and climbing through a window, I think there's many people who would call that a threat. 

If someone smashed and climbed through your bedroom window, would you call that a threat?
Of course he would.  He’s just not willing to make an honest attempt at engagement on this.

 
I did not assert that the strokes were definitively brought on by the riot.  In fact I asked you if your position was they were definitively not.  I feel confident asserting it is "more likely than not" that the two events were linked.  What's your opinion?


It is not "more likely than not".  He would have had a stroke regardless.  1/6 did not cause, nor was it related to, his stroke.

You're trying to link two incidents by merely putting them next to each other in a sentence.

Unless, of course, you can produce a Medical Examiners report refuting me?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for agreeing. 


Too bad you didn't look at what all I bolded.

To clarify what is possibly confusing you...I was disagreeing with your statement that "Had this happened to a BLM protestor, he would be in jail for murder." 

No he wouldn't because it would be viewed as a justified killing as it was with Babbitt. 

 
https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3537393-ocasio-cortez-says-conservative-justices-lied-under-oath-should-be-impeached/

AOC wants to impeach conservative justices for lying to congress to secure appointments.  

Did anyone commit to "I will not vote to overturn Roe v Wade?"  

I remember ACB dodging questions about potential future cases.  I remember one of the Senators asked ACB if she "was on a mission from God to overturn Roe v Wade," to which she answered no.  

If we're going to launch impeachment hearings every time the SCOTUS has a decision we don't agree with, we're screwed as a nation.

 
https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3537393-ocasio-cortez-says-conservative-justices-lied-under-oath-should-be-impeached/

AOC wants to impeach conservative justices for lying to congress to secure appointments.  

Did anyone commit to "I will not vote to overturn Roe v Wade?"  

I remember ACB dodging questions about potential future cases.  I remember one of the Senators asked ACB if she "was on a mission from God to overturn Roe v Wade," to which she answered no.  

If we're going to launch impeachment hearings every time the SCOTUS has a decision we don't agree with, we're screwed as a nation.
Let’s start with Biden and his comments about the number of Covid deaths under a presidents watch. 

 
https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3537393-ocasio-cortez-says-conservative-justices-lied-under-oath-should-be-impeached/

AOC wants to impeach conservative justices for lying to congress to secure appointments.  

Did anyone commit to "I will not vote to overturn Roe v Wade?"  

I remember ACB dodging questions about potential future cases.  I remember one of the Senators asked ACB if she "was on a mission from God to overturn Roe v Wade," to which she answered no.  

If we're going to launch impeachment hearings every time the SCOTUS has a decision we don't agree with, we're screwed as a nation.
It’s a bad idea. They are all top notch lawyers, coached by other top notch lawyers - they knew what they were going to do and they knew how to answer the questions in a way to protect themselves when they voted to reverse Roe. It might sound good but it wouldn’t go anywhere.

 
It is not "more likely than not".  He would have had a stroke regardless.  1/6 did not cause, nor was it related to, his stroke.

You're trying to link two incidents by merely putting them next to each other in a sentence.

Unless, of course, you can produce a Medical Examiners report refuting me?


Looks like the medical examiner disagrees with you, despite your attempts to disparage my remarks.

M.E. findings....

Diaz’s ruling does not mean Sicknick was not assaulted or that the violent events at the Capitol did not contribute to his death. The medical examiner noted Sicknick was among the officers who engaged the mob and said “all that transpired played a role in his condition.”

 
Looks like the medical examiner disagrees with you, despite your attempts to disparage my remarks.

M.E. findings....

Diaz’s ruling does not mean Sicknick was not assaulted or that the violent events at the Capitol did not contribute to his death. The medical examiner noted Sicknick was among the officers who engaged the mob and said “all that transpired played a role in his condition.”
Remember when we talked earlier about context and talking about facts?  Yeah you did it again. Playing fast and loose with what's actually documented and cherry picking.

"Capitol Police officer Brian D. Sicknick suffered two strokes and died of natural causes a day after he confronted rioters at the Jan. 6 insurrection, the District’s chief medical examiner has ruled.

The ruling, released Monday, will make it difficult for prosecutors to pursue homicide charges in the officer’s death"

The MA is speculating at best.  In the very article you post he's unable to divulge health history which obviously plays a HUGE part in strokes. For all we know, he could have had a fried food addiction.  Or his family has a history of blood clots. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3537393-ocasio-cortez-says-conservative-justices-lied-under-oath-should-be-impeached/

AOC wants to impeach conservative justices for lying to congress to secure appointments.  

Did anyone commit to "I will not vote to overturn Roe v Wade?"  

I remember ACB dodging questions about potential future cases.  I remember one of the Senators asked ACB if she "was on a mission from God to overturn Roe v Wade," to which she answered no.  

If we're going to launch impeachment hearings every time the SCOTUS has a decision we don't agree with, we're screwed as a nation.
Impeachment is obviously a bad idea.  But it’s also undeniable the last 4 conservative noms lied to get confirmed. 

 
Uhm...no.  No one lied.
Yeah they did.  The last three all called the ruling precedent and that weighs significantly into future rulings and 2 (iirc) called it settled law.  

Regardless it matters none now and I’m not interested in a multi post exchange debating and parsing out their word smithing.  

 


Bizarrely for someone who spent so long as a waitress, she sure knows how to bring zero to the table.

On everything.

No understanding of the economy. No understanding of the law. No understanding of actual media optics without her Staff holding her hand.

She's not a leader, she's a proxy for a radical ideology that has proven it can't deliver wins on it's own merits.

 
https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3537393-ocasio-cortez-says-conservative-justices-lied-under-oath-should-be-impeached/

AOC wants to impeach conservative justices for lying to congress to secure appointments.  

Did anyone commit to "I will not vote to overturn Roe v Wade?"  

I remember ACB dodging questions about potential future cases.  I remember one of the Senators asked ACB if she "was on a mission from God to overturn Roe v Wade," to which she answered no.  

If we're going to launch impeachment hearings every time the SCOTUS has a decision we don't agree with, we're screwed as a nation.
Stuff like this is a perfect example of AOC caring more about building her own brand than about doing what is best for her party or America.

 
Yeah they did.  The last three all called the ruling precedent and that weighs significantly into future rulings and 2 (iirc) called it settled law.  

Regardless it matters none now and I’m not interested in a multi post exchange debating and parsing out their word smithing.  


Not even remotely close to being a lie.  All that mean is it is a binding precedent, which Roe was when they answered the question.    And the Supreme Court can overturn any settled law they see fit even if they respect it.  

 
https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3537393-ocasio-cortez-says-conservative-justices-lied-under-oath-should-be-impeached/

AOC wants to impeach conservative justices for lying to congress to secure appointments.  

Did anyone commit to "I will not vote to overturn Roe v Wade?"  

I remember ACB dodging questions about potential future cases.  I remember one of the Senators asked ACB if she "was on a mission from God to overturn Roe v Wade," to which she answered no.  

If we're going to launch impeachment hearings every time the SCOTUS has a decision we don't agree with, we're screwed as a nation.


That is nothing, she condones murdering justices too.

AOC Brags about Blocking SCOTUS Security Bill after Kavanaugh Assassination Plot

 
The funny thing is many here on Team Blue say she has little influence in the party.  National news wanted her opinion, not the others.
These things aren't mutually exclusive, though.

  • AOC cares mostly about building her brand
  • AOC is popular with news outlets (mostly because she makes outrageous statements)
  • AOC has little influence within the party
 
Remember when we talked earlier about context and talking about facts?  Yeah you did it again. Playing fast and loose with what's actually documented and cherry picking.

"Capitol Police officer Brian D. Sicknick suffered two strokes and died of natural causes a day after he confronted rioters at the Jan. 6 insurrection, the District’s chief medical examiner has ruled.

The ruling, released Monday, will make it difficult for prosecutors to pursue homicide charges in the officer’s death"

The MA is speculating at best.  In the very article you post he's unable to divulge health history which obviously plays a HUGE part in strokes. For all we know, he could have had a fried food addiction.  Or his family has a history of blood clots. 


I didn't cherry pick at all.  I merely POSTED WHAT THE MEDICAL EXAMINER STATED.  You can take pot-shots at the ME and claim he is speculating at best, but as a medical professional he unequivocally stated "all that transpired played a role in his condition".  So it is not me some random internet forum poster taking the position that what went down on Jan 6 contributed to this man's death it was the flipping medical examiner.  Your posts have implied that the only basis I have in making this assertion is my bias.  Documented statements by a medical professional are the basis of my assertion.  

 
I didn't cherry pick at all.  I merely POSTED WHAT THE MEDICAL EXAMINER STATED.  You can take pot-shots at the ME and claim he is speculating at best, but as a medical professional he unequivocally stated "all that transpired played a role in his condition".  So it is not me some random internet forum poster taking the position that what went down on Jan 6 contributed to this man's death it was the flipping medical examiner.  Your posts have implied that the only basis I have in making this assertion is my bias.  Documented statements by a medical professional are the basis of my assertion.  
His purpose for poking at you is to get you suspended.  Put on ignore.

 
These things aren't mutually exclusive, though.

  • AOC cares mostly about building her brand
  • AOC is popular with news outlets (mostly because she makes outrageous statements)
  • AOC has little influence within the party
I think you are discounting her SM presence.  She keeps getting her message out there and it forms opinion that reflects in polls over time.  She’s talking about menstruating people instead of women, then our Michigan idiot refers to them as that.  It’s a snowball effect. 

 
The funny thing is many here on Team Blue say she has little influence in the party.  National news wanted her opinion, not the others.


These things aren't mutually exclusive, though.

  • AOC cares mostly about building her brand
  • AOC is popular with news outlets (mostly because she makes outrageous statements)
  • AOC has little influence within the party


Haven't we all realized that the media is going to try to get the quotes from the people most likely to cause controversy with said quotes? You know who probably has some nuanced thoughts on this decision? Amy Klobuchar. I am not aware of media seeking her out for her opinion. Why? She's boring AF and won't move the needle at all. AOC moves the needle, mostly for Republicans that want to hold her up as the example of everything that Democrats stand for.

She's definitely not that.

 
Do you think ketanji brown Jackson can't define what a woman is?  Blatant lie.   Or is that lie ok.
That’s a good question. And I think consistency needs to be applied here. If someone is OK with the politically empty BS answers that were given by the other conservative judges who’ve been recently nominated than that same someone should be OK with her politically empty BS answer.  I’ve made it very clear how I feel about those type of answers.  

 
That’s a good question. And I think consistency needs to be applied here. If someone is OK with the politically empty BS answers that were given by the other conservative judges who’ve been recently nominated than that same someone should be OK with her politically empty BS answer.  I’ve made it very clear how I feel about those type of answers.  
Ugh, just more of the same ol' "defend the tribe at all costs" b.s from dkp.  

;)  

 
Probably because she moves the needle.  which doesn’t equal influence in the party.
Wasn't she the one who introduced us to the Green new deal?  I'm pretty sure that some of that has found it's way on to the DNC platform, and that it happened while she was a freshman in congress.  I don't know why everyone on the left keeps trying to diminish her influence on the party.  I know all of her far out stuff hasn't been adopted by the party, but some of it certainly has.  

 
Wasn't she the one who introduced us to the Green new deal?  I'm pretty sure that some of that has found it's way on to the DNC platform, and that it happened while she was a freshman in congress.  I don't know why everyone on the left keeps trying to diminish her influence on the party.  I know all of her far out stuff hasn't been adopted by the party, but some of it certainly has.  
Some of it has made its way to a platform. Some of it isn’t bad ideas either.

I think people diminish the influence the right claims she has…some pushing her as some face of the party.  Some super influential person who represents some majority.  And that does not appear to be the case at all.

 
Brett Kavanaugh was forced out of a DC restaurant by protesters amid anger at SCOTUS overturning Roe v Wade


"Honorable Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and all of our other patrons at the restaurant were unduly harassed by unruly protestors while eating dinner at our Morton's restaurant," the restaurant told Politico.

Brett Khttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/brett-kavanaugh-was-forced-out-of-a-dc-restaurant-by-protesters-amid-anger-at-scotus-overturning-roe-v-wade/ar-AAZm43X?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=00e2ca8e4a3b48aa8948cd78765985a7

people suck

 
Brett Kavanaugh was forced out of a DC restaurant by protesters amid anger at SCOTUS overturning Roe v Wade


"Honorable Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and all of our other patrons at the restaurant were unduly harassed by unruly protestors while eating dinner at our Morton's restaurant," the restaurant told Politico.

Brett Khttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/brett-kavanaugh-was-forced-out-of-a-dc-restaurant-by-protesters-amid-anger-at-scotus-overturning-roe-v-wade/ar-AAZm43X?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=00e2ca8e4a3b48aa8948cd78765985a7

people suck
Thats horrible.

He left before dessert.

 
Brett Kavanaugh was forced out of a DC restaurant by protesters amid anger at SCOTUS overturning Roe v Wade


"Honorable Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and all of our other patrons at the restaurant were unduly harassed by unruly protestors while eating dinner at our Morton's restaurant," the restaurant told Politico.

Brett Khttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/brett-kavanaugh-was-forced-out-of-a-dc-restaurant-by-protesters-amid-anger-at-scotus-overturning-roe-v-wade/ar-AAZm43X?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=00e2ca8e4a3b48aa8948cd78765985a7

people suck
He believes that a meal begins at reservation. Maybe he'll need to travel to another state, stay overnight at a hotel, and hope nobody reports him in order to have a safe meal. His right to an overpriced steak dinner isn't anywhere in the Constitution, so I guess he doesn't have that right based on his logic.

 
Brett Kavanaugh was forced out of a DC restaurant by protesters amid anger at SCOTUS overturning Roe v Wade


"Honorable Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and all of our other patrons at the restaurant were unduly harassed by unruly protestors while eating dinner at our Morton's restaurant," the restaurant told Politico.

Brett Khttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/brett-kavanaugh-was-forced-out-of-a-dc-restaurant-by-protesters-amid-anger-at-scotus-overturning-roe-v-wade/ar-AAZm43X?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=00e2ca8e4a3b48aa8948cd78765985a7

people suck


How is it legal to harass judges? Especially SCOTUS judges. And I love how so many posters around here take issue with being called radical leftists, but are immediately cracking jokes and tacitly approving of this nonsense.

 
How is it legal to harass judges? Especially SCOTUS judges. And I love how so many posters around here take issue with being called radical leftists, but are immediately cracking jokes and tacitly approving of this nonsense.
Jokes make someone a radical leftist?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top