Posts Made By: Rod Kaufman

Originally Posted by Mel Maki

Yes, he wanted so desperately to hang Pence and he made sure the police were scarce, hoping something so terrible would happen that people would not be able to talk of anything but him for decades.

Perhaps, just perhaps, it will become more clear to you when the indictments, either at the state or federal level, come down the pipe...

"A 10-year-old girl was denied an abortion in Ohio after the Supreme Court ruled last week that it was overturning Roe v. Wade, demonstrating the tangible impacts that the high court’s decision is having on patients seeking access to the medical procedure."
"A child abuse doctor in Ohio contacted Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indiana, after receiving a 10-year-old patient who was six weeks and three days pregnant,..."
"That patient is now heading west to Indiana..."
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3544588-10-year-old-girl-denied-abortion-in-ohio/

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"A 10-year-old girl was denied an abortion in Ohio after the Supreme Court ruled last week that it was overturning Roe v. Wade, demonstrating the tangible impacts that the high court’s decision is having on patients seeking access to the medical procedure."
"A child abuse doctor in Ohio contacted Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indiana, after receiving a 10-year-old patient who was six weeks and three days pregnant,..."
"That patient is now heading west to Indiana..."
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3544588-10-year-old-girl-denied-abortion-in-ohio/

Republican governor Christie Noem of South Dakota attempts to respond to a question about this case...
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2022/07/03/kristi-noem-south-dakota-governor-abortion-ban-bash-sotu-vpx.cnn
I'm wondering if either Darian or Richard might be willing to drive the child and her baby to a local fire station in their state which a remedy noted by Amy Comey Barrett as a provision for immediate care of the baby and the relief of the obligation of a mother to provide ongoing care if unable to do so, thereby granting injunctive relief to the mother by fulfilling that specific duty. Maybe either Rich or Darian can bring punch and cookies, too. That way, they can show their appreciation for the firecrews and provide a snack for the party...

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Can you please tell me the 10 year old involved?  Can you point to the story where a 10 year old was pregnant?  

I guess I missed that made up story.  

BTW, while you're at it, can you tell me when Life Begins or is that an inconvenient question for a person like you to answer?

One last thing, do you still your forceps and vacuum extractor ready to go so you can do your part in killing babies in the womb?

A better question would be to have you tell us, what situation would you notice that you say is too outrageous to limit an abortion?

Why don't you provide an answer to that, since you're all into hypothetical questions being asked of Republicans, while you yourself are too chicken shit to address the questions that I and any other person pose to you regularly, which you dodge continuously.  

"A 10-year-old rape victim, who was six weeks pregnant, received an abortion in Indiana after being denied access in her home state of Ohio."
https://www.yahoo.com/video/10-old-rape-victim-recieves-180247281.html
Looks like you and Darian are off the hook in having to worry about travel duties to the fire station for the drop-off...

Originally Posted by James Lacey

Lots of people are noticing that Thomas didn't include Loving vs. Virginia in his list of due process cases to reconsider.


Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

I'm sure they have some nuanced argument for why Loving v. Virginia was not included, but it is hard to not notice the obvious omission.

GOP lawmaker introduces and thanks Trump on victory "for white life "!
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2022/06/26/mary-miller-slip-up-trump-rally-abortion-newsroom-sot-vpx.cnn

Originally Posted by James Lacey

The more important question is, why are you and all the other TAKS sufferers glomming onto one minor detail in her testimony that was something she testified was what she heard, not what she witnessed?

Here is what she testified to as firsthand observations. And why are you not freaking out about this testimony?

1. Trump and the WH had intelligence that the crowd was armed and didn't care, and Trump asked them to remove the MAGS since "They are not here to hurt me."
2. Trump wanted to go to the Hill and march with the crowd.
3. To recap, Trump was aware the crowd was armed, that they meant harm, and he wanted to march with them. 
4. Whether Trump grabbed the steering wheel in the SUV or assaulted anyone is so not the point. The fact that you and all the other TAKS sufferers are glomming onto this one bit of gossip to discredit all of the testimony is what is telling.
5. Then there is the witness tampering.

Leave it to the cons to not see the forest for a tree...

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Leave it to the cons to not see the forest for a tree...

Make that a twig!...

BTW, as an aside, Ginni Thomas, who stated a week or so ago, that she was "eager" to tell her side of the story to the January 6 committee, now says she is too stressed to appear...

Originally Posted by Greg Shaffer

Be sure to tune in for the next episode of the J6 committee. It is rumored that they finally found their smoking gun......

Seen today "My best friends sisters boyfriends brothers boyfriend heard from this guy that knows this kid who is going with the girl who saw President Trump say some things that Liz Cheney thought were bad. I guess its pretty serious."

As usual, Greg ignores the forest for the twig. The bulk of the testimony delivered by Hutchinson was eyewitness testimony. That's why she was called as a witness, Greg. And, as an eyewitness, she recounted what Trump had stated at the time it occurred, "I don't effing care that they have weapons — they're not here to hurt me," Trump said, according to Hutchinson. "Take the effing [magnetometers] away and let my people in."
Here's what a respected former federal prosecutor stated:
"Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor, told NPR's Rachel Martin that Hutchinson's testimony about Trump requesting the magnetometers be removed builds a "prosecutable case against Donald Trump."
"He knew right before he took that stage that that crowd was armed. He knew they were headed to the Capitol and he was so confident that they were not going to do anything to him, they were there for him, that he was willing to risk his own security by telling people that he wanted those mags taken down," Honig said. "To me, that could lend itself to a conspiracy charge, to an obstruction charge, even to a seditious conspiracy charge, which requires a showing that force was part of the plan."
"Hutchinson also quoted her former boss saying that Trump "doesn't want to do anything" about calls for violence against then-Vice President Mike Pence."
"He thinks Mike deserves it," she recalled Meadows saying."
https://www.npr.org/2022/06/29/1108573335/hutchinsons-bombshell-jan-6-testimony-sways-legal-experts-and-conservative-media

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

When are you turning over YOUR land to the Native American tribe near you, from which it was apparently stolen?

Can you enlighten us all?  

The story here is not about their lands being stolen but I almost forgot, you're reading skills are in question, aren't they?
The story here is about sovereignty within legally established Indian land. I haven't seen any claims made by the Chumash indian tribe regarding re-claiming any of the land I live on...