Posts Made By: Rod Kaufman

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

DB, you don't have any evidence and Vox isn't any legal source, so I'll stand with my assertion that you're a conspiracy nut.

Of course it isn't as if anybody here didn't already know that fact.  

Oh Richie, so now "your" requirement is  that it has to be a "legal source"? Otherwise, it doesn't count? You know where you can go and what you can do when you get there...

"Where's Nancy?" shouted the intruder as he attacked her husband. Fortunately, he's recovering and Nancy wasn't home at the time of the attack. Now we get the disingenuous well-wishes from the GOP who's rhetoric about electional denialism helps fuel nut cases who do these things. Go look at the armed men in tactical gear calling people "mules" for dropping off their own ballots. "Trial by combat" by the failed ex-president's own lawyer on Jan 6th. Election deniers on the ballots throughout the country. And the cons on the forum will cheer if they win and democracy goes down the tubes with 'em...

Fox news propagandist Sean Hannity! You can't just make this stuff up like he does...
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3709387-senate-republican-campaign-chairman-gives-hannity-champion-of-freedom-trophy/

"The oil companies have been posting staggering profits since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent oil and gasoline prices soaring worldwide early this year. Over the course of six months from April through September, ExxonMobil has had an adjusted profit of about $2,300 a second, while Chevron earned $1,400 a second."
"For the second-straight quarter ExxonMobil did not mention that it had achieved a record profit, as companies typically do when they reach all-time highs. Reuters reported three months ago that the second quarter was a record profit for both companies. Chevron also did not mention it had been a record profit in the earlier period. With consumer outrage over high gas prices, both companies probably wanted to avoid calling attention to the record profits."
"Oil companies have generally been slow to increase crude oil production,..."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/28/energy/exxonmobil-chevron-oil-earnings/index.html
Yup, they certainly need to have more incentive like deregulation and more land to drill on, right? More corporate tax breaks, too, right? They don't have enough pipeline, right? That must be it...

See the thread on "Record Oil Company Profits". Those companies and the people who back them are the real liars...

Found guilty by a jury of his peers: "“im a capitol police officer who agrees with your political stance."
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/former-us-capitol-police-officer-found-guilty-obstruction-charge-involving-investigation

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Puts a stay on the attempt by the Corrupt Democrat Jan 6 inquisition to get President Trump's tax records.

Maybe even John Roberts realizes just what a corrupt bunch of Democrats this committee is made up of, who have no reason to look at his tax returns. 

Good for him.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-grants-a-stay-temporarily-blocks-release-of-trump-tax-records-to-house-democrats

Lol! It's just a temporary stay until the court decides if they want to hear it, or not. 
"U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, dismissed Trump’s suit late last year. His ruling was later affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which last week rejected Trump’s request to rehear the case, prompting his turn to the Supreme Court."
https://thehill.com/regulation/3713892-chief-justice-roberts-temporarily-shields-trump-tax-records-from-house/
SCOTUS, even with all of its Trump appointees, is unlikely to overturn the aforementioned decisions. Trump's move if just another typical delaying tactic for his refusal to comply with lawful means and ways of congress, not to mention the law itself...

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Earth to DB, all 'stays' are temporary.  Here's a clue for you, that is why they are called 'stays' rather than 'rulings'.  Get it?   

DUH.... really Rich, I didn't think of that.  

Once again you show your IQ.  Thanks, but we always know just how bright you are.  

Lol, YOU are the one that's touting a routine action from SCOTUS, "JOHN ROBERTS NO LESS", as if the stay is some sort of vindication for Trump in his refusal to comply with a lawful act of congress. Your nonsense isn't fooling anyone except perhaps your fellow cons on the forum...

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

I simply stated a fact.  

The one who seems to have gotten hysterical about it is yourself.  

After you got all excited and animated in your 1st response, I pointed out the fact that ALL stays are temporary, to counter your posting that it was "Just a temporary stay", whereby you implied that there are Permanent stays.  

Earth to DB, a permanent stay would be a ruling.  I can't imagine being in your home, and trying to engage in a rational discussion with you.  

Your kids and visitors to your home must just roll their eyes a great deal.  

No, your title of this thread says it all, "John Roberts No Less" for a simple delay in what should be the inevitable. Here's another sleazebag who got his clock cleaned by SCOTUS today:    https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/01/politics/lindsey-graham-supreme-court/index.html
We'll see if he takes the fifth, too...

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

I think you meant to say Hillary Clinton said that Republicans are going to steal the coming  elections:

Here's the video:   https://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-issues-warning-over-2024-presidential-election-called-election-denier-1754988

Header:  Hillary Clinton Called 'Election Denier' After Issuing 2024 Warning

Oh wait... sorry about that.  I forgot that your usual leftist Double Standard is still in play.  

It's obvious that's what the GOP playbook is and has been since this election-denying nonsense-rejected by at least 60 courts across the country-still advances by Trump-backed candidates in important offices across the country. Many of 'em have already stated they will only accept the outcome if they win or will, by their actions, refuse the will of the people if they vote Democratic in future elections by refusing to certify the outcome of an election. It doesn't get any plainer than that...