Here is what he says: “I never attended a gathering like the one Dr. Ford describes in her allegation.”
It turns out he did though, according to his own calendars, with most of the same people Ford says were there.
He is deceptive and manipulative throughout the hearing, and the article goes into great detail on these points. If you want to know how Bill Clinton Weasley this guy is, read the article.
"A gathering like the one Dr. Ford describes in her allegation" can mean a gathering with a little bit of attempted rape. So not really a lie, even if he did attend a party where those people attended, which has also not been proven.
Seriously? How many straws do you people need to reach for before you realize she was nothing more than a Democrat plant?
Want proof?
She is no longer moving forward with her alligations legally... she has 500k+ to do it with, it nope...
If you want to know how Bill Clinton Weasley this guy is, read the article.
Might want to get some ice on that. So when the wife runs for President you'll blindly support her and rig your primary system, again, to guarantee her nomination? Cool.
Montegriffo wrote: Sun Oct 07, 2018 3:24 am
A constitution can be worthless if you can't change it due to the political climate.
I'd say that's what makes a constitution valuable. You're not supposed to be able to change it with a minor majority. A constitution function as a check to rash democratic decisions, it's supposed to be really hard to change. It's what protects against mob rule.
If the original meaning doesn't apply, the constitution can be rendered worthless through changes in attitudes, culture, language, whatever.
Norway is pretty bad at following the original intent, which has made our constitution practically worthless. We joined NATO, even though it was against our constitution. And recently, the new gun law had three clear breaches on the constitution, without any opposition.
If anyone want to change the constitution, sure, go ahead, through the proper channels. But a constitution should be the supreme law of the land, and it shouldn't change its meaning based on who's got the majority in parliament at any moment.
Not having a codeified constitution like everyone else our Constitution comes mostly from Parliamentary law.
This means it can only be charged by open debate and vote amongst elected representatives.
I don't fully understand the difference to a written constitution in practice but l'm not enamored by the idea of a set in stone constitution written around the time of the industrial Revolution.
Laws and rules need to adapt to the changing times every now and then.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
That's how you lost your human rights just in the course of a few decades, though. Hard pass. Have fun with it, though.
I prefer to make it nigh impossible to abridge our human rights. I am unhappy with how easily our own constitution is ignored and, when we get a convention, my hope is that my part of North America makes it almost impossible to abridge our human rights at all.
