Bleacher Bums Forum

Looks like Obamacare is a fraud.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2016/09/29/busted-gao-finds-payments-to-insurers-under-affordable-care-act-are-illegal/#2b92ef9247db

Of course it is a fraud.  That was known from the start.  The forbes link addresses whether it has also be operating illegally.

Once again our resident word salad disbarred ex-lawyer mangles facts, overstates outcomes and reaches the wrong conclusion by passing his so called facts thru his ass.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/09/28/trumps-claim-that-a-racial-discrimination-suit-was-brought-against-many-real-estate-firms/?tid=sm_tw


Do better

Once again our resident word salad disbarred ex-lawyer mangles facts, overstates outcomes and reaches the wrong conclusion by passing his so called facts thru his ass.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/09/28/trumps-claim-that-a-racial-discrimination-suit-was-brought-against-many-real-estate-firms/?tid=sm_tw
Do better

otto, please point to anything, anything at all, which I wrote in my post commenting on this which was inaccurate.

Just to make it easy, here is what I wrote:

The guy who defends Clinton's conduct with her emails by crowing that if she did not get charged and convicted then she was saintly and pure, now contends Trump "broke Federal law regarding the Cubian embargo," when the law should have been repealed 40 years ago.

As to "Pleads no contest" in the housing discrimination case, it was a civil action, not a criminal action.  In other words, there is no such thing as pleading "no contest."  He settled a civil lawsuit without any admission of wrongdoing, and quite possibly with a settlement payment far less than the cost of defending the case.

As to your, "Spouts the law and order republic stick for votes," I really wish you would learn how to write at least clearly enough to have some idea what you are trying to say.l

So find ANYTHING in my post is is factually inaccurate and I will not post another word here between now and the election -- wouldn't that make you feel good?

Of course if you CAN'T point to anything which is factually inaccurate, you will once again be showing yourself to be.... well, an idiot.

Enjoy.

Ok fatuous
Point to any post of mine where I stated "crowed that saintly and pure".
Second, show your evidence which would contradict reporting on the drumpfster Fire which proves his company did not break laws in regard to Cuba.
Third, tell me how settling without an acknowledgement of guilt is not pleading no contest in that situation. A situation where restrictions were placed on them for wrong doing.
Fourth, not a settlement payment but much more. How is it you got that wrong....
Fifth, clearly your a fukking moron.
And I did enjoy that
Balls in your court (or in your case..classroom)

Challenging me to prove what I wrote was right is a far cry from establishing that ANYTHING, even one word, was wrong.

Not surprisingly, you have failed to show a single factual inaccuracy.

Just a word of advice to avoid sounding so stupid in the future, when you have no idea whatsoever what a phrase like "no contest" means, you might want to avoid using it, unless, of course, you genuinely revel in appearing to be as ignorant as you actually are.  "No contest" is a term of art in legal proceedings, and it is only applicable in criminal cases, not in a civil action, as was brought against Trump and his father. -- and there is no "admission of guilt" or "acknowledgement of guilt" in a civil case, since "guilt" is not an issue in civil cases.

In the 34-year history of USA TODAY, the Editorial Board has never taken sides in the presidential race.
But this year, they’re having to alter that policy for the first time; Not to endorse a candidate. To un-endorse one.

So....

This year, the choice isn’t between two capable major party nominees who happen to have significant ideological differences. This year, one of the candidates — Republican nominee Donald Trump — is, by unanimous consensus of the Editorial Board, unfit for the presidency.


Consider the un-endorsement digging a big, big trench around the drumpfster fire and marking it with safety cones.


Enjoy

GARY JOHNSON SAYS HIS FAVORITE FOREIGN LEADER IS OBI-WAN KENOBI


By Andy Borowitz
September 29, 2016


DURHAM, N.H. (The Borowitz Report)—Asked at a town-hall meeting on Wednesday to name his favorite foreign leader, the Libertarian Presidential candidate Gary Johnson seemed stumped at first before finally responding, “Obi-Wan Kenobi.”

The host of the town hall, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, initially appeared taken aback by Johnson’s answer, but the former New Mexico governor went on to defend it vigorously.

“Obi-Wan Kenobi is a Jedi Master, Chris,” Johnson said. “More than anyone else, he taught me that the Force is already strong with me.”

“We’re on the same page about this, aren’t we, Bill?” he asked his running mate, the former Massachusetts Governor William Weld, who smiled weakly and shifted awkwardly in his chair.

As the town-hall audience murmured nervously, Matthews reframed the question for Johnson. “What I meant was, Governor, could you name your favorite world leader on this planet?” he asked.

Again, Johnson seemed perplexed, before eventually replying, “Frodo.”



The Libertarian Party announced on Thursday that Johnson would participate in no additional town halls.

nice embedded video clip in this: http://reason.com/blog/2016/09/28/gary-johnson-gets-angry-you-will-too