Mod note: Please assume good faith here. If you don’t want to answer a poster’s question, then don’t (or flag it). Not everyone on the BBS is a constitutional scholar or studied the American government in school, and given the topic of this post, asking questions along those lines would appear to be a legitimate avenue of inquiry.
Thanks.
Oh, I’m permanently and openly guilty AF for “contempt of cop”.
If it were an actual crime, I’d be in solitary for 400 years by now 
Of all the things that frighten me of consequences of the last 4 years, that is numerous uno.
One party has gamed the system and stacked justice against everyone.
How the hell do we actually undo this? I don’t know of any way. They are at best incompetent, at worst incompetent and corrupt as hell, and all appointed
FOR LIFE.
Democrats should never enter such a strategy either- but now I feel the only way to offset this is an equal campaign of liberal judges.
I really feel like America has drank poison, and the only solution is neutralizing it by drinking something else intensely. Which is not how problems should get solved- I wish courts were politically neutral- but I myself have seen first hand that isn’t true at all- and justice doesn’t come to those who deserve it.
And you ARE DEFINITELY WRONG #LDoBe
If you are speaking from your own experience; then the meeting you attended was not AA, regardless of anything else.
“No TRUE Scottsman would ever make my own organization look like a cult”
Am I right?
It’s AA. My experience is normal according to lots of other AA attendees I’ve spoken with, except apparently you.
I think you’re the odd-man-out here.
so, some federal magistrates need to be impeached, then, i guess…
Also, Stone used twitter to try to influence the outcome of the trail in a manner that smacked of witness tampering and jury tampering. Judges really dislike tampering.
If he had just tweeted photos of his morning coffee, he would have been just fine.
It’s…not?
They can’t exist. You have to give yourself over to a “higher power”. And so everyone does their thing while focusing on this “higher power” that is explicitly NOT God, but rather a being/situation/whatever that has all the characteristics of God. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc…
It works really well for some people. For others (like me) it most certainly does not. I am one of the people who has just had terrible consequences from drinking and substance abuse and perhaps has finally figured that out after 56 years on this planet. Everything I have experienced in this life has shown me that there is not a God. I even tried just deciding that there was a God (making a conviction), which led me to seminary where I thought maybe I could figure it out…that worked for a few years, but experience won out. Until I see flaming chariots in the sky or some other incontrovertible miracle, I’m not going to believe. If (when?) that day comes, He (It) is also going to have some explaining to do.
But I also have a PhD in social psychology, so I know that parts of the 12 step program are very effective behavioral therapy. I’m actually doing one or two of those steps by telling this story. So my takeaway is that if the 12 steps don’t work for you, some of them might.
I am most concerned by the broadness of the restrictions, "any public gatherings " is pretty damned broad restriction for a presumed innocent person!
Slowly and painfully. Federal judges can be removed, but they must be impeached by the house and then removed by the senate after an impeachment trial. So these judges must be watched for violations of the federal justice ethics code and then the violations must be pursued. Only the very worst offenders will be impeached. Congress is unlikely to impeach because of bad rulings or rulings they disagree with.
ETA: link for explainer by Brennan Center for Justice Impeachment and Removal of Judges: An Explainer
That’s my experience with AA as well. The, “It’s not religious, it’s spiritual!” argument comes from pro-AA people who don’t want to look like cultists. But that’s a distinction without a difference.
Oh, and what’s happening in Portland is disgusting. My first thought was, “yep, that’s why Agent Orange has been stocking up on federal judges.”
If you were Black, you already would be…or dead.
The reason you’re still walking around is thanks to your privilege. Don’t forget that.
I’m not a lawyer, but the general rule is that pretrial restrictions need to be narrowly tailored to specific ends. You can prevent people from talking to other witnesses to prevent intimidation, but not from talking to anyone, for example. The more protected a conduct is under constitutional law, the more narrow the restriction generally has to be tailored. Protesting is generally really protected, to avoid violating someone’s first amendment rights. This means you could probably prevent someone from attending a specific protest, if the charges were related to something like conspiracy to start a riot at that protest, but a blanket ban on protests will never hold up. Once you get to restricting an enumerated right, like assembly, in all forms that bar would be monumental to clear.
AA has fought tooth and nail against all attempts to measure its effectiveness and compare it to other treatment modalities. They are also deathlessly opposed to investigating any of those other treatments or even challenging the notion that there is a one-size-fits-all disease model for drug-seeking. When it has been held up to scrutiny it has failed miserably. In the few clinical trials of which I am aware it had about the same effectiveness as simply deciding not to drink.
Slogans like “The Program doesn’t fail you. You fail the Program” or “75% of those who really try the Program succeed” are so much untreated effluent.
That is not what’s happening. The protesters aren’t violent. It’s right there in front of your eyes.
Yeah,
They can declare a riot if someone sets a fire, if a window is broken if and if …
A journalist recognized a cop by name who them slapped his cell ph outta the journalist’s hand and broke a window. Then they called that a riot. (see: twitter: bellingcat)
As Orwell would say:
double plus unfun.
What exactly are you contesting? That AA is founded on the belief that one needs a higher power to overcome addiction? That people in AA meetings recommend reading the Big Book? That there are AA meetings with love showers and people babbling about God?
Check out the 12 steps in the wikipedia article, 5 of which reference „god“ directly. I can‘t see how this is anything but „definitely religious“.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
