thelawlorfaithful

Ad Free Member
  • Content count

    10,231
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About thelawlorfaithful

Profile Information

  • Team
    Nevada
  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Reno, NV

Recent Profile Visitors

19,666 profile views
  1. Mug, from now on instead of "disapproval" can we refer to this as "percent of people who are tired of winning?"
  2. Death Penalty
  3. http://www.mwcboard.com/index.php?/profile/614-andreaztec/
  4. They still have 5th amendment rights, they just can't plead the fifth while providing testimony under oath regarding their actions performing the duties of their governmental position. They could still plead the fifth on matters not related to that. In a trial for a contempt charge they could plead the fifth, as what is in question is not what they did while clothed in the authority of the government, but whether their actions aimed to obstruct justice by failing to produce evidence (testimony) when the judge ordered them to do so. As is now, if found guilty of the charge they would pay the fine and/or serve the time and then would be free.
  5. They've caught exactly one lady doing mechanical doping. I'm sure it's happening, but it's not rampant in the way PED's are in sports.
  6. As is now, after six months of being jailed for contempt a person gets due process regarding the charge. So no, comrade, it wouldn't be as you framed it. Does it work better? How can you be certain?
  7. Nope. You can hold them in contempt, and the specter of charges for perjury and obstruction of justice would be incentives for telling the truth.
  8. A judge can decide what questions are pertinent for them to answer.
  9. If who they are working for is the enormously powerful government that the constitution created then yes. And like I said, solely pertaining to their work for that government. If they're being investigated for doing something illegal not within those bounds then the fifth amendment applies just the same as it does now.
  10. Of course you would like a post referencing Churchill. To the princess's sister
  11. That depends on the talk about climate change we're having. Admittedly, I'm not informed enough upon the subject to take a position, so I never do on here. And yes, there are segments of conservatives who deny it completely, or at least deny the potential effects, which is just at bad. From most of the conservative arguers I've seen, who in every other topic don't seem without merit regarding this topics, the generally accepted looming catastrophe of climate change is based upon theoretical computer modeling. That is not the scientific method. Those models may well be correct, or even severely underestimating the effects of a changing climate. But that is not the same thing as being repeatedly provable by using the scientific method. It's not that they won't, but that they can't definitely control for all the variables. In a way, it is the soft science topic within the hard sciences. There are just too many unexpected variables to account for to trust it entirely. It's handicapping, not the scientific method. But as uninformed as I am, which I know halfman not to be, I'd still lean towards Vegas all things considered.
  12. To paraphrase Churchill, I hate cats because they look down upon us, I despise dogs because they look up to us, I eat pigs because they see us as equals.
  13. I don't think much of think progress or MSNBC, but even they aren't infowars, more like Townhall and Foxnews. Infowars is coast to coast mixed with various elements of the right wing.