Sore losers again, repubs just won't give up

[Harlan Huckleby]

To be clear, I'm not arguing that only Cali should be doing this.

Would doing this in only California be fair? To the dems, no. To the voters? yes.

[SkinBasket]

To be clear, I'm not arguing that only Cali should be doing this.

Would doing this in only California be fair? To the dems, no. To the voters? yes.

I'm guessing from your juxtaposition of the above quotes followed by your use of an emoticon that you somehow feel those two statements are mutually exclusive? I think you missed a connection somewhere in your brain, but please, feel free to elaborate how those two statements can't possibly co-exist without being an indication of mental illness and maybe I can help you help yourself. Maybe. Probably not. Really, it's not likely at all, but we can still try.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You have been arguing in favor of the California initiative all along, and then "to be clear" claim that you are against it.

And then you say the initiative is unfair to Democrats, but fair to the people. So we are to believe that you value fairness to Democrats more than fairness to the people.

I'm sure this all makes sense in your head.

[SkinBasket]

You have been arguing in favor of the California initiative all along, and then "to be clear" claim that you are against it.

I never said I'm against it. I said "I'm not arguing that only Cali should be doing this." Your attempts to twist everyone else's statements seems to be confusing yourself more than anything these days.

And then you say the initiative is unfair to Democrats, but fair to the people.

I said voters, not people.

So we are to believe that you value fairness to Democrats more than fairness to the people.

I value fairness to voters - all voters - over fairness to how changing an unfair system effects political dynamics in a given state. I value a fair, representative vote, independent of the issue or politics involved. Whether that vote only happens in California or whether it happens nationwide, I value a more representative vote over a less representative vote. I simply stated I understand it happening only in Cali could be considered "unfair" to Dems through poor use of equivocations like Texas. That doesn't change the fact that a more representative vote is more fair to voters - no matter the scale.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I said "I'm not arguing that only Cali should be doing this."

This issue at hand is that only California is changing. And you never argued against it, you simply mentioned the (weak) arguments on the other side.

Whether that vote only happens in California or whether it happens nationwide, I value a more representative vote over a less representative vote.

Here we go again. I know this means something in your head, but the words state that you support California (alone) moving to proportional voting.

The only consistent thing you say is that you value a more representative system. So lets work from there.
I take it you are in favor of a Parlimentary system? Because our presidential system is horribly unrepresentative, it's winner take all. The big advantage of a Parliment is that it fosters multiple parties, all of which retain power to challenge the Prime Minister. It's much closer to true democracy than our presidential system.

And I HAVE to beleive that you despise the electoral college. It was invented expressly to take power from the voters and move it to the educated political elites. And it gives voters in small states 1.3 votes, large state voters .84 votes (or some such thing.)

As a fair representation freak, why aren't you simply railing against the electoral college?

[SkinBasket]

Jesus fuck, what a waste of time.

Yes, I support the Cali initiative because I see it as a step in the right direction (as I've explained several times now), and I can understand the reasons given as a front for political motivations as having at least some merit because the state is unique (again, covered).

But that doesn't mean, as you seem to suppose, that I don't support an end to the electoral college system. You're arguing as if supporting the Cali initiative excludes supporting the same nationwide, which is where I'm assuming your confusion lies.

You're arguing with yourself again, and if you didn't try so hard to turn everything into something you think you have an answer for, this wouldn't be so difficult.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Yes, I support the Cali initiative

finally!

So you aren't It just seemed that way when you were trying to have it both ways.

I didn't have any idea of your opinion on the electoral college. But now that I hear you are against it, welcome aboard!

[SkinBasket]

So you aren't It just seemed that way when you were trying to have it both ways.

Don't foist your lack of understanding on me. Unless you're playing Dumb Harlan again. In that case, you can just go fuck yourself. Actually either way you can go fuck yourself.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You operate at the level of name calling. You use the word "representative" but haven't even thought about what that word means. You are against democrats, and that's as deep as you go.

[SkinBasket]

Cry me a river.


After you get done telling me what I know, believe, and think... again.

[Freak Out]

Weren't some Giuliani people linked with the Cali initiative? Now it looks like his best friend wont be able to keep himself out of Federal Court. It's really to bad he never became Homeland Security secretary. ya...

Prosecutors expected to file charges against Bernard Kerik

BY GREG B. SMITH
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Ex-Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik will likely face new federal charges, sources say, some linked to meeting at Walker's, a bar in Tribeca allegedly attended by Kerik and two then-city officials.

Bernard Kerik's legal nightmare is about to get worse, with federal prosecutors expected to file charges against the former police commissioner that will likely include allegations of bribery, tax fraud and obstruction of justice, the Daily News has learned.

The indictment, expected next month, could prove to be an embarrassing obstacle for Kerik's former mentor Rudy Giuliani, who is cruising at the top of the polls heading into the presidential primary gauntlet.

The bribery allegations against Kerik stem from a secret meeting at a bar in Tribeca, according to two sources familiar with the federal probe.

Kerik's lawyers recently agreed to waive the statute of limitations on the tax charges until Nov. 17, which will allow them to make one last plea to try to ease the pain.

Kerik will go to the Justice Department in Washington in the coming weeks to try to get expected criminal tax charges reduced to civil fines.

Meanwhile, witnesses have been appearing before a grand jury in White Plains, several sources said.

Last spring, Kerik turned down a deal to plead guilty to tax charges. Since then, the probe has expanded to include other charges, the sources said.

The indictment will have direct implications for Giuliani, the sources said.

For one, another Giuliani commissioner and a top inspector general during Giuliani's years as mayor will be called as witnesses to describe the secret meeting in Tribeca.

The Giuliani officials are Raymond Casey, former head of the Trade Waste Commission, a city agency set up to keep the mob out of the carting industry, and Michael Caruso, former inspector general with the city Department of Investigation.

In July 1999, Casey and Caruso met with Kerik, then the city Correction Department commissioner, at Walker's bar on North Moore St., court papers reveal.

At the time, Casey was investigating Interstate Industrial Corp., a company that employed Kerik's brother Donald and the best man at Kerik's wedding, Larry Ray.

An Interstate affiliate had applied to operate a waste transfer station in Staten Island, and Casey was looking into allegations that the firm had ties to the Gambino crime family.

During the meeting, both Interstate and Ray were discussed, according to an affidavit filed in a civil suit by Caruso's lawyer, Mark Freyberg.

Kerik has admitted that at the time Interstate was secretly paying to renovate his Bronx apartment. Prosecutors are now expected to allege that the free renovations amounted to Kerik accepting bribes, the sources said.

In return for the renovations, the feds will allege, Kerik used his city position to try to influence the city's probe of Interstate, the sources said.

During the Walker's meeting, Kerik allegedly told Casey that he did not see the allegations concerning Interstate's ties to the mob as credible, according to a source familiar with the case.

Kerik noted that his brother worked for the company, and said, "If I thought Interstate was mobbed up, do you think I'd let my brother work there?" according to the source.

Kerik also urged Casey to complete his probe and either reject or accept the application - but either way, to do it expeditiously, the source said. Years later, the agency recommended denying Interstate the license.

Kerik's lawyer Kenneth Breen did not return a call seeking comment. Casey's lawyer and Perry Carbone, the prosecutor handling the case for Manhattan U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia, also did not return calls.

Last year, Kerik pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor charges brought by the Bronx district attorney in connection with receiving payments totaling $165,000 from Interstate, but he was not charged with bribery.

The expected obstruction of justice charges from the feds are related to Kerik's statements to Bronx prosecutors, the sources said.

The expected federal tax fraud charges are linked to Kerik's failure to pay taxes on the income he received from Interstate, the sources added.

Giuliani has extensive ties to Kerik, promoting him to correction commissioner, then to police commissioner. Giuliani later also hired him at his firm, Giuliani Partners, and recommended him to President Bush for the job of Homeland Security secretary.

The relationship soured in December 2004 when Kerik withdrew from consideration for the Homeland Security job and a torrent of accusations of wrongdoing poured forth.

Giuliani has since admitted he had erred in pushing Kerik for the Homeland Security job.

"It was a mistake," Giuliani told CNN's Larry King in February. "I think the answer is I made a mistake and I took responsibility for it."