Ten oz

The U.S. Senate voted today to end it's support if Saudi Arabia in Yemen. I consider this an important first step.

In Florida the list of uncounted votes continue to rise. Initial 4,000 ballots had been set aside by state officials for having questionable signature and now as ballots post marked from before the election ballot continue to trickle in another nearly uncounted 7,000 ballots are being reported. The numbers are sure to raise Palm Beach and Polk have yet to report.

Do you have a citation for this? That I am aware of there was no one in Clinton campaign has been "convicted" of anything relating to the Dossier.

How about you take up what Raider posted with Raider. As it all applies to this topic I a woman has already come forward and admit she was paid to collect and complete ballots in favor of Mark Harris during the election. I feel there should be another election ASAP. The election result is compromised. In my opinion if it turns out a member of Mark Harris's campaign was involved Harris should be disqualified from office for this cycle and seat. You either agree with my thoughts on the matter or disagree.

I have no idea what your point here is. One is not removed but I feel they should be. What about that is confusing you?

The U.S. is knowingly supplying the Saudi govt with the weapon being used Yemen. I fear turning a blind eye to the plight of Yemen will only lead to more conflict in the future. Some of the children watching their Mothers, Fathers, Brothers, Sisters, and etc dying today will grow up hardened an full of animosity towards the world. We (human) are better than this. I wish my govt would stop selling weapons being use in Yemen and get on the ground in Yemen to help on the humanitarian side.

Below are my 2 posts on the matter. Both clearly state I am referencing campaigns. I clearly posted "Candidates who's campaign's break the law" and "Trump's campaign broke the law". It is type out in black and white. More over I already clarified the matter for you. It is sort of ridiculous you are attempting to insist otherwise. There will always be plausible deniability for an individual candidate. Whether its laundering money, breaking into facilities, throwing out ballots, or etc the individual candidate almost will never by the one getting their hands dirty. It will almost always be members of their campaign directly committing the criminal acts. In the NC case no one is claiming Mark Harris personally went door to door taking ballots. Rather it is believed other Republicans working to win the election for him did. To me its the same difference. The outcome is illegitimate. NC shouldn't just have to wait out a term to get this resolved. There should just be another election held asap to ensure the person voters actually want in office gets put in office.

Court filings yesterday (Dec. 7th 18') show that Trump's former personal Lawyer of 11yrs Michael Cohen was in contact with Russians offering to assist the Trump campaign starting early as November of 2015. These are not matters of speculation. Cohen has been a cooperative witness. Cohen has already entered guilty pleas.

If you 2 read my post accurately you'll see I clearly said "any candidate whose campaign breaks the law". I did not say the individual candidate must directly break the law. A campaign is an extension of a candidate and function on the candidates behalf. If a campaign violates the law I believe that candidate should be disqualified. Cohen committed election related crime for Candidate Trump. That means Trump's campaign broke the law. Such behavior by a campaign should be disqualifying. Likewise in the NC case. It doesn't matter whether the candidate collected ballots or a campaign staffer did it for them. It is the same difference.

Nothing about pointing out the the significant age difference implies Watson was uniquely vulnerable. Rather it was in response to J.C. MaxSwell who asked a specific hypothetical question. We are 6 page in and this is the first time age was brought up. It is a minor component overall.

No, I said "Remove the fact Tyson is married the age gap is still significant and she still worked for him. The situation remains creepy regardless". The "situation" includes the fact he was her boss.

Considering she walked into Tyson's office, explained she felt he had behaved inappropriately, and then quit I would say she did know what she wanted. She apparently wanted to work in an environment where she didn't feel married men twice her age that she reported directly to were trying to have sex with her.

From what I can find the McAfee interview written about in the patheos article I linked in the OP is the only interview with Tyson's former assistant Ashley Watson. So the issue of when the invitation was made isn't clear. Whether or not Tyson was married doesn't change anything. Tyson is 60yrs old and Watson is 29yrs old. Tyson is more than double her age. Remove the fact Tyson is married the age gap is still significant and she still worked for him. The situation remains creepy regardless whether or not Tyson is married. Lots of relationship start off with differentials in income which some perceive as power differentials. However I think power differentials between individuals who work together are far less common. Co-workers who date are most typically peers from my experience. The most famous case I can think with a major power differential between married man and a women less than half his age would be Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. In that case Bill Clinton was married, 50yrs old (Lewinsky was 22 or 23 I think), and Bill Clinton was the most important person where Lewinksy worked. The relationship was totally consensual. Regardless of the consensual nature of that relationship Bill Clinton has been wracked over the coals for that affair ever since. Just this past June while out promoting the book "The President is Missing" Bill Clinton had a series of confrontational interviews where he was asked to apologize to Monica Lewinsky. It has been 24yrs since the Lewinsky affair and Bill is still being publicly challenged and ridiculed for it. Rightfully so in my opinion. The situation was ridiculously inappropriate.

The way Tyson describes it in his own words seems as though she was dropping him off and he invited her up. I will see if I can find a clearer version of events.

A lot of employers have strict rules about dating. For example in the U.S. Military, Federal Agencies, local Police Departments and most govt related jobs members are only allowed to date other members of an equivalent paygrade. Even casual socializing (anything non-work related) between individuals separated by stature is against the rules. Many of Tyson's peers are Professors in Academia and on campuses it is not uncommon to have rules about Administrators dating students. Just as it is normal for co-workers to date it is also normal for there to be rules about who can date.

If I am not mistaken it was also part of the women's job to drive Tyson to and from the set. So being in the car at his apartment would have been a normal occurrence. Tyson invited her in and she had just a moments to say yes or no to her boss.

No, if members of ones campaign breaks the law they are not removed from office. Take the most current high level example. Members of Trump's campaign have been convicted of felonies. Trump's own former personal attorney was convicted of multiple felonies including campaign finance crimes in which he cited Trump as a co-conspirator. Trump's campaign broke the law. That is a fact. Trump hasn't been removed from office and we'll all just have to wait till the next election per the normal cycle to remove him.

To my knowledge a re-vote following such reports has never happened for national office. When we look at what happen in GA, FL, and now NC it would be great if we could just hold another vote. I think it is very important elections are gotten right and people have faith in the process. To many elections are being decide in court or by local officials who either do or do not want to hand count votes. There should be a national standard election for national office. Also any candidate who's campaign breaks the law should either be disqualified from services or depending on the nature of the law broken and amount of votes received a new special election should be held asap. It is insane to me that we allow officials to serve out their time in office even after it because known their campaign broke the law to get them in office.

I think to some extent everyone has heard the mantra "no means no" so often that in situations where "No" wasn't verbalized some see ambiguity. However "No" is actually (in my opinion) the default standard. Unless one invites you to touch them you shouldn't be touching. For example the extension of a hand is an invitation to shake or the lateral extension of arms is an invitation for a huge. One should never just grab and huge are person or just take their hand. It is inappropriate.

In both the case of the Tattoo and assistant Tyson behaved poorly in my opinion. I think most adults know better, should know better, than attempting to get beneath clothing or inviting subordinates into a private location for wine. In his response on Facebook I feel Tyson blames the victims in both cases by suggesting what he felt they should have done at the time rather than focusing on himself. In my opinion Tyson substantiated those 2 claims in his response. It is the third accusation which is unknown.

I am still waiting for my President to make a clear statement laying out our (U.S. of A.) position on what's happening and the extent we do or do not recognize and support Ukrainian sovereignty. Ambassadors for POTUS have spoken but no one actually speaks for Trump but Trump. Contradicting the made by others on his behalf is common sport for Trump. I would feel more comfortable about if I believed my govt had a clear position here but I fear it doesn't.

The way this conversations keeps dipping toward talk of leftist extremism, cries related to due process, lamenting about not being able to flirt anymore and statements that nothing can ever be known here and we all should move are disappointing. Whether or not we ever know for a fact what happened there are interesting points for discussion here. Drugged and Raped accusation - Tyson claims he dated his accuser for a while, they were intimate a few times, and it didn't workout because there was "no chemistry". Tyson didn't specify the length of the relationship or total amount of intimacy. Tchiya Amet (Link to her version) claims that Tyson was assigned by school administrators to initially show her around campus and the two became friends. Amet claims she viewed Tyson as a mentor or older brother figure and the two hung out a lot. She claims there was a platonic relationship. One day while hang out Tyson offered her some water. After drinking it she only remembers sparse moments where Tyson was intimate with her. She believes Tyson drugged the water. The 2 version of events are not so incredibly different as to be totally irreconcilable. There is room here to accept both version without the need to assume one side or the other is lying. It is common between people for the nature of a relationship to be misunderstood. I'd bet everyone of us have been in a relationships where there was confusion from one side or the other about whether the relationship was platonic or romantic. Both Tyson and Amet claim they spent time together. It is reasonable that both are telling the truth from their own perspective. Tyson thought they were dating and Amet thought it was platonic. It happens all the time. Where their stories diverge is whether or not the intimacy was consensual. Neither is denying intimacy accorded. Amet's believes she was drugged because she can't remember consciously participating or consenting to intimacy after being given water by Tyson. The water being drugged is the conclusion Amet came to because she experienced being impaired. Amet does not have hard evidence for or proof of Tyson drugging her. Still accepting both versions of events if Amet became impaired somehow unrelated to anything Tyson did it is possible in my opinion Tyson wouldn't have noticed and since he believed the 2 were dating went ahead been intimate her. These things do happen. Most commonly when alcohol or illicit drugs are involved but those are not the only was a person can become impaired. There are other physiological things which can produce memory loss and temporary impairment. It is why clear verbal consent is so heavily preached now days in sexual assault and prevention training. Sometimes the extent to which a person is able to consent is compromised and it goes unnoticed. Whether or not that is the case between Tyson and Amet isn't known but it is something that happens. It is one of the many reasons why I feel we can allow ourselves to believe victims while still respecting the innocence til proven guilty of the accused. These situations do not need to be viewed through the lenses of good vs evil where one side is a Rapist or the other side is a lair bent of ruining someones life.

On separate but possibly related note In the interview with Tchiya Amet I linked she explains that Tyson was initially assigned by administrators to show her around because the 2 were the only black students on campus. She describes viewing Tyson as an older brother and senior fellow person of color to help mentor her. I found the characterization and the fact (if true) the 2 were the only black students interesting. What Amet describes is an initial differential is power/position and a fellowship rooted to race. It substantively different than the casual dating, consensual intimacy, which ended in "no chemistry" Tyson described. If Amet's description about the reasons for their interactions(racial fellowship and senior student mentor) are accurate social awkwardness could account for why Tyson felt they were dating. It is possible the matter of race failed to register with him and being they were both students he viewed their status as equal. Of course that is all pure speculation on my part.

Millions couldn't see Bill Cosby as a rapist either. I find the socially socially awkward and misunderstood part odd. Neil DeGrasse Tyson is an Astrophysicist by education yet has spent years blossoming himself into a media personality host TV Shows and being a regular on shows and podcasts such as (Joe Rogan, John Oliver, Bill Maher, etc). I think being socially relevant and understandable is part of his appeal and success. There is as much or more known as there was with Kavanaugh. Both Tyson and his accuser Tchiya Amet have commented. Tyson is his response acknowledges knowing Amet, claims they dated, and claims they were intimate. Kavanaugh had denied ever knowing his accusers. Here is a link to an audio interview where Amet discusses it. At times during her telling of events it seems overly convenient that she can't produces certain things she references. However most those things deal with proving she knew and spent time with Tyson and that is not in question. As such the overly convenient absences are actually insignificant.

Tyson has been accussed of more than just unwanted flirtation. Thus far the conversation has focus more on the other accusations because both Tyson's version of events and that if his accusers are similar.