Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Terry Branstad (Ely, Colo: house, incomes)

[mofford]

Terry Branstad, the longest serving governor in American history, having recently completed one of the most difficult and dangerous diplomatic missions ever, as ambassador to China under the Trump administration, has been absolved of any wrong doing in the politically motivated trial he lost a few years ago, concerning discrimination against a gay staffer, Christopher Godfrey. The 1.5 million dollar award to Godfrey has been reversed by Iowa Supreme Court, as there was no proof Branstad knew he was gay before he fired him, and Godfrey was not a state employee, but a consultant that was fired for reasons related to work performance. The trial was rigged and the motive behind it was to smear Branstad's reputation.

https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2021...ation-lawsuit/

Kim Reynolds called the ruling “a complete and total victory for the rule of law and Iowa taxpayers.” Reynolds is polling well as of late, and her political future seems bright.

Also wanted to mention another long serving Iowa politician is fighting an uphill battle to show he is not ready for the boneyard, 87 year old Chuck Grassley did 22 push ups at a veterans lunch, proving he is physically fit and will probably be seeking another term. He's a very powerful senator with a good reputation, and I do not think it would be wise to vote him out of office and replace him with a rookie senator. Grassley works hard for Iowa and I think the US senate benefits greatly from his leadership and experience. Surprised at a recent poll (rigged?) if a senate election were held today, he would only receive 29% support. I think that's sad, and probably not accurate.

Grassley doing push ups
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om2DgSVi0Vg

[atler8]

Originally Posted by mofford

Terry Branstad, the longest serving governor in American history, having recently completed one of the most difficult and dangerous diplomatic missions ever, as ambassador to China under the Trump administration, has been absolved of any wrong doing in the politically motivated trial he lost a few years ago, concerning discrimination against a gay staffer, Christopher Godfrey. The 1.5 million dollar award to Godfrey has been reversed by Iowa Supreme Court, as there was no proof Branstad knew he was gay before he fired him, and Godfrey was not a state employee, but a consultant that was fired for reasons related to work performance. The trial was rigged and the motive behind it was to smear Branstad's reputation.

https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2021...ation-lawsuit/

Kim Reynolds called the ruling “a complete and total victory for the rule of law and Iowa taxpayers.” Reynolds is polling well as of late, and her political future seems bright.

Also wanted to mention another long serving Iowa politician is fighting an uphill battle to show he is not ready for the boneyard, 87 year old Chuck Grassley did 22 push ups at a veterans lunch, proving he is physically fit and will probably be seeking another term. He's a very powerful senator with a good reputation, and I do not think it would be wise to vote him out of office and replace him with a rookie senator. Grassley works hard for Iowa and I think the US senate benefits greatly from his leadership and experience. Surprised at a recent poll (rigged?) if a senate election were held today, he would only receive 29% support. I think that's sad, and probably not accurate.

Grassley doing push ups

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om2DgSVi0Vg

Twice above you have made crystal clear statements that indicate that something is or was "rigged." From the 2 statements, it is absolutely clear that you believe that the court case and the poll of voters that you do not personally agree with or like are thus false because they do not not square with your own views. Thusly we are treated to the "rigged" sentiment. I assure you that one cannot hope to similarly routinely deal in that manner with everyone or everything in life.

How is is possible that the court proceedings as set forth under the laws of the State of Iowa are in and of themselves "rigged". I'll be waiting to hear an answer that specifically explains that claim.

As for Branstad himself, a JURY OF YOUR FELLOW IOWA PEERS found him guilty in that they did not believe his testimony, i.e. they found that he LIED. Despite the Iowa Supreme Court ruling, your cry that it was a "rigged" trial cannot ever change that fact!

In terms of grassley, get this: I am 66 years old. In November of 1958, the winter before I started kindergarten, chuck grassley was elected to the Iowa legislature in the Iowa House and represented his home area of Butler County in that body.
Decades later, he won election to the U.S. Senate in 1980 and has sat in that body since January of 1980; i.e. for over 40 years.

Cutting to the chase and forgetting anything else I may have agreed with or disagreed with that chuck grassley has said or done over the course of his 62 years of holding elective office, grassley completely lost me when in 2009 during debate over the ACA, i.e .Obama Care, he came home to Iowa and made numerous in person and on air statements about the proposed legislation.
The absolute kicker for me was an appearance he made at a town picnic in central Iowa during which he ABSOLUTELY LIED to Iowans when he said that the ACA would set up "death panels" that would decide the fate of grandma and grandpa, etc.
Looking in on the ACA now in 2021 several years later, I'll ask "Where are chuck grassley's 'death panels'?
See the link below for coverage from 2017 when grassley's past use of "death panels" was discussed at a public appearance he made in Iowa. The coverage at the link is from The Hill, a conservative-leaning D.C. online news site I frequently visit.

Having been very heavily at the center of Senate negotiations on the bill at that time, grassley fully well knew that the "death panels" and "pulling the plug on Grandma" lines were all loads of malarkey or a set of inflammatory, bald-faced lies. Nevertheless, he said them to Iowans anyway!
When a grassley "death panel" statement that I saw on video was made in 2009 in Iowa, I called a news reporter in Iowa and asked him if I had misunderstood what grassley was heard saying in the video coverage. I wanted to know if that was exactly how that particular appearance transpired. The reporter assured me that I had indeed understood the exact words of grassley at that event.

As I wrote earlier, I am skipping everything else about grassley and focusing for the sake of some brevity only on that 1 item.
But boy, is that a doozy of a lie! It was an unspeakably awful moment whereby grassley revealed himself for what he sadly became over time; i.e. an inveterate liar & political hack whose time in the U.S. Senate has come and gone and who now is perhaps the most remarkable example of why term limits are needed.

In conclusion about grassley I'll offer this: He used to have a reputation as a straight shooter and as something of a maverick for which I always gave him a degree of respect even if I disagreed with him on various issues.
However, in his most recent years as Iowa's senior U.S. Senator, grassley has lost his way and fallen into the trap of becoming a rubber stamp for whatever policy the 2020 election loser trump or the odious mitch mcconnell wanted whether or not it was right or even moral.

As a functioning rubber stamp, grassley no longer acts with truthfulness as his guiding principle but rather he now serves as a willing lackey who no longer has a sense of righteous moral clarity or a spine of courage to guide him. For Iowans, that is an obvious & embarrassing spectacle to behold!
Any modicum of respect that was once due for grassley's years of governmental service have been willingly jettisoned by him.
As a result, grassley is damaged goods historically-speaking and there will now never be any entry made in a grassley reference that speaks to him as being a "profile in courage".

As for the op, your claims here of this and that being "rigged" in and of themselves are plentifully revealing.
They speak to disingenuous thought that dovetails in line with the unfortunate "fake news" pablum that has become far too common in public discourse.
I would hope for better on this forum.


https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...ig-death-panel

[mofford]

Chuck has plenty of life left in him, comparing Grassley years to regular human years, he is only about 60 years old. He could easily outlive Strom Thurmond whom lived to 100 years and 203 days, and served 48 years in the senate. Chuck Grassley might be able to surpass the all time record of Robert C. Byrd, whom served in the senate for 51 years, 5 months and 26 days. I'm pulling for Chuck. Would have to agree with you that 2009 was not his best moment, but generally speaking, republicans are weak on anything pertaining to healthcare, Chuck is no exception, but the goal has always been to keep us away from socialized medicine, many countries are scaling back there UHC systems to some degree, as it has many flaws. His chess playing was very good in 2016, the way he handled the Supreme Court appointments, with Garland and Kavanaugh, but it might open up a can of worms after what happened with Ginsberg, as the democrats may try to pack the supreme court, which could have dire consequences.

Concerning Branstad and the Godfrey trial, I don't recall a lot of details being released to the public about the facts and solid proof on how Branstad was found guilty by the jury. The case was appealed, and we have the ruling from the Iowa Supreme Court. I will not speculate further as to what went wrong in the trial, be it the judge, jury selection, evidence or whatever. All I know is that I'm very happy Branstad was vindicated and his reputation restored.

As to all this rigged stuff, that is a democrat game they play, media takeover, fake news, promoting illegal immigration via open borders to gain votes and tip red states like Arizona into blue states. Eternal riots, demonstrations, strikes, all backed by the media, injecting politics into sports, collecting money from republicans whom must spend money for TV spots to have any chance of winning, paid to stations and networks that are totally hostile to their views, then using their money to produce more propaganda for their side. Yeah, that's fair, lol. Yes, there was the capitol riot on the republican side, rather short compared to the nationwide destruction on the dem side with city after city being ruined and not fit for decent people with middle class incomes to live in, not affordable, not clean, not safe. The democrats use many tactics the communists once used to take over various countries by force over the past century. Enough said for tonight.

[Rachel NewYork]

This is not the forum to argue over who is worse: Republicans or Democrats. You can take that stuff to the Politics and Other Controversies forum.

Topic closed.