Originally posted by TopHatter
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ex-FBI Director Mueller appointed DOJ Special Counsel
Collapse
X
-
"The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck
-
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostYes, so are cops not pulling me over when I am going 5 over on the interstate. Rule of Law is not always the best option. Hell, it's not even usually the best option, it's always better to have rule by NORM rather than law, but that's a totally different discussion.
You appeared to be slightly uncomfortable with the Rump Parliament, and then turned right around and said Presidents should be given a damn near blanket pardon.
Are you not seeing the irony in that?“He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”
Comment
-
i am actually a fan of expansive executive powers, but I'm not exactly supportive of the idea of pardoning anyone even remotely associated with a current investigation into one's own Presidential campaign.
Trump is illustrating the problem of relying on norms as a way to regulate power.There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Comment
-
not for much longer! i'm about to pull chalks and become a red-blooded dirty slimy contractor!There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
Comment
-
Originally posted by astralis View Postnot for much longer! i'm about to pull chalks and become a red-blooded dirty slimy contractor!
And I still owe you a battlefield tour!!!“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
Mark Twain
Comment
-
Originally posted by Albany Rifles View PostI hope you mean the one from the book and not the crappy one in the movie.
It's too bad my favorite genre is science fiction. Which means I have to watch the ones with Tom Cruise in them, even though I haven't cared for him as an actor since perhaps 2002.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, on the other hand, is a force multiplier that makes the movies he's in even greater.
It's not a simple matter of Sci-Fi Plot + Arnold, it's Sci-Fi Plot x Arnold. The films he's in become exponentially greater, with a few exceptions."Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."
Comment
-
Originally posted by TopHatter View PostHow did we go from "Presidents should have damn near blanket pardons for anything they do in office, with only certain offenses being unpardonable" to you going 5 mph over the limit on the interstate?
You appeared to be slightly uncomfortable with the Rump Parliament, and then turned right around and said Presidents should be given a damn near blanket pardon.
Are you not seeing the irony in that?
The same applies to Presidents. It's not exactly kosher to let them go, but IMO it's better from a political POV if we don't try to prosecute former Presidents for crimes they committed, unless they are particularly egregious.
The Rump Parliament really had neither the authority nor the need to execute the King, IMO, but it's not a good example of the Rule of Law regardless, at least IMO.
but I'm not exactly supportive of the idea of pardoning anyone even remotely associated with a current investigation into one's own Presidential campaign.Last edited by GVChamp; 07 Jun 18,, 22:41."The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck
Comment
-
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostNot really sure I think the English Civil War is an example of anything useful. The Rump Parliament is called "Rump" because the military purged the Long Parliament (itself undemocratic by US standards) of everyone they didn't like.
Basically the total opposite of rule by law.
This was not enough money by 1940 so first after having ruled without Parliament for 11 yrs he called the 'Short Parliament' (which he did not like and lasted 3 weeks) and then again in 1640 the Long Parliament specifically to get more income. They understandably were not happy with Ship Money writs imposed without their consent as by Magna Carta. Some stuff was done but notes like "Sir, you have done your duty, and your subjects have failed in theirs; and therefore you are absolved from the rules of government, and may supply yourself by extraordinary ways; you have an army in Ireland, with which you may reduce the kingdom" did not inspire confidence in the Parliament. When Charles failed to arrest five MPs he raised his standard in Oxford thus declaring war on Parliament for what he called his 'Divine Right' to basically do as he pleased.
Having lost the first part of the Civil War he started it again; making war against his own subjects. It was that he was rightfully executed. All avenues of conciliation were tried but he insisted until the last that Parliament (representing the people) had no authority to judge him since he was supreme head of the legal state. This is just what Trumpkin's misguided followers claim now. Charles lost his head for it.
Certainly the 'purging' of the Long Parliament into the 'Rump Parliament' was illegal but the country had been at war twice thanks to the King. What followed was worse briefly; a form of puritan dictatorship called a 'Commonwealth' under Cromwell with no Parliament. The Long Parliament was recalled following Cromwell's death to vote in the Restoration (of Charles ll) and then a new Parliament called.
I was a Tory (Conservative) in England and they are the direct inheritors in many senses of the Royalist cause in England. But I think even British educated Conservatives today can recognise 'Divine Right' to do as one pleases is a legal fallacy - it has no part in Common Law. Charles l sought to make himself above the customary norms of levying taxes - which being contrary to custom was contrary to the law. He made war on his own people for his belief that such was right. He payed for it since he refused all compromise. Sic semper tyrannis.Last edited by snapper; 07 Jun 18,, 23:33.
Comment
-
I don't really have any major disagreements with the basic facts of the English Civil War, but you're glossing over a lot of stuff with Parliament and the New Model Army, that make the Parliamentary side look kind of extreme. Even if the Parliament is correct on certain issues, that doesn't mean it has the authority to either try or execute the King, let alone to abolish the monarchy (like it later did). You don't have to believe in the Divine Right of Kings to think that.
Trump obviously does not have the divine right of anything and is subject to the checks and balances within the Constitution. But the pardon power is explicitly in the Constitution, and the SC has given the President pretty wide pardon powers."The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck
Comment
-
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostTrump obviously does not have the divine right of anything and is subject to the checks and balances within the Constitution. But the pardon power is explicitly in the Constitution, and the SC has given the President pretty wide pardon powers.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostI don't really have any major disagreements with the basic facts of the English Civil War, but you're glossing over a lot of stuff with Parliament and the New Model Army, that make the Parliamentary side look kind of extreme. Even if the Parliament is correct on certain issues, that doesn't mean it has the authority to either try or execute the King, let alone to abolish the monarchy (like it later did). You don't have to believe in the Divine Right of Kings to think that.
Originally posted by GVChamp View PostTrump obviously does not have the divine right of anything and is subject to the checks and balances within the Constitution. But the pardon power is explicitly in the Constitution, and the SC has given the President pretty wide pardon powers.Chimo
Comment
Comment