Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2018 American Political Scene

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by surfgun View Post
    Drugs stepped on by the killer Fentanyl? Kills druggies dead.
    If you want to dance, you have to pay the fiddler.

    You would think our Attorney General and President would be good with this.

    Every little bit helps solve the opioid crisis. Without them having to lift a finger
    Last edited by Gun Grape; 11 Feb 18,, 04:43.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by zraver View Post
      Actually he is... all executive power in every executive agency devolves from the President per the Constitution.
      Article 2 of the constitution says:

      Section 2
      1: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
      Note that his role as commander in chief is explicitly laid out. However, his relationship with heads of other departments is not explicitly defined except that he has the power to require their written opinions. Obviously, he also has the power to appoint and fire them.

      The way that he conducts his business with his cabinet officers other than DoD is set in precedent and tradition. Requiring personal loyalty to him from Justice is dangerous precedent.

      Comment


      • And lets cut the crap about the oath. Zraver should know that Federal Officers don't take the enlisted oath.

        Every federal office holder takes an oath as required by Article VI
        The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
        The one that the Director of the FBI takes is

        5 U.S. Code § 3331 - Oath of office

        An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath:

        “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This section does not affect other oaths required by law.
        Nothing mentioned about obeying or being loyal to the President. Only the enlisted oath mentions obeying the orders of the President and officers appointed over them

        The video in the link is FBI Director Wray taking that oath

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/video...=.c2525eba1133
        Last edited by Gun Grape; 11 Feb 18,, 18:06.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
          And lets cut the crap about the oath. Zraver should know that Federal Officers don't take the enlisted oath.
          Oh I do know, I was merely pointing out loyalty to the president is not untoward so long as it is lesser to loyalty to the Constitution. I'm far more worried about the never ending butthurt among the resist movement. Yeah he is crass, a boor and likely a perv and tax cheat. Nothing particularly presidential there in living memory. However we now have 2 memos from Congress 1 House and 1 Senate along with multiple statements by senior democrats that more than reinforce there was no collusion and no one has been able to make a coherent case on how firing Comey was anything less than deserved and a lawful use of presidential power. He won the election and his policies are more or less consistent with the conservative agenda which means opposition is political not principled.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by surfgun View Post
            Now a majority of Americans believe President Obama illegally surveilled the Trump Campaign.
            https://www.investors.com/politics/e...-ibdtipp-poll/
            Did you even read your own source? Only by culling the denominator, from 900 to 648 (a tiny sample), and then saying 55% think as you do, is it possible to twist the actual results:

            356 / 900 = 39.6% ... of investor.com readers, not of “Americans.”
            Last edited by DOR; 11 Feb 18,, 17:19.
            Trust me?
            I'm an economist!

            Comment


            • Political like 4 years of Benghazi hearings?
              Or political like Mitch McConnell:" The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."
              Or political like John Boehner : “We're going to do everything — and I mean everything we can do — to kill it, stop it, slow it down, whatever we can.”
              Or political like the Birther movement?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                Oh I do know, I was merely pointing out loyalty to the president is not untoward so long as it is lesser to loyalty to the Constitution. I'm far more worried about the never ending butthurt among the resist movement. Yeah he is crass, a boor and likely a perv and tax cheat. Nothing particularly presidential there in living memory. However we now have 2 memos from Congress 1 House and 1 Senate along with multiple statements by senior democrats that more than reinforce there was no collusion and no one has been able to make a coherent case on how firing Comey was anything less than deserved and a lawful use of presidential power. He won the election and his policies are more or less consistent with the conservative agenda which means opposition is political not principled.
                Haven't seen anything in either memo that directly refutes that there was 'collusion'. The Nunes Memo only goes as far to question the bias of the Steele memos and their use with regards to the validity in getting a warrant on Carter Page, and that the FBI didn't tell the FISA court that the source was biased (the last point, the Grassley letter contradicts). The Grassley letter also doesn't refute anything regard 'collusion' either. They only question the process and motivations.

                What we do know: it's the position of every intelligence agency in the United States that the Russian government carried out a series of cyberattacks and influence campaigns in an attempt to intervene and influence the outcome of the presidential election.

                Cui bono? Trump.

                Given what is known about Papadopoulos, Roger Stone & WikiLeaks, Manafort & Deripaska, the Trump Tower meeting, and Russian money funneled to the NRA, suspicion is not unwarranted.

                And if Comey being fired with the intent to derail the Mike Flynn and Russia investigations is a lawful exercise of presidential power - better re-write all the history books, as in that case, Nixon was just exercising his powers in a lawful manner as well, and was unfairly persecuted and railroaded.

                But hey - as long Trump's only a tax evader and a money launderer - any opposition is political, not principled.
                Last edited by Ironduke; 11 Feb 18,, 18:36.
                "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                  Political like 4 years of Benghazi hearings?
                  Dead Americans shouldn't be a political issue. HRC was evasive and she and the Obama administration tried to blame the first amendment for a terror attack.

                  Or political like Mitch McConnell:" The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."
                  Not even close to the same level, he was honest about his political objectives but never stepped off the deep end into tin hat territory. He didn't pander fake dossiers, encourage rioting in the streets or run around saying not my president.

                  Or political like John Boehner : “We're going to do everything — and I mean everything we can do — to kill it, stop it, slow it down, whatever we can.”
                  Obamacare was and is bad law, I haven't faulted the Dems for their opposition to the tax reform that passed. I think that is good law, but its an area where reasonable people can disagree.

                  Or political like the Birther movement?
                  Thats as close as it comes, but the birthers were never as numerous as the never trumpers, nor as vicious. Never saw a mob of birthers beating Obama supporters.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                    Thats as close as it comes, but the birthers were never as numerous as the never trumpers, nor as vicious. Never saw a mob of birthers beating Obama supporters.
                    What are you talking about? I never saw people like Mitt Romney or George H.W. Bush be vicious or beat Obama supporters either.

                    Never Trumpers are Republicans who were/are opposed to Trump. They were, in fact, the polar opposite of vicious and violent.
                    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                      Haven't seen anything in either memo that directly refutes that there was 'collusion'. The Nunes Memo only goes as far to question the bias of the Steele memos and their use with regards to the validity in getting a warrant on Carter Page, and that the FBI didn't tell the FISA court that the source was biased (the last point, the Grassley letter contradicts). The Grassley letter also doesn't refute anything regard 'collusion' either. They only question the process and motivations.
                      They show the process was corrupt, fruit of the poisonous tree

                      What we do know: it's the position of every intelligence agency in the United States that the Russian government carried out a series of cyberattacks and influence campaigns in an attempt to intervene and influence the outcome of the presidential election.
                      Yet the only proof we have of people meeting with Russian are all connected to the Dems. Trump Tower meeting, Trump jr left as soon as the Fusion GPS plant veered from dirt to policy. They never paid the Russians, or tried to arrange back channel paperless communications like the Dems did. Yeah Russia probably meddled, we do it all the time. But there is a huge chasm between meddling and trying to make HRC's expected presidency weaker and supporting Trump. Russia ran ads against both and Trump's platform was markedly anti-Russian in his support of energy export and stronger NATO spending.

                      Given what is known about Papadopoulos, Roger Stone & WikiLeaks, Manafort & Deripaska, the Trump Tower meeting, and Russian money funneled to the NRA, suspicion is not unwarranted.
                      Papadopoulos and Page were back benchers, Manafort was mercenary and you don't see me defending him, he was also charged with crimes from years before the Trump campaign.

                      And if Comey being fired with the intent to derail the Mike Flynn and Russia investigations is a lawful exercise of presidential power - better re-write all the history books, as in that case, Nixon was just exercising his powers in a lawful manner as well, and was unfairly persecuted and railroaded.
                      Big IF there. What we know for fact is that Comey should have been fired months earlier when he usurped prosecutorial powers in deciding not to charge HRC and revealing the contents of an investigation w/o indictment contrary to FBI rules. Now it turns out he was also lying to the FISA Court and violating the Woods Protocols put in place to protect Americans constitutional rights.

                      But hey - as long Trump's only a tax evader and a money launderer - any opposition is political, not principled.
                      Look at Obama and Clinton finances... Didn't think dirty money mattered to ya'll anymore. Or is it just fake moralizing when its the other party in power.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                        What are you talking about? I never saw people like Mitt Romney or George H.W. Bush be vicious or beat Obama supporters either.

                        Never Trumpers are Republicans who were/are opposed to Trump. They were, in fact, the polar opposite of vicious and violent.
                        I use the term never trumpers to encapsulate all ya'll be you resist democrats or rinos makes no difference to me.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                          They show the process was corrupt, fruit of the poisonous tree
                          Gowdy, whom you've opined so glowingly about, states the following:
                          REP. GOWDY: I actually don't think it has any impact on the Russia probe for this reason —

                          MARGARET BRENNAN: The memo has no impact on the Russia probe?

                          REP. GOWDY: No— not to me, it doesn't — and I was pretty integrally involved in the drafting of it. There is a Russia investigation without a dossier. So to the extent the memo deals with the dossier and the FISA process, the dossier has nothing to do with the meeting at Trump Tower. The dossier has nothing to do with an email sent by Cambridge Analytica. The dossier really has nothing to do with George Papadopoulos' meeting in Great Britain. It also doesn't have anything to do with obstruction of justice. So there's going to be a Russia probe, even without a dossier.

                          Papadopoulos and Page were back benchers, Manafort was mercenary and you don't see me defending him, he was also charged with crimes from years before the Trump campaign.
                          Retroactive minimalization - if Trump were aware of anything they were doing, whatever that may be, and he allowed them to continue on his campaign past that point, he's responsible for their actions.

                          Big IF there. What we know for fact is that Comey should have been fired months earlier when he usurped prosecutorial powers in deciding not to charge HRC and revealing the contents of an investigation w/o indictment contrary to FBI rules. Now it turns out he was also lying to the FISA Court and violating the Woods Protocols put in place to protect Americans constitutional rights.
                          Maybe he should have been fired because of that. But that's coulda woulda shoulda. From Trump's own mouth, the reason for firing him was the Russia investigation. Trump should have kept his mouth shut to his grave that it was about anything other than Comey's handling of the Clinton investigation. Keeping your mouth shut is pretty important in preventing prosecutors from proving your intent.

                          Look at Obama and Clinton finances... Didn't think dirty money mattered to ya'll anymore. Or is it just fake moralizing when its the other party in power.
                          All big money is dirty money. It's a universal problem in our politics. There's always quid pro quo with all these big money donors, and our current system of campaign finance is essentially legalized, regulated bribery. The NRA thing though, if true, seems to be doubleplusdirty and additionally illegal compared to the run of the mill big money donations and funding.

                          I don't know who you're talking about when you say "ya'll", or what you're referring to when you say the "other party".
                          "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                            I use the term never trumpers to encapsulate all ya'll be you resist democrats or rinos makes no difference to me.
                            Being an anti-Trump Republican doesn't make somebody a RINO. Kind of interesting though that the people who most vocally throw out the RINO label have only been Republicans since 1994, yet these ex-Yellow Dog Democrats somehow have the gall to claim the mantle as the arbiters of Republican orthodoxy.
                            "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                              Gowdy, whom you've opined so glowingly about, states the following:
                              Fruit of the poisonous tree corrupts the entire process, add in the brady violations and its unlikely any investigation will stick.


                              Retroactive minimalization - if Trump were aware of anything they were doing, whatever that may be, and he allowed them to continue on his campaign past that point, he's responsible for their actions.
                              Not retroactive, neither was paid and Page was fired


                              Maybe he should have been fired because of that. But that's coulda woulda shoulda. From Trump's own mouth, the reason for firing him was the Russia investigation. Trump should have kept his mouth shut to his grave that it was about anything other than Comey's handling of the Clinton investigation. Keeping your mouth shut is pretty important in preventing prosecutors from proving your intent.
                              From Trump's own mouthy huh, care to cite that? Becuase he did give conflicting accounts but both were based on Comey's actions in the run up to the election and the damage he did to the FBI.


                              [quote]All big money is dirty money. It's a universal problem in our politics. [quote]

                              Which is why I'm not overly stressed about it in the context of this conversation.

                              There's always quid pro quo with all these big money donors, and our current system of campaign finance is essentially legalized, regulated bribery.
                              We agree


                              The NRA thing though, if true, seems to be doubleplusdirty and additionally illegal compared to the run of the mill big money donations and funding.
                              huh?

                              I don't know who you're talking about when you say "ya'll", or what you're referring to when you say the "other party".
                              Dems and rinos... You'd rather have a later term abortion supporter, never saw a honest man she couldn't swindle, a rich man who couldn't buy her and a poor villager she couldn't bomb with extensive ties to dictators and yes Russia as president.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                                Dead Americans shouldn't be a political issue. HRC was evasive and she and the Obama administration tried to blame the first amendment for a terror attack.
                                Your right. The 9/11 investigation took less than 2 years. And there was only 2 of them. One in the House and one in the Senate.
                                Why did we need 8 different Benghazi hearings?


                                Not even close to the same level, he was honest about his political objectives but never stepped off the deep end into tin hat territory. He didn't pander fake dossiers, encourage rioting in the streets or run around saying not my president.
                                You mean like Trump did when Obama won reelection in 2012
                                https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...34630820507648

                                We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!

                                And maybe Mitch didn't but there were more than a few Fake Birth Certificates floated around trying to show that Obama was not qualified for the office.

                                Obamacare was and is bad law, I haven't faulted the Dems for their opposition to the tax reform that passed. I think that is good law, but its an area where reasonable people can disagree.
                                But his quote wasn't just about Obama care


                                Thats as close as it comes, but the birthers were never as numerous as the never trumpers, nor as vicious. Never saw a mob of birthers beating Obama supporters.
                                Never saw Candidate or President Obama tell people at his rally to rough protesters up and he would pay the lawyer bill either

                                https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/23/polit...nch/index.html

                                And a lot more examples if you have amnesia

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X