Originally posted by surfgun
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The 2019-2020 Impeachment, Trial and Acquittal of Donald John Trump
Collapse
X
-
“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.”
-
Originally posted by surfgun View PostSchumer considers himself a “law maker” therefore he is above rules. Rules are for the little people. Just ask Nancy.
Speaking of which, how do you feel about Trump's lawyers claiming complete and total immunity from the law, up to and including shooting someone in broad daylight?“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
-
Originally posted by Monash View PostMeanwhile Australia with compulsory voting has, I think some measure of insulation against such problems because highly politically motivated individuals on either end of the spectrum get 'drowned' to a degree by those in the (somewhat demoralized) center who probably wouldn't vote if they didn't have to.
If the centre drops out, you get a feeding frenzy between the poles with large policy shifts from one extreme to the other depending on who wins.
This is a recipe for instability and the consequent unrest and trouble that will surely accompany it.
The result is neither side of politics can pander only to the needs/interests of their welded on supporters without eventually alienating that all important middle part of the bell curve. This means to some degree at least they have to align their political platforms with the middle in mind - albeit usually with clenched teeth. So I guess on in this regards we lucked out.
There is some instability here which i'm curious to understand.
Comment
-
Originally posted by surfgun View PostTops, just let me know when the precedent changes. Otherwise it has been and is SOP.
Also, don't know if you noticed this or not, but: How do you feel about Trump's lawyers claiming complete and total immunity from the law, up to and including shooting someone in broad daylight?
You seem quite put out by Schumer and Pelosi...surely you have some thought on Trump believing and claiming in a court of law that he has total immunity from the law?“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
-
It would appear that you have trouble understanding and interpreting anything Trump. I do not believe Trump or his lawyers believe that Trump will shoot anybody. He and his lawyers believe in the separation of powers and the autonomy of the Executive Branch.
Comment
-
Originally posted by surfgun View PostIt would appear that you have trouble understanding and interpreting anything Trump. I do not believe Trump or his lawyers believe that Trump will shoot anybody. He and his lawyers believe in the separation of powers and the autonomy of the Executive Branch.
'No, rather, he and he lawyers have argued for complete immunity of the President (not the Executive Branch) whilst in office. They have also said nothing about "separation of powers". They simply think that Trump is totally immune from the law.
______________
Trump's lawyers argue he can't be charged while in office — even if he shoots someone
NEW YORK — Even if President Donald Trump shot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue, New York authorities could not punish him while he is in office, the president's lawyers argued Wednesday.
Attorneys for Trump made the claim while arguing before a federal appeals court in their suit against Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance, who has subpoenaed Trump’s tax returns.
Trump is fighting the subpoena on the grounds that as president, he has absolute immunity from criminal indictment or investigation. His attorney said that would block Trump from being arrested and charged even if he followed through on his campaign trail claim: “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and wouldn’t lose any voters, okay?”
Carey Dunne, New York District Attorney Cy Vance Jr.'s general counsel, said the president's position is too absolute.
There could be examples in which a state should be able to conduct a criminal investigation of a sitting president, "if, for example, he did pull out a handgun and shoot someone on Fifth Avenue."
Asked about that, Consovoy said a president could be charged with such a crime once he was out of office or if he was impeached and removed from office. "This is not a permanent immunity," he said.
Judge Denny Chin pressed him on how the crime would be handled while Trump remained in office. “Nothing could be done, that’s your position?” he said.
“That is correct,” Consovoy replied.
The Manhattan DA subpoenaed eight years of Trump’s tax returns from his accounting firm, Mazars USA, as part of a probe into hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels in exchange for her silence about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump.
Federal Judge Victor Marrero threw out Trump’s suit seeking to block the subpoena, finding his “extraordinary” claim to be immune from criminal investigation was not supported by the law.
Trump appealed, and the subpoena was put on hold as the case is heard. The sides made oral arguments Wednesday before the Second Circuit.
The case is expected to ultimately make its way to the Supreme Court. Trump’s attorneys and the DA’s office made an agreement that if Trump loses in the appeals court, Vance will hold off on enforcing the subpoena as long as Trump makes his appeal to the Supreme Court within 10 days.
“We view the entire subpoena as an inappropriate fishing expedition not made in good faith,” Consovoy told the judges.
“Everything we’ve heard this morning makes clear the president is a target,” he said. “The district attorney just wants the president’s tax returns.”
Unlike past presidents, Trump has adamantly refused to make his tax returns public.
Carey Dunne, general counsel for the District Attorney, said the privilege the president’s lawyers are claiming is not founded in the law.
“There’s no such thing as presidential immunity for tax returns,” he said.
“He may view them as embarrassing or sensitive but tax returns do in fact get subpoenaed all the time in financial investigations,” he said. “They’re making this up, your honor.”
___________
So, once again, how do you feel about that claim of total immunity for the President?“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
-
Originally posted by surfgun View PostI am afraid that these interpretations that line up with and fall into the mainstream press and Democrats believe that Trump has anointed himself King. It’s all what if, hypotheticals that I am not going to attempt interpret.
I'm asking you: What is your opinion on 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
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostThis is a good outcome but what explains being on the 6th PM in the last ten years. There is some instability here which i'm curious to understand.
Fortunately it got so bad both sides of politics have been more or less forced to implement internal reforms to make it harder to oust a leader without first jumping certain administrative hoops. This seems to have slowed down the 'churn rate' somewhat. That and the fact polls were telling both major parties that the electorate was getting sick of their antics - hence more independent candidates.If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.
Comment
-
monash,
So what exactly is your point? Are you suggesting that US politics is no more polarized and divisive now in 2020 than it was back in the late 90's during the Clinton Administration? ID so please see the below from a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2017.
the idea that "everyone will use impeachment every time from now on" is not a particularly compelling one because the parties will still need to consider the political costs for doing so. if the GOP wants to re-do 1998 with a new Dem President, then let them have the joy of it.Last edited by astralis; 02 Jan 20,, 14:59.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 Postmonash,
my point is that impeachment has already been used as a political weapon regarding something that is of far less concern to United States prosperity and security. that backfired, as Newt Gingrich found out to his chagrin.
the idea that "everyone will use impeachment every time from now on" is not a particularly compelling one because the parties will still need to consider the political costs for doing so. if the GOP wants to re-do 1998 with a new Dem President, then let them have the joy of it.
What cost ? this impeachment isn't going to cost the Dems. They're betting it will hurt the incumbent
Impeachers are the good guys, remember : )
So the formula is impeach - win next election
Comment
-
DE,
GOP won the following election. The people said Billy and his party were bad.
Bill Clinton's impeachment played almost zero role in the 2000 election.
What cost ? this impeachment isn't going to cost the Dems. They're betting it will hurt the incumbentThere 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
Comment