Page 1006 of 1006 FirstFirst ... 6506906956996100410051006
Results 10,051 to 10,057 of 10057

Thread: Politics Thread

  1. #10051
    Supporting Member bjf123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Section 105
    Posts
    3,752
    Quote Originally Posted by Masterofreality View Post
    By the way. Sure glad Dementia Joe had that “We’ll immediately change the course of the Pandemic” definitive statements during the campaign. Then Friday Joe, who obviously can’t remember yesterday, says “There’s nothing we can do to change the course of the Pandemic during the next several months. “

    Ha. Lies, begin. Keep Track Paul since you were so diligent with the last President’s alleged mistruths.
    I wonder if the media will challenge him on that? Oh, wait. That’s right. Joe doesn’t actually take tough questions.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

  2. #10052
    Supporting Member bobbiemcgee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    9,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Masterofreality View Post
    By the way. Sure glad Dementia Joe had that “We’ll immediately change the course of the Pandemic” definitive statements during the campaign. Then Friday Joe, who obviously can’t remember yesterday, says “There’s nothing we can do to change the course of the Pandemic during the next several months. “ .
    I think he's doing what he can. He was left a big mess. Also said it would be a "dark winter" a few hundred times.Is it Winter? Palm tress on Lake Erie?
    This space for rent.

  3. #10053
    Supporting Member paulxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    16,181
    Quote Originally Posted by Masterofreality View Post
    Ha. Lies, begin. Keep Track Paul since you were so diligent with the last President’s alleged mistruths.
    If he gets anywhere close to "the greatest of all presidents" at 25,000+, I'm all over it. No worries.

    I note the Wall Street Journal article again in case you missed it:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/yes-the...mp-11611356881

    Perhaps they've turned into a left wing opinion site?
    ...he went up late, and I was already up there.

  4. #10054
    Voice of Reason Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    18,817
    Quote Originally Posted by bobbiemcgee View Post
    I think he's doing what he can. He was left a big mess. Also said it would be a "dark winter" a few hundred times.Is it Winter? Palm tress on Lake Erie?
    "A big Mess".

    Vaccine in record time. Already more than 1,000,000 vacs a day. Joe's "objective" was already in place before he ever was inaugurated.
    Yeah. Glad we have that mess. We've already gotten our vaccs. No issues.

    Where's the mess, other than the fake stories foisted by fake media?
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  5. #10055
    Voice of Reason Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    18,817
    Quote Originally Posted by paulxu View Post
    If he gets anywhere close to "the greatest of all presidents" at 25,000+, I'm all over it. No worries.

    I note the Wall Street Journal article again in case you missed it:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/yes-the...mp-11611356881

    Perhaps they've turned into a left wing opinion site?
    Anybody can do anything. Whittington assumes that it is a valid hearing presided by The Chief Justice. Roberts wants no part of it.
    Alan Derschowitz says differently as to whether there can be a legit hearing. Any decision by the Senate after appeal would never stand.

    Why don't you and your idols, move on and worry about the country going forward, and stop destroying jobs in a pandemic? Your Boogie Man Trump can't hurt you anymore, little boy.
    Performative
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  6. #10056
    Supporting Member paulxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    16,181
    Yikes. He was the "greatest" ever. 30,573!

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...3e2_story.html

    Joe's got his work cut out for him.
    ...he went up late, and I was already up there.

  7. #10057
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Masterofreality View Post
    Nixon & Trump are totally different situations. If you are “lost” it’s because you want to be and don’t want to see clearly.
    Nixon was still in office. Then resigned and so there was no legal precedent. As Strange Brew said below the SOP is definitely designed to prevent overreach. Hence, as an example, the Presidential veto.
    And you answered your own “lost” question. The Biased House can do anything they want, including performative, time wasting actions then foist it over on the Senate. A true Constitutionally compliant Impeachment hearing requires that the Chief Justice preside, not a politically biased actor like Harris. The Senate can do whatever they do, but the fact remains is that there is no “defendant” to be removed from office. Roberts sees this trash and wants no part of it. So even if Harris is a tie breaker vote. The decision will be appealed to the Supreme Court, will be found to be invalid & unConstitutional and the High Court will override it.
    -No valid defendant per the Constitution
    -No valid presider per the Constitution

    Actions are irrelevant and performative. All for political points.
    Abhorrent for country unity.
    Based on this rant it is clear that you do not understand the process.

    First, not sure where President Nixon was raised. The case I was referring to was a 1993 case involving a Federal judge named Nixon, hence my parenthetical to make that clear.

    Second, why do you think Harris gets a vote on impeachment? Her only involvement is that she might preside over the case. She would not have a vote on whether to convict or not.

    Third, an impeachment hearing doesn’t require the Chief Justice to preside over it, only an impeachment involving a president. Whether that is sitting or not, I guess still has to be litigated. But if it is decided that it must be the Chief Justice, then he will preside over it as he is constitutionally required to do. If it is decided that it only applies to a sitting president, then someone else selected by the senate will preside over the trial (possibly Harris, but I doubt it)

    Fourth, and this is where it does get confusing and wonky. There is no inherit right to an appeal an impeachment to the Supreme Court (or any other court). The reason being is that impeachment is the legislative check on the other branches of government. This is intended to be, and is, a political trial not a judicial trial. That isn’t to say you cannot try (hence the case law in Nixon vs. US). The court in Nixon (the federal judge) made it clear that they have the right as the ultimate interpreter of the constitution to decide something is unconstitutional but are unwilling to step in to interfere in the rights given solely to the senate in the constitution as it would interfere in the legislative branches check on the executive and judicial branches. So outside of a blatant violation (such as a rule to decide impeachment with a coin flip), they will not interfere as it is a political question and therefore non-justiciable.
    Last edited by STL_XUfan; Today at 08:58 PM.
    "If our season was based on A-10 awards, there’d be a lot of empty space up in the rafters of the Cintas Center." - Chris Mack

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •