MAGAThread XVIII: The Authority Is Total

[Greater Miami Shores]

Exaggerated Exaggeration by the Democratic Party Base on the vote against new extra witnesses and the eventual acquittal of President Trump on Wednesday.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosa ... s-n2560531

Source Townhall - But the Video speaks for itself not Townhall.

[Alien Space Bats]

The US Constitution or impeachment laws process must be changed from politicians of the right and the left impeaching politicians of the right and the left, to a US Court of Law with US Court of Laws rules and regulations. Not laws, rules and regulations the House and Senate political majority of the time can make, who agrees and who disagrees?

There's an easier solution.

Overturn the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that Presidents can't be charged with a crime, and then bring back the old procedure whereby a private citizen or group of private citizens can ask a judge to impanel a Grand Jury to investigate allegations of wrongdoing, with private counsel representing the accusing parties conducting the Grand Jury investigation.

Under this scenario, impeachment would only come after a President's criminal conviction in a court of law. Under those circumstances, the President's political allies would be hard-pressed to let said President remain in office once he'd been found guilty in a court of law.

[The Black Forrest]

Exaggerated Exaggeration by the Democratic Party Base on the vote against new extra witnesses and the eventual acquittal of President Trump on Wednesday.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/juliorosa ... s-n2560531

Source Townhall - But the Video speaks for itself not Townhall.

Best way to have addressed that would have been the blocked witnesses, documents, and now the blocked emails recently announced.

[Alien Space Bats]

But most of the country won't give a shit because they enjoy saying "She's a cunt" to the beat of the William Tell Overture. Some are probably looking forward to the day she dies so they can piss in her open casket or worse.

Oh, great.

Now I have that tune and those words stuck in my head, where they'll likely rattle around for the rest of the day ("She's a cunt! She's a cunt! She's a cunt, cunt, cunt! She's a cunt! She's a cunt! She's a cunt, cunt, cunt!")

God damn you!

[San Lumen]

The US Constitution or impeachment laws process must be changed from politicians of the right and the left impeaching politicians of the right and the left, to a US Court of Law with US Court of Laws rules and regulations. Not laws, rules and regulations the House and Senate political majority of the time can make, who agrees and who disagrees?

There's an easier solution.

Overturn the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that Presidents can't be charged with a crime, and then bring back the old procedure whereby a private citizen or group of private citizens can ask a judge to impanel a Grand Jury to investigate allegations of wrongdoing, with private counsel representing the accusing parties conducting the Grand Jury investigation.

Under this scenario, impeachment would only come after a President's criminal conviction in a court of law. Under those circumstances, the President's political allies would be hard-pressed to let said President remain in office once he'd been found guilty in a court of law.

I support this completely. Presidents should be able to be indicted

[Gormwood]

But most of the country won't give a shit because they enjoy saying "She's a cunt" to the beat of the William Tell Overture. Some are probably looking forward to the day she dies so they can piss in her open casket or worse.

Oh, great.

Now I have that tune and those words stuck in my head, where they'll likely rattle around for the rest of the day ("She's a cunt! She's a cunt! She's a cunt, cunt, cunt! She's a cunt! She's a cunt! She's a cunt, cunt, cunt!")

God damn you!

You're Welcome.

[Greater Miami Shores]

The US Constitution or impeachment laws process must be changed from politicians of the right and the left impeaching politicians of the right and the left, to a US Court of Law with US Court of Laws rules and regulations. Not laws, rules and regulations the House and Senate political majority of the time can make, who agrees and who disagrees?

There's an easier solution.

Overturn the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that Presidents can't be charged with a crime, and then bring back the old procedure whereby a private citizen or group of private citizens can ask a judge to impanel a Grand Jury to investigate allegations of wrongdoing, with private counsel representing the accusing parties conducting the Grand Jury investigation.

Under this scenario, impeachment would only come after a President's criminal conviction in a court of law. Under those circumstances, the President's political allies would be hard-pressed to let said President remain in office once he'd been found guilty in a court of law.

While I think my idea is good and necessary, good post quote on my post. I wish we could do your idea or my idea whichever, but the point is the impeachment process should not be political by politicians of either political parties.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

There's an easier solution.

Overturn the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that Presidents can't be charged with a crime, and then bring back the old procedure whereby a private citizen or group of private citizens can ask a judge to impanel a Grand Jury to investigate allegations of wrongdoing, with private counsel representing the accusing parties conducting the Grand Jury investigation.

Under this scenario, impeachment would only come after a President's criminal conviction in a court of law. Under those circumstances, the President's political allies would be hard-pressed to let said President remain in office once he'd been found guilty in a court of law.

While I think my idea is good and necessary, good post quote on my post. I wish we could do your idea or my idea whichever, but the point is the impeachment process should not be political by politicians of either political parties.

Ideally it isn't...

But hey, why follow the spirit or intent of a rule when you can rules-lawyer something in the constitution for personal gain like it's Soveriegn-Citizen Bingo Night?

Trump: I DO NOT CONSENT! I DO NOT CONSENT! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

[Telconi]

The US Constitution or impeachment laws process must be changed from politicians of the right and the left impeaching politicians of the right and the left, to a US Court of Law with US Court of Laws rules and regulations. Not laws, rules and regulations the House and Senate political majority of the time can make, who agrees and who disagrees?

There's an easier solution.

Overturn the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that Presidents can't be charged with a crime, and then bring back the old procedure whereby a private citizen or group of private citizens can ask a judge to impanel a Grand Jury to investigate allegations of wrongdoing, with private counsel representing the accusing parties conducting the Grand Jury investigation.

Under this scenario, impeachment would only come after a President's criminal conviction in a court of law. Under those circumstances, the President's political allies would be hard-pressed to let said President remain in office once he'd been found guilty in a court of law.

I'm pretty sure it's just as easy to reply "Nay" to the roll call if he's been convicted as it is otherwise.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

wouldve made for good TV.

They probably couldn’t have figured out how to dumb it down to trumps level?

Draw it with crayons. That will be the trick.

[Gormwood]

They probably couldn’t have figured out how to dumb it down to trumps level?

Draw it with crayons. That will be the trick.

Fluorescent crayons.

[Alien Space Bats]

Under this scenario, impeachment would only come after a President's criminal conviction in a court of law. Under those circumstances, the President's political allies would be hard-pressed to let said President remain in office once he'd been found guilty in a court of law.

I'm pretty sure it's just as easy to reply "Nay" to the roll call if he's been convicted as it is otherwise.

It would be much harder to survive, politically.

<pause>

Or at least for now it would be, anyway. Of course, in another four years, when we're on the brink of Donald Trump running for and winning an illegal third term while openly declaring his intention to be President for Life (and after four more years of the continuing Erdoganization of America), you're right: I probably wouldn't be a big deal at all.

[Diarcesia]

Under this scenario, impeachment would only come after a President's criminal conviction in a court of law. Under those circumstances, the President's political allies would be hard-pressed to let said President remain in office once he'd been found guilty in a court of law.

I'm pretty sure it's just as easy to reply "Nay" to the roll call if he's been convicted as it is otherwise.

It would be much harder to survive, politically.

<pause>

Or at least for now it would be, anyway. Of course, in another four years, when we're on the brink of Donald Trump running for and winning an illegal third term while openly declaring his intention to be President for Life (and after four more years of the continuing Erdoganization of America), you're right: I probably wouldn't be a big deal at all.

I eagerly await what their defense would be in such a move. Hmm...

"But times have changed"

"We must adopt to current realities "

or better yet...

"Modern problems require modern solutions"

[Gormwood]

It would be much harder to survive, politically.

<pause>

Or at least for now it would be, anyway. Of course, in another four years, when we're on the brink of Donald Trump running for and winning an illegal third term while openly declaring his intention to be President for Life (and after four more years of the continuing Erdoganization of America), you're right: I probably wouldn't be a big deal at all.

I eagerly await what their defense would be in such a move. Hmm...

"But times have changed"

"We must adopt to current realities "

or better yet...

"Modern problems require modern solutions"

At the same time Lincoln gets pulled off the chair and replaced by a smug gold-plated Trump.

[Alien Space Bats]

So now that Trump's about to be acquitted, he's almost certainly going to be completely unchained and completely unhinged. Senate Republicans have accepted Alan Dershowitz's notion that the President (or at least a Republican President) can operate without any limits so long as he "believes" that his own continuing tenure in office (and thus — by extension — the electoral success of his own Party and its return to complete control over the government) is "in the interests of the United States".

<pause>

So what's to stop him from calling up Putin and saying, "President Putin, Sir: I'd like you to use your intelligence agencies to completely destroy the Democrat Party (sic). I promise you that I'll make certain that you'll get no interference from the Justice Department, the Secret Service, or the FBI; I'll order them to stand down and just let you operate with complete freedom and immunity anywhere you want in America or even the whole world to take whatever steps you decide you need to take to make sure that the Democrat Party (sic) goes away. I want the Party apparatus smashed; I want all the major officials and figures taken off the board in whatever way you choose to take them off the board; I want the Party's grassroots organization pulled up out of the ground and burned to ash; I want the Democrats GONE. I want the Republican Party to be in a position to run for office totally unopposed at every level, so Republicans can fill every office all across the country. What do you say?"

I mean, I suppose that Putin might decide not to, or I suppose the price might end up being too steep ("Well, Donald, I want you to give me a free hand in Ukraine, I want you to pull out of NATO, and I want Alaska back"), but assuming it isn't, what's to stop Trump from doing such a thing? I mean, under the "Dershowitz Doctrine", that would be entirely within the President's rights, and not at all impeachable, right?

[Diarcesia]

So now that Trump's about to be acquitted, he's almost certainly going to be completely unchained and completely unhinged. Senate Republicans have accepted Alan Dershowitz's notion that the President (or at least a Republican President) can operate without any limits so long as he "believes" that his own continuing tenure in office (and thus — by extension — the electoral success of his own Party and its return to complete control over the government) is "in the interests of the United States".

<pause>

So what's to stop him from calling up Putin and saying, "President Putin, Sir: I'd like you to use your intelligence agencies to completely destroy the Democratic Party. I promise you that I'll make certain that you'll get no interference from the Justice Department, the Secret Service, or the FBI; I'll order them to stand down and just let you operate with complete freedom and immunity anywhere you want in America or even the whole world to take whatever steps you decide you need to take to make sure that the Democratic Party goes away. I want the Party apparatus smashed; I want all the major officials and figures taken off the board in whatever way you choose to take them off the board; I want the Party's grassroots organization pulled up out of the ground and burned to ash; I want the Democrats GONE. I want the Republican Party to be in a position to run for office totally unopposed at every level, so Republicans can fill every office all across the country. What do you say?"

I mean, I suppose that Putin might decide not to, or I suppose the price might end up being too steep ("Well, Donald, I want you to give me a free hand in Ukraine, I want you to pull out of NATO, and I want Alaska back"), but assuming it isn't, what's to stop Trump from doing such a thing? I mean, under the "Dershowitz Doctrine", that would be entirely within the President's rights, and not at all impeachable, right?

Short of inciting a criminal act, he is in the clear, from what I understand.

[Alien Space Bats]

Short of inciting a criminal act, he is in the clear, from what I understand.

I'm not even sure that inciting a criminal act would be illegal under Dershowitz's construction. I mean, in my example, Trump could say, "I didn't give Putin permission to KILL Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, and Elizabeth Warren; I just said "take them (all) off the board". I thought it was obvious that they were to do it by whatever legal means might be available. No, I don't see any point in investigating any of this; I mean, what's done is done, and it's not like we can prosecute Putin for it, or anything, right..?"

[Gormwood]

So now that Trump's about to be acquitted, he's almost certainly going to be completely unchained and completely unhinged. Senate Republicans have accepted Alan Dershowitz's notion that the President (or at least a Republican President) can operate without any limits so long as he "believes" that his own continuing tenure in office (and thus — by extension — the electoral success of his own Party and its return to complete control over the government) is "in the interests of the United States".

<pause>

So what's to stop him from calling up Putin and saying, "President Putin, Sir: I'd like you to use your intelligence agencies to completely destroy the Democratic Party. I promise you that I'll make certain that you'll get no interference from the Justice Department, the Secret Service, or the FBI; I'll order them to stand down and just let you operate with complete freedom and immunity anywhere you want in America or even the whole world to take whatever steps you decide you need to take to make sure that the Democratic Party goes away. I want the Party apparatus smashed; I want all the major officials and figures taken off the board in whatever way you choose to take them off the board; I want the Party's grassroots organization pulled up out of the ground and burned to ash; I want the Democrats GONE. I want the Republican Party to be in a position to run for office totally unopposed at every level, so Republicans can fill every office all across the country. What do you say?"

I mean, I suppose that Putin might decide not to, or I suppose the price might end up being too steep ("Well, Donald, I want you to give me a free hand in Ukraine, I want you to pull out of NATO, and I want Alaska back"), but assuming it isn't, what's to stop Trump from doing such a thing? I mean, under the "Dershowitz Doctrine", that would be entirely within the President's rights, and not at all impeachable, right?

Short of inciting a criminal act, he is in the clear, from what I understand.

Like I said, only child molestation would actually turn his base against him.

[Gormwood]

Short of inciting a criminal act, he is in the clear, from what I understand.

I'm not even sure that inciting a criminal act would be illegal under Dershowitz's construction. I mean, in my example, Trump could say, "I didn't give Putin permission to KILL Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, and Elizabeth Warren; I just said "take them (all) off the board". I thought it was obvious that they were to do it by whatever legal means might be available. No, I don't see any point in investigating any of this; I mean, what's done is done, and it's not like we can prosecute Putin for it, or anything, right..?"

If the country actually survives the Trumper tantrum and a Democrat gets into the White House, guaranteed the Republicans will hurry themselves setting up sore loser laws to hobble the incoming administration to keep it from being done to them.

[Alien Space Bats]

Like I said, only child molestation would actually turn his base against him.

See, I think you're wrong about that. They'd just sponsor a contest to send him the prettiest little girls on a regular basis, as a tribute to our Great Leader — and insist that he was bestowing a tremendous honor on these sweet young virgins.

Good thing he's probably too old and fat to get it up any more.

[Gormwood]

Like I said, only child molestation would actually turn his base against him.

See, I think you're wrong about that. They'd just sponsor a contest to send him the prettiest little girls on a regular basis, as a tribute to our Great Leader — and insist that he was bestowing a tremendous honor on these sweet young virgins.

Good thing he's probably too old and fat to get it up any more.

I bet Melanie wishes he was.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

See, I think you're wrong about that. They'd just sponsor a contest to send him the prettiest little girls on a regular basis, as a tribute to our Great Leader — and insist that he was bestowing a tremendous honor on these sweet young virgins.

Good thing he's probably too old and fat to get it up any more.

I bet Melanie wishes he was.

Which one of his girlfriends is Melanie?

[Gormwood]

I bet Melanie wishes he was.

Which one of his girlfriends is Melanie?

The current ball and chain I believe.

[Strahcoin]

Hmm, impeachment. Well, since I am incapable of staying away from expressing my thoughts, I guess I'll say what I think about Trump's impeachment here.

Not only is it morally wrong, it is also a terrible idea politically. The only two presidents to be impeached in the past (NOT Richard Nixon; he resigned first) were not convicted from office. Also, when Bill Clinton was impeached, didn't that backfire on the Republicans? Would that not happen in the exactly same way for the Democrats now that they're impeaching Trump?

Plus, the economy is at an all-time high, unemployment is low, our international enemies are treating us with more respect... it seems that the common populace would most likely re-elect Trump, and trying to remove him from office for "crimes" not substantiated by evidence beyond reasonable doubt isn't going to sit well with them. I doubt the Democrats are ignorant to this fact, so some of them will likely vote with the Republicans to not convict him.

Now, on a more moral level, what did Trump do wrong? From what I have learned, he offered compromises on many issues, including prison reform, campaigning for LGBT tolerance in authoritarian nations, and even giving humanitarian aid and/or amnesty for some illegal immigrants (which Democrats opposed, because there was probably some funding for the wall attached to the deal). In my opinion, Trump is a great moderate and a pragmatic, not a "fascist" who should be convicted.

In short, Trump is a good president, there's not enough evidence to convict him, and impeaching him is therefore political suicide.

P.S. If you think what I'm saying is "offensive" or "ignorant", please consider what I have stated with an open mind and inwardly try to reason to yourself why you feel I'm being "offensive" or "ignorant". I doubt I will be able to change your mind (I learned that the hard way in other General forums), but I might as well sate my personal desire to express my thoughts and reasoning in a crowd of opposition.

(Also, I can't promise I'll respond to replies; I do have non-NS things I'm supposed to do.)

[Thermodolia]

well that was anti climatic.

*shrugs* it was expected.

Maybe a reason for the rush vote?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/01/politics ... index.html

Anyhow.......

Doesn’t this administration know that you don’t tell everyone that you have committed a crime and you are withholding evidence? Seriously. John Oliver was right this isn’t watergate it’s stupid watergate