ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , Hunter Biden , joe biden , rudy giuliani , Trump controversies , US-Ukraine relations

Reply
Old 20th September 2019, 07:32 PM   #41
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,443
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don't doubt that the Republicans would do a lot to cover for Trump. But I also think key players in the GOP would at least want to know what they're covering up. The potential downside of his shenanigans could come back to bite them. So I think some will want to know what their exposure is. Also, national security is one of the few issues where I see some daylight between Trump an GOP leadership. Anything involving promises he makes to other heads of state might get their attention.
Maybe, But how much do we really know about the Russian investigation ? It seems to me that while they're not totally in lockstep with Trump on foreign policy they refuse to perform oversight that might expose his actions.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 07:32 PM   #42
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,625
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
...from this?

Look, I frankly agree that Dolt 45 & crew are skating pretty close to outright treason (and would likely skate right over that line, were we at at war according to congress, which we aren't), but in my view, this isn't much. And as much as you want to talk about "two centuries", I figure...maybe 55 years, not including a brief period after the Civil War. Want to save things? Well, there are plenty of groups working to preserve it, and there always have been. Some are a century or more old, some formed up on nov. 9th 2016 or later. Find a local one, get to work, and stop whining.

Or, you can watch other people work via the internet, contribute on your own, and stop whining.

But there's a common theme here, you may have noticed.
If things are really as dire as actubeys believes, seems to me you should seriously considering it's time to start considering the last resort of an "appeal to arms" a la 1776.
Otherwise it's a lot of noise, frankly.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 07:50 PM   #43
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Unfortunately the Republicans in Congress are just as corrupt. So goodbye democracy. 226 years was a good run I guess.
Most of those years were **** for a lot of people from a government perspective.

Last edited by BobTheCoward; 20th September 2019 at 07:51 PM.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 08:34 PM   #44
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 9,447
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
Trump did have a conversation, but it was a "beautiful conversation". So you can all back off now.
Also award winning.

A beautiful, award-winning conversation filled with daffodils. And hot fudge.

A wondrously-gorgeous, flower-bedecked, blue-ribbon chat the Smuckers-covered likes of which the world has never seen. Like those magazines under your bed. And the sock.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 11:31 PM   #45
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,203
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
The president in his capacity as ambassador and negotiator when he is awake is not engaged in an any intelligence activity.
Fixed.

Oh, and any formal engagement by the executive of one country with another country is an "intelligence" activity.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 12:20 AM   #46
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,220
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
If things are really as dire as actubeys believes, seems to me you should seriously considering it's time to start considering the last resort of an "appeal to arms" a la 1776.
Otherwise it's a lot of noise, frankly.
Frankly, I'm not even slightly surprised that the dimwitted career criminal keeps getting caught committing crimes in a dimwitted manner.

As I keep saying, this is, in large part, as result of the republicans realizing that they simply cannot win a fair election as they are now. Worry more about people like Mitch McConnell, segregationist Justice Roberts (I wonder how many people know that he worked to get the Brown vs. Board decision thrown out under Reagan?), and state legislators that hyper-gerrymander districts and suppress voters. Yet again, Dolt 45 is a symptom, not the disease.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 12:22 AM   #47
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 41,052
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
If things are really as dire as actubeys believes, seems to me you should seriously considering it's time to start considering the last resort of an "appeal to arms" a la 1776.
Otherwise it's a lot of noise, frankly.

Once a democracy resorts to armed coups it usually turns out to be worse than the problem.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 12:59 AM   #48
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,912
Let me know when John Dean writes that it's worse than Watergate.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 03:41 AM   #49
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,357
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Let me know when John Dean writes that it's worse than Watergate.
Nothing to worry about, right? Business as usual. Which president hasn't broken the law over and over again?

We understand you've decided to be a part of the problem. When we find a solution, you'll know about it.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

Last edited by uke2se; 21st September 2019 at 03:43 AM.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 04:19 AM   #50
Tero
Graduate Poster
 
Tero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North American prairie
Posts: 1,613
Trump now talking "his crimes." Can't be investigated while he is president.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019...eturns-lawsuit
Tero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 04:21 AM   #51
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,580
Originally Posted by Random View Post
So far, the best bit was Rudy Giuliani's epic meltdown on CNN. I am reminded of the idea of a "Golden Shovel Lawyer", an expensive attorney who shows up in court in a fancy suit and tie and proceeds to bury their client.
I read that as golden shower . Not sure if it means I need glasses or if it's just because I'm in a trump thread.

eta
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
And IMHO Trump will get away with it.
If he is relected, I see no peaceful way of restoring democracy and rule of law.
There's certainly a lot to fix. The silver lining, I suppose, is that the US has learned a lot of lessons from Trump. I expect, and hope, the Dems will change some rules and laws once they gain power again.
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)

Last edited by Safe-Keeper; 21st September 2019 at 04:24 AM.
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 05:41 AM   #52
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,965
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Why? This President deserves it. He's destroying the republic that so many gave their last full measure of devotion to preserve.
Trump's doing a fine job destroying the republic, but firing squads would do a better job.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 06:19 AM   #53
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,355
So to summarize:
1) he didn't do it
2) if he did do it, there's nothing wrong with
3) even if it were clearly wrong, it doesn't matter because he can't be investigated for doing it
4) suck it, libtards

Is that about right?
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 06:22 AM   #54
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: People's Democratic Republic of Planet X
Posts: 31,746
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Add Rudy Giuliani's best impression of Colonel Nathan R.Jessep in his interview where he says he first denied he asked the Ukraine to investigate Biden and moments later said he did and was proud of it. Add the fact that aid to the Ukraine was mysteriously held up and then was released to them.

Trump is the most corrupt President in US history and should be lined up against a wall and shot for Treason. After his impeachment and a fair trial. Unfortunately the Republicans in Congress are just as corrupt. So goodbye democracy. 226 years was a good run I guess.
Stop being ridiculous! Everyone knows that the US Federal Government uses lethal injection as the method of execution.
__________________
"Shemp, you are the one fixed point in an ever-changing universe." - Beady
"I don't want to live in a world without shemp." - Quarky
"Real name? Xavier Jorge Gladdius Horatio McShrimp. No wonder he goes by shemp." - wasapi
"...just as a magnet attracts iron filings, Trump shemp attracts, and is attracted to, louts." - George Will
shemp is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 07:10 AM   #55
autumn1971
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,895
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Why? This President deserves it. He's destroying the republic that so many gave their last full measure of devotion to preserve.
Yes. You don’t admonish your cancer and try to convince it to play by the rules. You cut it out and destroy all remnants.
__________________
'A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggardly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson, glass-gazing, superservicable, finical rogue;... the son and heir of a mongral bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining, if thou deniest the least syllable of thy addition."'
-The Bard
autumn1971 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 07:17 AM   #56
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 18,834
I'm curious as to how long the DNI can keep the whistleblower from Congress. The IG was ordered not to assist the whistleblower in meeting with either committees. If he/she works in the Whitehouse, just come out the Commerce Department exit, turn left at the National History Museum and The Capitol Building will be right in front of you. Can't miss it.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band.
Craig4 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 08:12 AM   #57
autumn1971
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,895
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
I'm curious as to how long the DNI can keep the whistleblower from Congress. The IG was ordered not to assist the whistleblower in meeting with either committees. If he/she works in the Whitehouse, just come out the Commerce Department exit, turn left at the National History Museum and The Capitol Building will be right in front of you. Can't miss it.
The law makes the patriot go through the AG for proper security in reporting to the committee heads.
The AG is a contemptible bastard of a traitor who will not allow the patriot to report by withholding that security protocol.

It’s traitors to the Constitution all the way down in the republican party.
__________________
'A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggardly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson, glass-gazing, superservicable, finical rogue;... the son and heir of a mongral bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining, if thou deniest the least syllable of thy addition."'
-The Bard
autumn1971 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 08:19 AM   #58
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Originally Posted by autumn1971 View Post
The law makes the patriot go through the AG for proper security in reporting to the committee heads.
The AG is a contemptible bastard of a traitor who will not allow the patriot to report by withholding that security protocol.

It’s traitors to the Constitution all the way down in the republican party.
I bet if we put you and him on a debate stage, he would make a more persuasive argument that his Constitutional theory is more appropriate.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 08:38 AM   #59
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,580
Originally Posted by shemp View Post
Stop being ridiculous! Everyone knows that the US Federal Government uses lethal injection as the method of execution.
That's not as flashy. Unless you administer said injections by tranquiliser darts by firing squad.
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 08:46 AM   #60
autumn1971
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,895
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I bet if we put you and him on a debate stage, he would make a more persuasive argument that his Constitutional theory is more appropriate.
Given a week to prepare, I bet not. He breaks laws in order to subvert the Constitution’s balance of powers.
__________________
'A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggardly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson, glass-gazing, superservicable, finical rogue;... the son and heir of a mongral bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining, if thou deniest the least syllable of thy addition."'
-The Bard
autumn1971 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:16 AM   #61
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Originally Posted by autumn1971 View Post
Given a week to prepare, I bet not. He breaks laws in order to subvert the Constitution’s balance of powers.
Or he adheres to the (correct?) Theory of the unitary executive.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:27 AM   #62
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,443
Originally Posted by shemp View Post
Stop being ridiculous! Everyone knows that the US Federal Government uses lethal injection as the method of execution.
Actually I think the Feds give them a choice of methods. But either way works for me.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:30 AM   #63
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,443
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I bet if we put you and him on a debate stage, he would make a more persuasive argument that his Constitutional theory is more appropriate.
Now I'm laughing. Trump can barely put two sentences together without sounding like a moron. The man knows nothing about the law except maybe how to ignore it.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:35 AM   #64
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,021
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Or he adheres to the (correct?) Theory of the unitary executive.
There isn't any question that Constitution vests control of the executive branch to a "unitary" president, but the question is, are there any limits? If you can prove that the "strong" unitary executive theory is "correct" then you will have proved that the Constitution itself needs some serious correction: As we are seeing with Trump, such an interpretation would imply that a corrupt President can ignore the Constitutional budgetary and executive oversight functions vested in Congress and use his powers to his own ends.
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:36 AM   #65
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Now I'm laughing. Trump can barely put two sentences together without sounding like a moron. The man knows nothing about the law except maybe how to ignore it.
I meant Barr. I was responding to a post about the AG.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:38 AM   #66
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
There isn't any question that Constitution vests control of the executive branch to a "unitary" president, but the question is, are there any limits? If you can prove that the "strong" unitary executive theory is "correct" then you will have proved that the Constitution itself needs some serious correction: As we are seeing with Trump, such an interpretation would imply that a corrupt President can ignore the Constitutional budgetary and executive oversight functions vested in Congress and use his powers to his own ends.
I think that is all correct which is why I hate the Constitution.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:47 AM   #67
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,021
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I think that is all correct which is why I hate the Constitution.
Fortunately, we can usually avoid problems by simply interpreting the Constitution rationally rather than pedantically.
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 10:00 AM   #68
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Fortunately, we can usually avoid problems by simply interpreting the Constitution rationally rather than pedantically.
Rationality is a low bar of logical conclusions from acceptable assumptions. And acceptable assumptions is a miasma of possibilities. There are enough people in any competing school of Constitutional thought that there is a set of acceptable assumptions for them.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 10:18 AM   #69
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,021
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Rationality is a low bar of logical conclusions from acceptable assumptions. And acceptable assumptions is a miasma of possibilities. There are enough people in any competing school of Constitutional thought that there is a set of acceptable assumptions for them.
Then give me the "acceptable assumption" behind the theory that a corrupt president can use his control of the Department of Justice to avoid Congressional oversight.
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 10:21 AM   #70
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Then give me the "acceptable assumption" behind the theory that a corrupt president can use his control of the Department of Justice to avoid Congressional oversight.
Why? I benefit from people being wrong about the Constitution.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:33 PM   #71
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 41,052
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Why? I benefit from people being wrong about the Constitution.
Do you run a book on it?
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:44 PM   #72
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
Do you run a book on it?
While I think my interpretation is correct, it produces terrible results. The wrong interpretations out there makr things better.

It is like what I say about Kavanaugh probably being the best justice. The purpose of the court is to determine meaning from a product prepared by rich white men that.thought people that did not look like them shouldn't vote. He is cut from the same cloth. That isn't an endorsement.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 01:05 AM   #73
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 87,627
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Trump's doing a fine job destroying the republic, but firing squads would do a better job.
I thought capital punishment is allowed in the USA? A lot of people seem to have missed that acbytesla only mentioned firing squads after a "fair trial". You can debate whether Trump's alleged crimes merit capital punishment, and whether a firing squad is an appropriate way to lawfully execute someone. However since the USA is fine with capital punishment and has been since it became an independent country I fail to see how using capital punishment is a way of "destroying the Republic".
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 04:20 AM   #74
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,965
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I thought capital punishment is allowed in the USA? A lot of people seem to have missed that acbytesla only mentioned firing squads after a "fair trial". You can debate whether Trump's alleged crimes merit capital punishment, and whether a firing squad is an appropriate way to lawfully execute someone. However since the USA is fine with capital punishment and has been since it became an independent country I fail to see how using capital punishment is a way of "destroying the Republic".
Executing a previously elected leader is bound to incite his still considerable group of followers. In addition, I don't see that Trump has committed any crimes which call for the death penalty. (Yes, treason is an executable offense, but has a narrow definition and it's not at all obvious it applies in Trump's case even if we presume he's guilty of everything alleged.)

If Trump has committed a capital crime, then I suppose that execution would be constitutional (if pursued in the appropriate manner). It would also go far to breaking the already fragile state of the republic.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 11:00 AM   #75
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,443
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Executing a previously elected leader is bound to incite his still considerable group of followers. In addition, I don't see that Trump has committed any crimes which call for the death penalty. (Yes, treason is an executable offense, but has a narrow definition and it's not at all obvious it applies in Trump's case even if we presume he's guilty of everything alleged.)

If Trump has committed a capital crime, then I suppose that execution would be constitutional (if pursued in the appropriate manner). It would also go far to breaking the already fragile state of the republic.
Your arguments have merit. But only because the law is not clear.

If Trump's actions lead to the destruction of our republic, they will certainly lead to the deaths of many Americans. Lawlessness and abuse of power by a head of state has ramifications far beyond that can be immediately seen. Trump is a criminal of the first order and therefore needs appropriate punishment. A minimum of 10 years in a 3 by 6 cell is called for. The idea that he should get away with his crimes is appalling.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 02:09 PM   #76
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,965
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Your arguments have merit. But only because the law is not clear.

If Trump's actions lead to the destruction of our republic, they will certainly lead to the deaths of many Americans. Lawlessness and abuse of power by a head of state has ramifications far beyond that can be immediately seen. Trump is a criminal of the first order and therefore needs appropriate punishment. A minimum of 10 years in a 3 by 6 cell is called for. The idea that he should get away with his crimes is appalling.
I'm not opposed to Trump facing punishment if he clearly violated laws. Most of his corruption of the system isn't clear breaking of a criminal code, as far as I can tell. Taking emoluments, for instance, isn't a crime and I don't think that his behavior would make charging him with accepting bribes an easy sell.

Obstruction of justice could perhaps stick, but I'm not sure that it is such a clearcut case that it is worthwhile to further divide the country pursuing that charge.

But, yes, if Trump committed clear crimes, so clear that any reasonable person would see that it's a violation of the criminal code, then I think he should pay the price.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 03:53 PM   #77
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,443
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I'm not opposed to Trump facing punishment if he clearly violated laws. Most of his corruption of the system isn't clear breaking of a criminal code, as far as I can tell. Taking emoluments, for instance, isn't a crime and I don't think that his behavior would make charging him with accepting bribes an easy sell.

Obstruction of justice could perhaps stick, but I'm not sure that it is such a clearcut case that it is worthwhile to further divide the country pursuing that charge.

But, yes, if Trump committed clear crimes, so clear that any reasonable person would see that it's a violation of the criminal code, then I think he should pay the price.
I have a huge problem with him flat out ignoring laws such as the whistleblower law. Trump is obstructing justice by instructing members of his staff not to cooperate. He is obstructing justice through the AG. Nixon tried the same thing and the AG and the DAG ignored him and even resigned. Trump is a criminal and his hand picked director is not enforcing the law but obstructing its administration. Trump and Barr deserve to swing. Now I doubt that will happen because our government has grown so corrupt over the years and Trump has leveraged that corruption to protect him.

The Democrats play by the rules and the Republicans ignore them and that is why we are in the situation we are in.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 04:20 PM   #78
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,965
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I have a huge problem with him flat out ignoring laws such as the whistleblower law. Trump is obstructing justice by instructing members of his staff not to cooperate. He is obstructing justice through the AG. Nixon tried the same thing and the AG and the DAG ignored him and even resigned. Trump is a criminal and his hand picked director is not enforcing the law but obstructing its administration. Trump and Barr deserve to swing. Now I doubt that will happen because our government has grown so corrupt over the years and Trump has leveraged that corruption to protect him.

The Democrats play by the rules and the Republicans ignore them and that is why we are in the situation we are in.
I thought that the whistleblower law was clear and that the administration was obviously in violation. (NOTE: I don't know that being in violation comes with any explicit penalties. I don't know that ignoring it would be a criminal act.)

However, this WaPo article suggests that the situation is not so clear cut. The law is about whistleblowers alerting higher-ups of issues in the intelligence community. Trump is not part of the intelligence community.

An excerpt:

Quote:
A hallmark of past administrations has been vast presidential power to control disclosure of classified information; Bill Clinton and Barack Obama both championed whistleblower protections yet reiterated that the Whistleblower Protection Act did not undercut the president’s authority.

“The executive branch has always asserted the right to withhold deliberative material or presidential communications from Congress,” Litt wrote, concluding that it’s possible the privilege could protect the president’s communications with foreign leaders.

“The extent of such a privilege — and in particular whether it would protect communications that might constitute bribery — is untested,” he said. “But if the White House asserted such a privilege, the ODNI would be bound to honor it.”
The situation is perhaps murkier than I first thought. It is possible that the law as written will not allow this communication to be seen by Congressional committees. We will see how this turns out. (I'd reckon that any case which makes it to the Supreme Court is likely to be found in Trump's favor, but I'm guessing this based on the political makeup of the court and not on merits, about which I know nothing.)
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 04:31 PM   #79
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,443
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I thought that the whistleblower law was clear and that the administration was obviously in violation. (NOTE: I don't know that being in violation comes with any explicit penalties. I don't know that ignoring it would be a criminal act.)
It doesn't. But it's another obvious obstruction of justice. He's impeding an investigation into what appears to be another criminal act. He's trying to use another foreign government to influence another US election.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; 22nd September 2019 at 04:57 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 04:33 PM   #80
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,170
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I have a huge problem with him flat out ignoring laws such as the whistleblower law. Trump is obstructing justice by instructing members of his staff not to cooperate. He is obstructing justice through the AG. Nixon tried the same thing and the AG and the DAG ignored him and even resigned. Trump is a criminal and his hand picked director is not enforcing the law but obstructing its administration. Trump and Barr deserve to swing. Now I doubt that will happen because our government has grown so corrupt over the years and Trump has leveraged that corruption to protect him.
And this is just the beginning. By the time he's finished the Constitution will just be a worthless piece of paper.

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward
Most of those years were **** for a lot of people from a government perspective.
True, but it was getting better until recently.

Personally I welcome the end - then I can gloat about how Democracy has failed wherever it was tried...
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:57 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.