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 !MOD BOX WARNING!

Reply
Old 6th September 2018, 08:38 AM   #41
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,851
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Pence has used the word "lodestar" repeatedly throughout the years, and also spoke at McCain's funeral.

I think the two most likely explanations for the use of the word are: 1) the op-ed was written by Pence, 2) it was used deliberately as a red herring to protect the identity of the author.
There is another rational explanation. Pence's repeated use of "lodestar" caused other staffers to learn a new word and what it means. Then they can use it themselves at any time.

With this explanation it's not Pence and it's not someone launching a red herring or pretending to be Pence.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher 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 6th September 2018, 08:39 AM   #42
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,330
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Whomever wrote it should stop being such a pussy and work to invoke the 25th. In the article they identify Trump as completely unable to perform his duties, and if the author is to be believed as a senior official, he or she swore an oath to protect the constitution of the US.

What is being described in the article is that Trump officials are actively sabotaging the President. However bad the President is, this is a real problem, and however funny we think it is, it's treasonous behavior.

If Trump is unfit (he absolutely is), he should be removed.
Per the 25th amendment, it is the responsibility of the Vice President and the Cabinet (department secretaries) to notify Congress if the President is unfit. We don't actually know whether the author of this piece is the VP or a cabinet officer. If so, you are absolutely correct that they should be working in that direction. However, if it is a White House staffer, or an executive branch officer below cabinet rank, they aren't really part of that equation.

Also, it's not really treason (as the US Contstitution defines treason).
CORed 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 6th September 2018, 08:42 AM   #43
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,851
Originally Posted by slyjoe View Post
The NYT knew this op-ed would be a big deal, and they know who the author is.
Could the NYT somehow be tricked into thinking they know the true original author when they really don't?
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher 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 6th September 2018, 08:46 AM   #44
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,198
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
Per the 25th amendment, it is the responsibility of the Vice President and the Cabinet (department secretaries) to notify Congress if the President is unfit. We don't actually know whether the author of this piece is the VP or a cabinet officer. If so, you are absolutely correct that they should be working in that direction. However, if it is a White House staffer, or an executive branch officer below cabinet rank, they aren't really part of that equation.

Also, it's not really treason (as the US Contstitution defines treason).
Unfortunately the wording in the 25th is "unable" to perform his duties, not unfit. Besides which, if his cabinet did so then Trump would relieve them all, and they could no longer work covertly to thwart his worst impulses. And all for naught. Since there is about a 0.000001% chance that congress, needing a 2:1 majority in both houses, would actually remove him.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 6th September 2018 at 08:50 AM.
lobosrul5 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 6th September 2018, 08:47 AM   #45
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,867
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
There's also the dog that didn't bark evidence here. Trump and Sanders have been calling the writer of the Op-Ed GUTLESS and a coward rather than claiming it is just made up.
Exactly!

The people who write these denials are highly trained in weasel wording. The exact wording of these rebuttals is always fascinating and often helps reveal what is actually true. Any time a rebuttal calls an accusation outrageous, crazy or even ridiculous, rather simply calling it untrue, makes me more confident that it is accurate. Sure, the POTUS needing keepers to prevent him from doing seriously dangerous things is crazy and outrageous, but... untrue??
Giordano 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 6th September 2018, 08:48 AM   #46
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,151
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Could the NYT somehow be tricked into thinking they know the true original author when they really don't?
Is that a rhetorical question? The answer is obviously "yes".
theprestige 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 6th September 2018, 08:48 AM   #47
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 19,420
Yeah, I'd nix all the treason talk. IMO, it's no more treason, or even illegal, than when a secretary orders flowers and a gift in their bosses name to go to their bosses spouse because their boss forgot the anniversary, or when Radar O'Reilly performs actions to make up for Col. Blake's incompetence. Only it is more manipulative, it's more extensive, and it involves policy. It's Trump's White House, it's Trump's folks. He picked them, he lets them do what they do, and can fire them if he so chooses. If he's an empty suit, sorry folks, he's an empty suit. With a big mouth.
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles
LSSBB 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 6th September 2018, 08:52 AM   #48
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,160
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
There is another rational explanation. Pence's repeated use of "lodestar" caused other staffers to learn a new word and what it means. Then they can use it themselves at any time.

With this explanation it's not Pence and it's not someone launching a red herring or pretending to be Pence.
McCain had used it:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senator...ife-and-times/

Quote:
"I was raised in the concept and belief that duty, honor, country is the lodestar for the behavior that we have to exhibit every single day," he said.


Then Kissinger did at McCain's funeral:
http://time.com/5384954/john-mccain-final-act/

Quote:
“Honor was John’s lodestar,” former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said. “It was his way of life.”
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 6th September 2018 at 09:09 AM.
kellyb 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 6th September 2018, 08:53 AM   #49
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 21,988
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
There is another rational explanation. Pence's repeated use of "lodestar" caused other staffers to learn a new word and what it means. Then they can use it themselves at any time.

With this explanation it's not Pence and it's not someone launching a red herring or pretending to be Pence.
I didn't say my suppositions were exhaustive, just the two I find most plausible.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim 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 6th September 2018, 08:55 AM   #50
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,160
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Is that a rhetorical question? The answer is obviously "yes".
The NYT editor claims to have gotten in direct contact with the author to confirm authorship. It could not have been a trick. All you can do is speculate that the editor of the NYT is lying.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb 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 6th September 2018, 08:57 AM   #51
Distracted1
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,572
I wonder if the "unnamed senior official" released this information to the NYT in order to seek public support from other "senior officials".
Perhaps he/she is hoping for corroboration.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 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 6th September 2018, 08:59 AM   #52
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,160
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Yeah, I'd nix all the treason talk. IMO, it's no more treason, or even illegal, than when a secretary orders flowers and a gift in their bosses name to go to their bosses spouse because their boss forgot the anniversary, or when Radar O'Reilly performs actions to make up for Col. Blake's incompetence. Only it is more manipulative, it's more extensive, and it involves policy. It's Trump's White House, it's Trump's folks. He picked them, he lets them do what they do, and can fire them if he so chooses. If he's an empty suit, sorry folks, he's an empty suit. With a big mouth.
Could it qualify as "sedition", tho?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb 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 6th September 2018, 08:59 AM   #53
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,867
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
Per the 25th amendment, it is the responsibility of the Vice President and the Cabinet (department secretaries) to notify Congress if the President is unfit. We don't actually know whether the author of this piece is the VP or a cabinet officer. If so, you are absolutely correct that they should be working in that direction. However, if it is a White House staffer, or an executive branch officer below cabinet rank, they aren't really part of that equation.

Also, it's not really treason (as the US Contstitution defines treason).
I suspect that lodestar very much wants to have the 25th amendment issue brought into active consideration but was unable privately to convince enough of their colleagues to do so. think that this editorial was intended to blow open the ongoing secret "gentleman's agreement" so that the question of Trump's incompetence now has to be publicly addressed.

And absolutely this is not treason in any way. The POTUS is not a king. In fact there are probably many situations in which other civilian officials in the executive branch can ignore or countermand a request or order of the President without violating any laws.
Giordano 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 6th September 2018, 09:01 AM   #54
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,151
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Unfortunately the wording in the 25th is "unable" to perform his duties, not unfit.
Why "unfortunately"? The purpose of the 25th is to spell out the procedure for temporary transfer of presidential authority in situations where the president is unable to act in that role. If he's dead, or kidnapped, or unconscious, etc.

Unfitness is handled by the impeachment process. There's nothing "unfortunate" at all in providing two different solutions to two different contingencies.
theprestige 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 6th September 2018, 09:06 AM   #55
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,867
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Could it qualify as "sedition", tho?
'incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority."

I don't think so because the term "lawful authority" applies to the government of the USA as a whole, and the heart of the question is if protecting the USA from a deranged and incompetent individual is really opposing the lawful authority. In any case the courts have held in the USA that "sedition" falls under freedom of speech in the absence of a call to violence.
Giordano 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 6th September 2018, 09:07 AM   #56
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,198
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Why "unfortunately"? The purpose of the 25th is to spell out the procedure for temporary transfer of presidential authority in situations where the president is unable to act in that role. If he's dead, or kidnapped, or unconscious, etc.

Unfitness is handled by the impeachment process. There's nothing "unfortunate" at all in providing two different solutions to two different contingencies.
Unfortunately, as in CORed is wrong. The impeachment process (the remove from office part anyhow) also takes a two thirds majority in Congress, so its not as if this is an easier "workaround".
lobosrul5 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 6th September 2018, 09:11 AM   #57
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,186
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
And absolutely this is not treason in any way.
True. Treason is a pretty specific thing, and this isn't it.

But it was still a stupid and counter-productive move. There's just no good spin on this. In no scenario is this sort of anonymous self-congratulatory revelation of an internal conspiracy a step forward.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 6th September 2018, 09:11 AM   #58
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,151
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
The NYT editor claims to have gotten in direct contact with the author to confirm authorship. It could not have been a trick. All you can do is speculate that the editor of the NYT is lying.
Or the author handed the text to a cut-out, who forwarded it to the New York Times under their own name. The editor would get in direct contact with the cut-out, who would claim to be the real author. The editor would have no way of knowing it was a trick.
theprestige 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 6th September 2018, 09:13 AM   #59
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,160
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
In any case the courts have held in the USA that "sedition" falls under freedom of speech in the absence of a call to violence.
I think NYTanon is good to go, then, if that's really the case.

I think "intelligence community" lawyers are going to argue that it's not the intel community's job to undermine anybody's freedom of speech by outing the author.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb 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 6th September 2018, 09:14 AM   #60
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 75,787
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
There's also the dog that didn't bark evidence here. Trump and Sanders have been calling the writer of the Op-Ed GUTLESS and a coward rather than claiming it is just made up.
Yeah that's what I was refering to. This time they instead decided to smear the leaker rather than deny it. Odd.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 6th September 2018, 09:15 AM   #61
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 75,787
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Because publishing the op Ed is itself an act to undermine. They've just sent the White House into another paroxysm of paranoia, witch hunting, and backstabbing. The serpents are biting each other in a frenzy. Everyone knows the fastest path to rattle Trump's cage good and hard is to announce to the press that he's not in control of things. He's probably tripled his Diet Coke consumption to rehydrate from all the spittle he's lost from screaming in the last two days. Another couple of leaks and he'll need an IV drip!
Good point.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 6th September 2018, 09:16 AM   #62
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,151
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Unfortunately, as in CORed is wrong. The impeachment process (the remove from office part anyhow) also takes a two thirds majority in Congress, so its not as if this is an easier "workaround".
I think it is easier, actually. The 25th begins with a specific test of executive ability, and involves Congress to resolve a dispute over the outcome of the test. Impeachment skips the testing process, and goes straight to Congress. If you have two thirds of Congress willing to consider removing the president, impeachment is a more streamlined way to get that done. And if you don't have two thirds support, neither approach really matters. Unless the President unequivocally fails the test of ability specified in the 25th. In that case, the 25th is actually the preferable solution.

But that's not the case here. The case here is that people want Trump gone, and are flailing around trying to find whatever procedural excuse or shenanigans that looks likely to make that happen. My opinion is, the 25th is a red herring. If people don't like the way Trump is presidenting, just push for impeachment already. Save the 25th for its intended purpose - transferring presidential authority when the president is literally incapacitated.

Last edited by theprestige; 6th September 2018 at 09:20 AM.
theprestige 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 6th September 2018, 09:16 AM   #63
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,340
At least one staffer in this White House has said (awhile ago) when leaking s/he pays attention to colleagues' idioms so that they can throw the trail off themselves. It's probably a pretty common practice.

ETA: Maybe this was cited in the other thread: "To cover my tracks, I usually pay attention to other staffers' idioms and use that in my background quotes. That throws the scent off me," the current White House official added.

https://www.axios.com/trump-white-ho...56b542cd0.html

Still, I would have a friend write the editorial. I also wouldn't rule out that anonymous is more than one person (which may be unknown to the Times as well).
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.

Last edited by Cain; 6th September 2018 at 09:21 AM.
Cain 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 6th September 2018, 09:17 AM   #64
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,160
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
True. Treason is a pretty specific thing, and this isn't it.

But it was still a stupid and counter-productive move. There's just no good spin on this. In no scenario is this sort of anonymous self-congratulatory revelation of an internal conspiracy a step forward.
The letter read to me like it was written by someone who personally resents Trump. Like, sending that to the NYT is part of a vendetta, if that makes sense. The letter makes sense if spite is the actual point.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb 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 6th September 2018, 09:20 AM   #65
BrooklynBaby
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 816
Time to institute polygraphing and find the subversives.
BrooklynBaby 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 6th September 2018, 09:21 AM   #66
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,186
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
The letter read to me like it was written by someone who personally resents Trump. Like, sending that to the NYT is part of a vendetta, if that makes sense. The letter makes sense if spite is the actual point.
Quite likely. The real question is what possessed the NYT to publish it as an anonymous editorial. Spite might be the actual point for them too, but they should know better.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat 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 6th September 2018, 09:21 AM   #67
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 75,787
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The editor would have no way of knowing it was a trick.
You are speculating, though. He might have a way of knowing that you're not privvy to.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 6th September 2018, 09:22 AM   #68
Cavemonster
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,990
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Why "unfortunately"? The purpose of the 25th is to spell out the procedure for temporary transfer of presidential authority in situations where the president is unable to act in that role. If he's dead, or kidnapped, or unconscious, etc.

Unfitness is handled by the impeachment process. There's nothing "unfortunate" at all in providing two different solutions to two different contingencies.
But unfitness is not explicitly covered in impeachment requirements any more than it is in the 25th.

Quote:
treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors
Unfitness is a far more awkward match for those criteria than it is for a type of inability.

But further, section 4 of the 25th provides specifically for a case where the president is in disagreement with either the cabinet or congress about his inability to perform his duties and gives congress the power to decide. That would not be applicable in cases of death unconsciousness etc. So clearly the intent and text of the amendment allows for kinds of incapacity about which a President may disagree, such as extreme unfitness.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster 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 6th September 2018, 09:22 AM   #69
autumn1971
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,463
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Is that a rhetorical question? The answer is obviously "yes".
So a business entity whose whole profit margin is based on its world-wide reliability would risk everything by sloppy vetting?

Why do you hate capitalism?
__________________
'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 6th September 2018, 09:23 AM   #70
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,034
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Unfortunately the wording in the 25th is "unable" to perform his duties, not unfit.

Does anybody have a copy of the job description?!
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 6th September 2018, 09:24 AM   #71
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 17,340
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Well, at least the editorial clarifies one thing: the "deep state" of entrenched bureaucrats is real, and is really working to undermine the Executive branch.
Wouldn't the people this close to the president be the people he brought in?

Seems more like the "best people" either aren't that good or aren't that loyal. May need a new hiring manager to vet these folks.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith 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 6th September 2018, 09:25 AM   #72
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,160
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Quite likely. The real question is what possessed the NYT to publish it as an anonymous editorial. Spite might be the actual point for them too, but they should know better.
I find the whole thing fascinating, so I'm glad they published it.

The only people mad at them for publishing it are the people who've been calling them fake news since before Trump revoked their WH press pass, so...
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb 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 6th September 2018, 09:25 AM   #73
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 14,086
I guess I'm having a hard time grasping exactly what the big bombshell is supposed to be here.

We already knew that a lot of Trump's inner circle don't like him and if you don't think at least some of that inner circle don't think the ship is sinking (regardless of whether or not you think it is sinking and indeed regardless of whether or not it actually is) and are taking steps to make sure they have a seat in the lifeboats you're naive to the point of insanity.

Stripped from all the "Pull Trump's string to see what crazy nonsense he spouts off to feed the media machine" language all we're left with is somebody in the White House doesn't like Trump and is intentionally making things difficult for him which... raise your hand if you couldn't have guessed that a week ago?
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
JoeMorgue 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 6th September 2018, 09:26 AM   #74
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 17,340
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Quite likely. The real question is what possessed the NYT to publish it as an anonymous editorial. Spite might be the actual point for them too, but they should know better.
So, we are now holding the NYT editorial board to a higher standard than the President of the United States. Bizarro world.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith 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 6th September 2018, 09:26 AM   #75
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,151
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
But unfitness is not explicitly covered in impeachment requirements any more than it is in the 25th.
The 25th actually spells out the criteria for unfitness explicitly.

That's another advantage of the impeachment process. While the 25th imposes a specific and narrow test, "high crimes and misdemeanors" gives Congress considerable leeway to remove the president for a wide range of justifications.

Quote:
But further, section 4 of the 25th provides specifically for a case where the president is in disagreement with either the cabinet or congress about his inability to perform his duties and gives congress the power to decide. That would not be applicable in cases of death unconsciousness etc. So clearly the intent and text of the amendment allows for kinds of incapacity about which a President may disagree, such as extreme unfitness.
Certainly. It was wise of the authors of the Amendment to provide a contingency for resolving disputes between the President and his Cabinet. But impeachment is still a better fit for this scenario, since it requires only the support of Congress, and not additionally the support of the Cabinet and the dissent of the President.
theprestige 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 6th September 2018, 09:27 AM   #76
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,867
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Why "unfortunately"? The purpose of the 25th is to spell out the procedure for temporary transfer of presidential authority in situations where the president is unable to act in that role. If he's dead, or kidnapped, or unconscious, etc.

Unfitness is handled by the impeachment process. There's nothing "unfortunate" at all in providing two different solutions to two different contingencies.
Actually impeachment is limited to "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." It dos not apply to unfitness in any other way.

The 25th amendment was created expressly to deal with if the President was "unable" to perform their duties, with "unable" not defined in the amendment but left to be defined first by the cabinet, and, if rebutted by the President, to be defined by Congress. The amendment clearly is designed to include "medically unfit as in unconscious" as falling within the category "unable". I believe the drafters of the amendment, and most others, would view "medically unfit as in clinically and seriously insane" as also falling under the "unable" category.
Giordano 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 6th September 2018, 09:28 AM   #77
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,151
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You are speculating, though. He might have a way of knowing that you're not privvy to.
Of course. But I'm not speculating any more than someone who believes the editor has correctly identified the real author.
theprestige 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 6th September 2018, 09:29 AM   #78
lobosrul5
Graduate Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,198
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
So, we are now holding the NYT editorial board to a higher standard than the President of the United States. Bizarro world.
The press has always (or for any of our lifetimes anyways) been held at a higher standard than politicians (until Fox News came along). Sad as it is, we expect a degree of lying from politicians. The current POTUS has just taken it to extremes.
lobosrul5 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 6th September 2018, 09:29 AM   #79
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,160
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Or the author handed the text to a cut-out, who forwarded it to the New York Times under their own name. The editor would get in direct contact with the cut-out, who would claim to be the real author. The editor would have no way of knowing it was a trick.
What in the world is a cut-out?

The NYT said they talked to someone in the Trump admin who confirmed that they were the author.

Did you listen to the podcast where the NYT editor was talking about how he determined it was real?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb 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 6th September 2018, 09:29 AM   #80
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,330
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Unfortunately, as in CORed is wrong. The impeachment process (the remove from office part anyhow) also takes a two thirds majority in Congress, so its not as if this is an easier "workaround".
Actually, impeachment is somewhat easier, in that it requires a simple majority in the House of Representatives and 2/3 in the Senate, whereas a 25th amendment removal requires 2/3 of both house and Senate (and that after the VP and cabinet have stated that the President is unable to perform his duties, and the President has disagreed).
CORed 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 10:27 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.