Doc Posted July 2 Posted July 2 3 minutes ago, daz28 said: We need to stop thinking in terms of Biden and trump with this decision, because it may stand for a long time, and if/when someone does decide to use that power, it will be far too late for the SCOTUS to do anything about it. They literally made a bed that all of us, including them, have to lay in, and pray that it doesn't happen. That's NOT how a country of law and order/checks and balances operates. Kavanaugh should be forced to answer why his stance, that even a few years ago, he felt that a president wasn't above the law, even concerning matters of military and defense. What changed, Brett? Do we not deserve to know the answer to that? If he says lawfare, then he just admitted he has zero faith in the justice system, that he is at the top of. So when the Obama administration admitted to killing up to 114 innocent civilians with drone strikes, you'd be fine with Obama being charged with their deaths? 1
daz28 Posted July 2 Posted July 2 2 minutes ago, Doc said: So when the Obama administration admitted to killing up to 114 innocent civilians with drone strikes, you'd be fine with Obama being charged with their deaths? So when some president murders citizens, are you going to glad they weren't charged? To think that lawfare is so awful right now, that we need a king(who can now do much, much worse) is straight crazy. Btw, using collateral damage is about as weak of bs as you could possibly use, but maybe that's all you got. 1
Doc Posted July 2 Posted July 2 18 minutes ago, daz28 said: So when some president murders citizens, are you going to glad they weren't charged? To think that lawfare is so awful right now, that we need a king(who can now do much, much worse) is straight crazy. Btw, using collateral damage is about as weak of bs as you could possibly use, but maybe that's all you got. Murdering citizens as part of an "official act"? Highly unlikely.
daz28 Posted July 2 Posted July 2 Just now, Doc said: Murdering citizens as part of an "official act"? Highly unlikely. Giving orders to the military is an official duty. I don't want to get too hung up on trump, because this goes far beyond him, but he has already talked about martial law and shooting looters. Again, I'm, not saying he's the nut to do it, but any order given to the military is "an official act", and that's indisputable. Now, who will our future nutjob president, who has bad intentions, appoint as his generals, because they are the only hope of stopping it. I'd assume he'd just replace them if they refused anyways. 1
Doc Posted July 2 Posted July 2 Just now, daz28 said: Giving orders to the military is an official duty. I don't want to get too hung up on trump, because this goes far beyond him, but he has already talked about martial law and shooting looters. Again, I'm, not saying he's the nut to do it, but any order given to the military is "an official act", and that's indisputable. Now, who will our future nutjob president, who has bad intentions, appoint as his generals, because they are the only hope of stopping it. I'd assume he'd just replace them if they refused anyways. Giving orders to the military is an "official duty" but killing a person isn't necessarily "official business." There has to be a justification and if generals don't refuse, Congress can impeach and remove a President. When did Trump talk about martial law? And did anyone get shot when people were looting for months on end in the Summer of 2020? 1
daz28 Posted July 2 Posted July 2 2 minutes ago, Doc said: Giving orders to the military is an "official duty" but killing a person isn't necessarily "official business." There has to be a justification and if generals don't refuse, Congress can impeach and remove a President. When did Trump talk about martial law? And did anyone get shot when people were looting for months on end in the Summer of 2020? Who decides the "justification"? Is there someone above the president, who decides that? No? If a general refuses, you can fire him, and have him court martialed. Then ask the next general if he'd also like a court martial. As for impeachment, the president has the power to adjourn Congress. Pretty hard to impeach someone, when you can't call into session. Will this happen under Biden, under trump if he wins? Probably not, but no president should have that much power. NONE. He discussed martial law in DC riots. His allies were also discussing martial law around Jan 6th as well, but MTG apparently "forgot" about that. No one got shot, so talking about it is fine? Oy vey!
Doc Posted July 2 Posted July 2 Just now, daz28 said: Who decides the "justification"? Is there someone above the president, who decides that? No? If a general refuses, you can fire him, and have him court martialed. Then ask the next general if he'd also like a court martial. As for impeachment, the president has the power to adjourn Congress. Pretty hard to impeach someone, when you can't call into session. Will this happen under Biden, under trump if he wins? Probably not, but no president should have that much power. NONE. He discussed martial law in DC riots. His allies were also discussing martial law around Jan 6th as well, but MTG apparently "forgot" about that. No one got shot, so talking about it is fine? Oy vey! Who decides? Congress. And no the President can't adjourn Congress just to avoid impeachment.
daz28 Posted July 2 Posted July 2 2 minutes ago, Doc said: Who decides? Congress. And no the President can't adjourn Congress just to avoid impeachment. You think Congress decides how the president can use the armed forces? Wrong, they don't. As long as the GQP holds either the House or the Senate, all they have to do is disagree with when to adjourn, and then the president holds the power to adjourn them both. He threatened to do it to get his appointments done before: President Donald Trump expressed frustration Wednesday that the Senate has not confirmed his pending nominees to various posts. “The current practice of leaving town while conducting phony pro forma sessions is a dereliction of duty that the American people cannot afford during this crisis,” Trump told reporters. The president warned that if the House does not agree to let the Senate adjourn, then he would “exercise my constitutional authority to adjourn both chambers of Congress” and make recess appointments for more than 100 pending nominees, especially those related to the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic aftermath.
reddogblitz Posted July 2 Posted July 2 (edited) 4 hours ago, daz28 said: You must not having been paying attention in class during fake electors scheme day. It was all set up to work legitimately. You'd be hoping that a group of generals would get together, and say, "no, what you did is crooked", and roll into Washington to remove the president, completely ignoring the fact that there would be likely another group of generals who felt that it was completely legitimate. The part that eats me alive is that MAGA nation doesn't even want the electors plot scheme to play out in court and will be happy when it all just evaporates. Maybe it was set up to look legal but it flopped. As did the find me 11,000 votes in Georgia because a Republican taped the conversation and ratted him out. in fact hes under indictment for it and would have been tried if nor for Fani Willis' shenanigans. Maybe she's in on it? In order for what you suspect to happen he has to have military, Supreme Court, Congress, his staff, and election officials in all swing states to go along with him. Like Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories it soon depends on everyone else being in on it except you. Which is it? President Trump is a not smart doofus or he is the conniving mastermind planning to take down our democracy and make himself dictator? Edited July 2 by reddogblitz
daz28 Posted July 2 Posted July 2 19 minutes ago, reddogblitz said: Maybe it was set up to look legal but it flopped. As did the find me 11,000 votes in Georgia because a Republican taped the conversation and ratted him out. in fact hes under indictment for it and would have been tried if nor for Fani Willis' shenanigans. Maybe she's in on it? In order for what you suspect to happen he has to have military, Supreme Court, his staff, and election officials in all swing states to go along with him. Like Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories it soon depends on everyone else being in on it except you. Which is it? President Trump is a not smart doofus or he is the conniving mastermind planning to take down our democracy and make himself dictator? He's a master at finding loopholes, and has been doing it his whole life. Bottom line is any president has always been surrounded by White House council, who were there to advise on if he'd have that particular power, and the legality of it. The legality of it guys have now left the room, and are in the unemployment line. That's not a good thing. 1 1
BillsFanNC Posted July 2 Posted July 2 All this nonsense you read about how “only Biden can make the decision to leave” is just so absurd. That’s not how the Democratic Party works. No individual is more important than the collective. That’s the whole point of the party. And in Biden’s specific case, he’s got no constituency in Washington. Yes, Ron Klain and 85-year-old Ted Kaufman benefit directly from his presidency, but it’s a small group. The rest of the city has no loyalty to Biden. They don’t care about him; they’ve never taken him seriously. Any president works for them as long as he’s a Democrat. It’s never personal with these people because the individual doesn’t matter.
Orlando Buffalo Posted July 2 Posted July 2 11 hours ago, daz28 said: So when some president murders citizens, are you going to glad they weren't charged? To think that lawfare is so awful right now, that we need a king(who can now do much, much worse) is straight crazy. Btw, using collateral damage is about as weak of bs as you could possibly use, but maybe that's all you got. https://www.aclu.org/video/aclu-ccr-lawsuit-american-boy-killed-us-drone-strike Obama had citizens hit with drone strikes overseas. Your ignorance of past events when you are so worked up is very telling that you believe what the media tells you to believe when they tell you. 1
SCBills Posted July 2 Posted July 2 It shouldn’t be too hard to find a Biden replacement…. Ok, nevermind.
OrangeBills Posted July 2 Posted July 2 11 hours ago, daz28 said: We need to stop thinking in terms of Biden and trump with this decision, because it may stand for a long time, and if/when someone does decide to use that power, it will be far too late for the SCOTUS to do anything about it. They literally made a bed that all of us, including them, have to lay in, and pray that it doesn't happen. That's NOT how a country of law and order/checks and balances operates. Kavanaugh should be forced to answer why his stance, that even a few years ago, he felt that a president wasn't above the law, even concerning matters of military and defense. What changed, Brett? Do we not deserve to know the answer to that? If he says lawfare, then he just admitted he has zero faith in the justice system, that he is at the top of. You people have no idea what this all means and are simply reduced to Left Wing media talking points. In no successful system would an Executive live in constant fear that every decision he makes for the good of the country could get him indicted thereafter. Our country has appropriate checks and balances to depose a President acting badly. Prosecuting those who acted as President after the fact would simply mean we wouldn't get good people to do this job...but I acknowledge our Leftist friends have little to no critical thinking skills and so they can't see this next layer... Your very BEST argument would be that the Leftist media has already ensured that no rational, capable, intelligent, successful person would do this anyway, and therefore that trap is already sprung, but at least we're still trying. Biden should go...the Democrat Party should be disbanded this cycle for lying to the American people for 4 years. 3 1
sherpa Posted July 2 Posted July 2 11 hours ago, daz28 said: Giving orders to the military is an official duty. I don't want to get too hung up on trump, because this goes far beyond him, but he has already talked about martial law and shooting looters. Again, I'm, not saying he's the nut to do it, but any order given to the military is "an official act", and that's indisputable. Now, who will our future nutjob president, who has bad intentions, appoint as his generals, because they are the only hope of stopping it. I'd assume he'd just replace them if they refused anyways. The military is obligated to refuse illegal orders. Further, it takes more than the president to "just replace them." 3
All_Pro_Bills Posted July 2 Posted July 2 31 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: https://www.aclu.org/video/aclu-ccr-lawsuit-american-boy-killed-us-drone-strike Obama had citizens hit with drone strikes overseas. Your ignorance of past events when you are so worked up is very telling that you believe what the media tells you to believe when they tell you. And in a fickle twist of irony, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for his efforts!
Recommended Posts