Are you even aware that impeachment is not a legal proceeding?Bryce wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 12:38 pmThere are any number of options in place to try citizens for the, pardon the pun, trumped up charges, Trump is accused of. The main reason these aren't being considered is because they would be laughed out of court.Robert Faygo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 12:09 pm Agreed.
In a country of precedents, this situation is VERY interesting to me.
Setting the precedent that we just look the other way at the end of any Federal term is a dangerous one. We currently don’t have a way, beyond the impeachment process, to determine what’s considered a serious crime or what’s considered a really, really, really serious crime. If Trump isn’t subjected to this test, it sets a dangerous precedent.
What’s the line for you? For someone else? For someone else? The ambiguity is more dangerous than anything else.
Some registered account users are experiencing password recognition issues. The issue appears to have been triggered by a PHP update last night. If this is occurring, please try logging in and using the "forgot password?" utility. Bear in mind auto-generated password reset emails may appear in your spam folder. If this does not work, please click the "Contact Us" option near the lower right hand corner of the index page to contact me via email.
Thank you for your patience!
- M.W.
Thank you for your patience!
- M.W.
The Impeachment
Re: The Impeachment
Donald Trump… In your guts you know he’s nuts.
Re: The Impeachment
Exactly. A sham such as this could never play out in a legal process.Rate This wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 2:13 pmAre you even aware that impeachment is not a legal proceeding?Bryce wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 12:38 pmThere are any number of options in place to try citizens for the, pardon the pun, trumped up charges, Trump is accused of. The main reason these aren't being considered is because they would be laughed out of court.Robert Faygo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 12:09 pm Agreed.
In a country of precedents, this situation is VERY interesting to me.
Setting the precedent that we just look the other way at the end of any Federal term is a dangerous one. We currently don’t have a way, beyond the impeachment process, to determine what’s considered a serious crime or what’s considered a really, really, really serious crime. If Trump isn’t subjected to this test, it sets a dangerous precedent.
What’s the line for you? For someone else? For someone else? The ambiguity is more dangerous than anything else.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Re: The Impeachment
You read that where? In which article?Rate This wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 2:11 pmBecause in those states the legislature further distilled the practical operations of the elections to the Secretaries of State. It’s not like they have to review every minute change in elections and approve it with a bill. Some of this can be delegated to other elected officials that directly oversee things.Bryce wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 1:57 pmI will stop believing so when someone explains to me why the last minute changes made to the election process in several of the key swing states, that was NOT approved by the state legislators, holds muster with this.
Article I
Section 4
Clause 1
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Re: The Impeachment
Absent any successful legal challenges to the changes we can assume that there is some legal authority by which changes can be made at the non-legislative level.Bryce wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 2:15 pmYou read that where? In which article?Rate This wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 2:11 pmBecause in those states the legislature further distilled the practical operations of the elections to the Secretaries of State. It’s not like they have to review every minute change in elections and approve it with a bill. Some of this can be delegated to other elected officials that directly oversee things.Bryce wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 1:57 pmI will stop believing so when someone explains to me why the last minute changes made to the election process in several of the key swing states, that was NOT approved by the state legislators, holds muster with this.
Article I
Section 4
Clause 1
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Here let’s do this... no excuse absentee voting in Michigan came into being how?
Donald Trump… In your guts you know he’s nuts.
Re: The Impeachment
Please, tell me.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Re: The Impeachment
Huh? High crimes and misdemeanors is and has always been whatever a majority of the house to impeach and supermajority of the senate to convict thinks it is.Bryce wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 2:14 pmExactly. A sham such as this could never play out in a legal process.Rate This wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 2:13 pmAre you even aware that impeachment is not a legal proceeding?Bryce wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 12:38 pmThere are any number of options in place to try citizens for the, pardon the pun, trumped up charges, Trump is accused of. The main reason these aren't being considered is because they would be laughed out of court.Robert Faygo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 12:09 pm Agreed.
In a country of precedents, this situation is VERY interesting to me.
Setting the precedent that we just look the other way at the end of any Federal term is a dangerous one. We currently don’t have a way, beyond the impeachment process, to determine what’s considered a serious crime or what’s considered a really, really, really serious crime. If Trump isn’t subjected to this test, it sets a dangerous precedent.
What’s the line for you? For someone else? For someone else? The ambiguity is more dangerous than anything else.
In this case the argument about incitement is really really strong however.
Donald Trump… In your guts you know he’s nuts.
Re: The Impeachment
Proposition 18-3 passed. It was voted on by we the people. In addition to no excuse absentee voting it also allowed
Straight ticket voting, automatic voter registration and same day registration. It passed 66-33 and is a part of the state constitution. That’s why the legislature wasn’t consulted.
Please list any further changes in any state you want to look into and we will see exactly how they came into being.
Georgia’s no excuse absentee balloting?
A state law passed in 2005.
You’ve been gaslighted. Folks running around claiming that the Secretaries of State were unilaterally making these changes without consulting the legislatures have misled you.
Donald Trump… In your guts you know he’s nuts.
Re: The Impeachment
I don't recall a proposition regarding sending un requested ballots out to the general population. I don't recall an initiative changing which ballots are acceptable and not, nor one that changes the dates in which the ballots may be accepted.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
Re: The Impeachment
After everything this guy has put your country through, in the last 2 1/2, months, it's unbelievable there is anyone still defending him.
But my opinion, for what it's worth, is that impeachment is an instrument to be used against a sitting President who can not be prosecuted. Now that he is no longer in office, why not just let the criminal justice system have at him?
OK. Someone tell me now to ind my own business.
But my opinion, for what it's worth, is that impeachment is an instrument to be used against a sitting President who can not be prosecuted. Now that he is no longer in office, why not just let the criminal justice system have at him?
OK. Someone tell me now to ind my own business.
Re: The Impeachment
1. They sent everyone an APPLICATION for a ballot. They did not send everyone a ballot. You had to return the application first just like with any absentee ballot. You could wipe your ass with it instead in protest if you wished. It was a courtesy because some people were not willing to venture out.
2. What ballot acceptance requirements were changed?
3. The deadline change went into the courts and was upheld by a lower state court and that was reversed at the appellate level and that was the end of that.
Remember that generally the Secretary of State administers elections and the legislature makes the laws that provide the structure for that administration. So every minute detail isn’t going to be covered by the law. At that point interpretation comes in and if necessary the courts get involved. It’s always been this way. If you read your history once in a while you’ll see that it is chock full of folks doing all kinds of horseshit surrounding elections and all kinds of other subjects and the courts stepping in to make rulings.
The Republicans keep saying the quiet part out loud... absent restrictions on voting and an electoral college they would never win another election again. Instead of doing what any smart organization would do and reinvent themselves to be more appealing and actually having a platform (they didn’t in 2020 which is absolutely insane) they continue to double down on the same stupid stuff. They are quickly becoming the Detroit Lions of world politics.
Donald Trump… In your guts you know he’s nuts.
Re: The Impeachment
Would irregularities or outright voter fraud, be justification for Trump's actions on Jan 6, for which he is being impeached?
Re: The Impeachment
No. There is no justification for it. Insurrection is a crime.
Donald Trump… In your guts you know he’s nuts.
- audiophile
- Posts: 9236
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
- Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.
Re: The Impeachment
45 Senators have come out that impeachment in unconstitutional.
Stick a fork in it, it fails in senate.
Stick a fork in it, it fails in senate.
Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!
Re: The Impeachment
It’s an uphill battle... but 5 sided with the Democrats.audiophile wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:28 pm 45 Senators have come out that impeachment in unconstitutional.
Stick a fork in it, it fails in senate.
Donald Trump… In your guts you know he’s nuts.
- audiophile
- Posts: 9236
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
- Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.
Re: The Impeachment
Rutro!
Sen. Leahy, Set to Preside Over Impeachment Trial, Taken to Hospital
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgntp
Sen. Leahy, Set to Preside Over Impeachment Trial, Taken to Hospital
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgntp
Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!