How A Snap Impeachment Of Trump Could Shatter Our Constitutional Balance (1/12 2:52 PST) (1 Viewer)

[Ramblin Wreck]

I agree we need to fix it.  I agree to the “put up or shut up” for the next 24 months.  I will lineup and point out any and all missteps from the Dems.

I feel it’s somewhat disingenuous to blame the Democrats for the last so many years with policy though. Point being MitchM has been blocking any and all changes. Wouldn’t you agree?

I didn't blame the Dems.  I'm saying move on and do your thing.  You have control.  Stop talking about Trump and Mitch and the last four years.  Make the country a better place and let's re-evaluate in 2022 and 2024

 

[The General]

I didn't blame the Dems.  I'm saying move on and do your thing.  You have control.  Stop talking about Trump and Mitch and the last four years.  Make the country a better place and let's re-evaluate in 2022 and 2024

I agree with get your work done. Dems should IMO work on a few centrist ideas that get the economy stabilized and help people. Covid is the top priority.

To this moving on from Trump stuff. Trump, as any person would if they did they same thing, needs to be held accountable. This shouldn’t be a debate. It might not be politically wise but it should be done.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I agree with get your work done. Dems should IMO work on a few centrist ideas that get the economy stabilized and help people. Covid is the top priority.

To this moving on from Trump stuff. Trump, as any person would if they did they same thing, needs to be held accountable. This shouldn’t be a debate. It might not be politically wise but it should be done.

Right.  Like Clinton was held accountable.  And many other stupid politicians that get away with things.  Spend four years going after Trump like you guys went after the Russian bogeyman and it's going to make things worse and you'll likely not get crap done politically you should be focused on.  Then the Right will win elections and do the same damn thing.  You guys preached normal for four years.  Then get back to focusing on policy and the best way to move on is get Trump out of the office next week and forget about him. It's fascinating how much he lives in many of your heads.

 

[JAA]

I agree we need to fix it.  I agree to the “put up or shut up” for the next 24 months.  I will lineup and point out any and all missteps from the Dems.

I feel it’s somewhat disingenuous to blame the Democrats for the last so many years with policy though. Point being MitchM has been blocking any and all changes. Wouldn’t you agree?

I didn't blame the Dems.  I'm saying move on and do your thing.  You have control.  Stop talking about Trump and Mitch and the last four years.  Make the country a better place and let's re-evaluate in 2022 and 2024

I think we are in agreement.  I guess I was confused by your original post on this when you were taking about all the whining the Dems have been doing for years.  It sounds like now is the time to make the past the past and move forward?

 

[The General]

Right.  Like Clinton was held accountable.  And many other stupid politicians that get away with things.  Spend four years going after Trump like you guys went after the Russian bogeyman and it's going to make things worse and you'll likely not get crap done politically you should be focused on.  Then the Right will win elections and do the same damn thing.  You guys preached normal for four years.  Then get back to focusing on policy and the best way to move on is get Trump out of the office next week and forget about him. It's fascinating how much he lives in many of your heads.

A few things.

This won't take 4 years. It's very clear. I agree and that politically it might not be the best play. But it needs to be done.

You talking about Bill or Hillary? Stop with the comparisons to what Trump did to what they were accused of. These things aren't in the same universe.

Hillary by the way was questioned for like 12 hours on TV, Bill lied about his hummer...YOU GOT HIM! 

 

[The General]

To this issue that the Dems have the power and should get things done.

@Ramblin Wreck will you join in the discussion if their agenda is held up by Republican minority in the Senate?

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Right.  Like Clinton was held accountable.

He was. Clinton was impeached.

And Trump should be impeached (again). 

There should be consequences, but you seem to be arguing, "What's done is done, let's move on and focus on how the Democrats are going to fix things."

Which isn't how accountability works.

 

[kwille]

I'm on the side of moving forward through the Senate with the result being disallowing Trump from serving ever again. My reasoning is equal parts inciting the behavior last week and also presenting the inflammatory lie of the stolen election for months/years in advance.  I'd like the Senate trial to occur at a later date to give the new administration time to fill positions and begin policy implementation.

Just letting him walk is dangerous. We must be unified in never allowing this behavior again by completing impeachment and Senate trial. There is real power in this approach. It checks all boxes: 1) appropriate punishment, 2) blocking an unfit man from holding future office, 3) allowing the new admin to move forward , 4) fostering unity for all who oppose sedition and treason 

 

[GordonGekko]

Anyhow the title of this thread (and Turley, and whoever else makes this argument) is so silly. Oh no, impeachment could upset the “constitutional balance”, whatever the heck that means!
 

Brandenburg v. Ohio Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

11,820 views •Jul 16, 2018

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vbjj9wJCD4

*****

What Turley is saying ( unfortunately lawyers like to use legalese and shove their credentials in everyone's face far too often) is that if a majority of people don't like the law in place, then there is a formal process to change the law. What you don't do is decide the law doesn't count in some specific instance against a specific person or situation because you think that's true "justice"

What they teach in the first year of law school, besides Brandenburg and Schenck ( the "clear and present danger" test) is the reality that when you walk into the court, you are only sure to get the law, you may or may not get justice. The concepts of law and justice are completely different.

Brandenburg would be an interesting overall legal and political deep discussion here, but it would never happen. Most of the lawyers here lean hard left, so why discuss the actual law and admit it would very difficult to have Trump meet all three elements of the precedent? Another thing is the legal field is very wide, meaning many of the lawyers here will likely specialize in something other than Constitutional law, and why admit that? Part of the "game" of the legal profession is convincing the average citizen that you know more than you do, which nearly all lawyers don't. All the legalese and pomp and circumstance and theater is all part of keeping the legal field a cottage industry for the chosen few. The last reason is that, like any other profession, you have people who are elite, you have a lot of JAGs ( Parcell's Just Another Guy principle) and you have basic cannon fodder, those who are just horrible in any aspect of the field. So I don't know if krista4 is a lawyer or not, but if she had some views on Brandenburg, I'd like to hear them, as I've observed her like I've observed most others here for a period of time and she's actually quite brilliant. She's unusually self aware. Many of the other guys would say that because they are just thirsty simps who want to crawl into her yoga pants. I say it because I recognize and value actual talent. That being said, also over time,I've seen many of the bizarre "mutual admiration society" foot rubbing between many of the "Can't Wait To Tell You I'm A Law God" brigade. And they are far from a krista4, most of them fall into the "My Kung Fu Is Weak" cannon fodder category. You don't need to actually have functional critical thinking skills to get through law school, you just need momentum mixed with an equal share of entitlement.

So the answer Tim is formally use the process in place to change the law. You'll say that's not fair. And you know what? You are probably right. It's not fair. But the application of law is often not fair. As stated, the law is not justice. But before you decide to grip your Air Soft gun a little bit tighter and go straight to the mattresses here, consider that it's the same principles of law that prevented Mike Pence from just showing up and saying, "No, no, that doesn't count, we are going to do this in the exact way I just made up right now"  You can't have one without the other. But that's what you really want, you desperately want one without the other, which is why you appear to be so angry about this all the time.

Ask how one can change the law. And how you can be a part of it. That's productive. Screaming for justice is just trying to ice skate uphill. Screaming doesn't empower you, it just lets everyone around you know you are actually powerless. Find the person you can never criticize, that's real power.

The burning sensation you are feeling is your pride telling you that you didn't learn something today. It's a hard way to live. Now you know the actual value of relentless pride too.

 

[Rodrigo Duterte]

Not only no concession, but the White House has not had a press conference or official statements in the wake of the events of 1/6. This is just mind boggling.  (1/12 8:58:12am)

The timestamp.    

 

[JAA]

ight.  Like Clinton was held accountable.  And many other stupid politicians that get away with things.  Spend four years going after Trump like you guys went after the Russian bogeyman and it's going to make things worse and you'll likely not get crap done politically you should be focused on.  Then the Right will win elections and do the same damn thing.  You guys preached normal for four years.  Then get back to focusing on policy and the best way to move on is get Trump out of the office next week and forget about him. It's fascinating how much he lives in many of your heads.

RW - Im really trying to find common ground here.  Your post feels very angry.  If Im interpreting that wrong, Im sorry.

I want the elected officials to do what's in the best interest of moving forward.  I get that folks believe "going after Trump" now is a bad idea.  I respectfully disagree.  I believe a message needs to be sent (hopefully bipartisan) that his conduct was not OK.  I don't want to ever see it again.  I'm willing to trade GWB-type presidents for the rest of my life in exchange.  I also want no more MitchM types, but thats a different topic.

If the current branches dont get it done now, we are in trouble.  Getting it done doesnt mean making everyone happy.  It does mean taking steps in making things better.

Thank you for posting your thoughts.

 

[The General]

Brandenburg v. Ohio Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

11,820 views •Jul 16, 2018

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Vbjj9wJCD4

*****

What Turley is saying ( unfortunately lawyers like to use legalese and shove their credentials in everyone's face far too often) is that if a majority of people don't like the law in place, then there is a formal process to change the law. What you don't do is decide the law doesn't count in some specific instance against a specific person or situation because you think that's true "justice"

What they teach in the first year of law school, besides Brandenburg and Schenck ( the "clear and present danger" test) is the reality that when you walk into the court, you are only sure to get the law, you may or may not get justice. The concepts of law and justice are completely different.

Brandenburg would be an interesting overall legal and political deep discussion here, but it would never happen. Most of the lawyers here lean hard left, so why discuss the actual law and admit it would very difficult to have Trump meet all three elements of the precedent? Another thing is the legal field is very wide, meaning many of the lawyers here will likely specialize in something other than Constitutional law, and why admit that? Part of the "game" of the legal profession is convincing the average citizen that you know more than you do, which nearly all lawyers don't. All the legalese and pomp and circumstance and theater is all part of keeping the legal field a cottage industry for the chosen few. The last reason is that, like any other profession, you have people who are elite, you have a lot of JAGs ( Parcell's Just Another Guy principle) and you have basic cannon fodder, those who are just horrible in any aspect of the field. So I don't know if krista4 is a lawyer or not, but if she had some views on Brandenburg, I'd like to hear them, as I've observed her like I've observed most others here for a period of time and she's actually quite brilliant. She's unusually self aware. Many of the other guys would say that because they are just thirsty simps who want to crawl into her yoga pants. I say it because I recognize and value actual talent. That being said, also over time,I've seen many of the bizarre "mutual admiration society" foot rubbing between many of the "Can't Wait To Tell You I'm A Law God" brigade. And they are far from a krista4, most of them fall into the "My Kung Fu Is Weak" cannon fodder category. You don't need to actually have functional critical thinking skills to get through law school, you just need momentum mixed with an equal share of entitlement.

So the answer Tim is formally use the process in place to change the law. You'll say that's not fair. And you know what? You are probably right. It's not fair. But the application of law is often not fair. As stated, the law is not justice. But before you decide to grip your Air Soft gun a little bit tighter and go straight to the mattresses here, consider that it's the same principles of law that prevented Mike Pence from just showing up and saying, "No, no, that doesn't count, we are going to do this in the exact way I just made up right now"  You can't have one without the other. But that's what you really want, you desperately want one without the other, which is why you appear to be so angry about this all the time.

Ask how one can change the law. And how you can be a part of it. That's productive. Screaming for justice is just trying to ice skate uphill. Screaming doesn't empower you, it just lets everyone around you know you are actually powerless. Find the person you can never criticize, that's real power.

The burning sensation you are feeling is your pride telling you that you didn't learn something today. It's a hard way to live. Now you know the actual value of relentless pride too.

Bradenberg. The KKK guy, right?

 

[The General]

Right.  Like Clinton was held accountable.  And many other stupid politicians that get away with things.  Spend four years going after Trump like you guys went after the Russian bogeyman and it's going to make things worse and you'll likely not get crap done politically you should be focused on.  Then the Right will win elections and do the same damn thing.  You guys preached normal for four years.  Then get back to focusing on policy and the best way to move on is get Trump out of the office next week and forget about him. It's fascinating how much he lives in many of your heads.

Going to need to expand your definition here

 

[yak651]

So interested in healing, can’t say that Biden won “fair and square”. Skip to around 6:50 if you want to see him do everything possible to not say it...

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1349061272608731136?s=21