|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
11-01-2019, 11:17 AM
|
#1
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
What fire breathing radical said this and about whom?
I want to share one strongly argued case for impeachment, from a leading constitutional scholar, that I stumbled across the other day.
"[The president’s] defenders describe the unthinkable disaster of impeachment. But it should not be unthinkable. The framers of the Constitution did not see impeachment as a doomsday scenario; they thought it necessary to remove bad men from the offices they were subverting."
“The president’s defenders, experts at changing the subject, prefer to debate whether [he] committed a felony …. [but] ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ are not limited to actions that are crimes under federal law."
“It becomes clear that the White House has never before been occupied by such a reckless and narcissistic adventurer. Sociopath is not too strong a word."
“We are regularly lectured about a constitutional crisis if the House goes forward with hearings and ultimately votes a bill of impeachment for trial in the Senate. Consider the alternative. Perhaps American presidents, by and large, have not been a distinguished lot…"
“….But if we ratify [his] behavior in office, we may expect not just a lack of distinction in the future but aggressively dishonest, even criminal, conduct. The real calamity will not be that we removed a president from office but that we did not."
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 12:02 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
I want to share one strongly argued case for impeachment, from a leading constitutional scholar, that I stumbled across the other day.
"[The president’s] defenders describe the unthinkable disaster of impeachment. But it should not be unthinkable. The framers of the Constitution did not see impeachment as a doomsday scenario; they thought it necessary to remove bad men from the offices they were subverting."
“The president’s defenders, experts at changing the subject, prefer to debate whether [he] committed a felony …. [but] ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ are not limited to actions that are crimes under federal law."
“It becomes clear that the White House has never before been occupied by such a reckless and narcissistic adventurer. Sociopath is not too strong a word."
“We are regularly lectured about a constitutional crisis if the House goes forward with hearings and ultimately votes a bill of impeachment for trial in the Senate. Consider the alternative. Perhaps American presidents, by and large, have not been a distinguished lot…"
“….But if we ratify [his] behavior in office, we may expect not just a lack of distinction in the future but aggressively dishonest, even criminal, conduct. The real calamity will not be that we removed a president from office but that we did not."
|
Another leading constitutional scholar, hard-core-liberal liberal Alan Dershowitz, thinks it's all a sham.
It's a matter of opinion.
|
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 12:48 PM
|
#3
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
Not Dersh
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 03:16 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,384
|
It doesn't matter rule of law is gone in the republican party . Lie alternative facts and pandering to their base endless conspiracy driven world view.. from immigrants to pizza shops to not believing what the hear or see the orangeman do or say..
Ps North Korea fires off 2 ballistic missile. Republicans were winning
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 03:17 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
It doesn't matter rule of law is gone in the republican party .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
We can't all be as obsessed with rule of law, as liberals are.
|
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 03:40 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
It doesn't matter rule of law is gone in the republican party . Lie alternative facts and pandering to their base endless conspiracy driven world view.. from immigrants to pizza shops to not believing what the hear or see the orangeman do or say..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
this is pretty deep for a monday
|
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 03:55 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Ps North Korea fires off 2 ballistic missile.
Maybe the quid pro quo wasn't attractive enough for Kim. Uh, oh, must be an impeachable offense somewhere in there.
Republicans were winning
|
Did that make you happy?
|
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 03:59 PM
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
I want to share one strongly argued case for impeachment, from a leading constitutional scholar, that I stumbled across the other day.
"[The president’s] defenders describe the unthinkable disaster of impeachment. But it should not be unthinkable. The framers of the Constitution did not see impeachment as a doomsday scenario; they thought it necessary to remove bad men from the offices they were subverting."
“The president’s defenders, experts at changing the subject, prefer to debate whether [he] committed a felony …. [but] ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ are not limited to actions that are crimes under federal law."
“It becomes clear that the White House has never before been occupied by such a reckless and narcissistic adventurer. Sociopath is not too strong a word."
“We are regularly lectured about a constitutional crisis if the House goes forward with hearings and ultimately votes a bill of impeachment for trial in the Senate. Consider the alternative. Perhaps American presidents, by and large, have not been a distinguished lot…"
“….But if we ratify [his] behavior in office, we may expect not just a lack of distinction in the future but aggressively dishonest, even criminal, conduct. The real calamity will not be that we removed a president from office but that we did not."
|
Doesn't sound like a strong argument for impeachment. Actually, it's a silly and very dangerous argument--impeachment based on conjecture.
|
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 04:57 PM
|
#9
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,205
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
It doesn't matter rule of law is gone in the republican party . Lie alternative facts and pandering to their base endless conspiracy driven world view.. from immigrants to pizza shops to not believing what the hear or see the orangeman do or say..
Ps North Korea fires off 2 ballistic missile. Republicans were winning
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Every time I think you can’t post anything more stupid, you hit the keyboard and surprise me again
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 05:41 PM
|
#10
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Doesn't sound like a strong argument for impeachment. Actually, it's a silly and very dangerous argument--impeachment based on conjecture.
|
Maybe that’s why Bork didn’t make it on the Supreme Court
It was his comment on the Clinton impeachment
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 06:06 PM
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
Maybe that’s why Bork didn’t make it on the Supreme Court
It was his comment on the Clinton impeachment
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
He was obviously wrong. As was Lindsey Graham about his nebulous reason for impeaching Clinton. Clinton was impeached for a specific crime. As is constitutionally mandated.
I understand, though, that you're big on innuendo, and conjecture. I think we would have constant and stupid, as well as unconstitutional impeachments if your standards were applied.
|
|
|
|
11-01-2019, 08:48 PM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
Every time I think you can’t post anything more stupid, you hit the keyboard and surprise me again
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Spit my beer everywhere
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
11-02-2019, 02:51 PM
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,384
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
Every time I think you can’t post anything more stupid, you hit the keyboard and surprise me again
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Sorry you find your truths Stupid ..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:13 PM.
|
| |