Lurker > red sox 777

Which one of our most unique and cherished political institutions has made America so great?

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Vote away!

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Related to this, I read a news story that Susan Collins sent a note to the Chief Justice asking if the House managers had violated the rule of the Senate against impugning the motives or character of members after the House managers more or less accused the Senate majority of preparing to violate their oath to be impartial. And the Chief Justice gave them a verbal warning, which is rather light for direct contempt of court and contempt of the Senate.


---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

It is really a separation of powers issue. Without this precedent you would have judicial supremacy. An unelected majority of the Supreme Court could govern the country like a dictatorship.

If you impugn the motives of the chosen head of state of the people without proof, you effectively impugn the motives of the people and deprive them of a voice. That is not okay in our republic.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

It's why at the UK Supreme Court a couple months ago, they had to argue that Boris Johnson had lied to the Queen - because the Queen can do no wrong. So if she made a bad decision, she must have been relying on bad information.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

One of the things that frustrates me the most about this era is that people keep giving Trump and his administration the benefit of the doubt despite the fact that they do the wrong thing every single fucking time

The courts have to. Those are the rules set by precedent, that we assume the executive is doing their best to act in the best interests of the nation.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzNoI9Q0o7A

Kamala Harris openly giving advice to the House managers on CNN. Looks like Mitch isn't the only one who is not even pretending to be an impartial juror!

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

Oh Im certainly not defending it! but theres no reasonable doubt that Trump did what he is accused of, so thats kinda all thats left.

In related news, upcoming possible bullshit excuse for not calling witnesses:

https://twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1220521857251790848?s=21

Yeah that's not really an excuse. The Senate is the first and last court here.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Well, the way it's done in schools is pretty bad. For instance, pressuring non-American students to recite it. That could potentially be subornation of treason, depending on the treason laws in the student's country of citizenship!

Non-American citizens should never be permitted to recite the pledge, and should not be allowed to serve in the military. Not until they've become citizens.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

I always thought the way the Pledge of Allegiance is recited in schools felt cultish. The one saving grace of the Pledge is that it contains the two words "under God." That means that each person's allegiance to God, to conscience, to doing right must always come ahead of allegiance to country. It distinguished us from the Soviet Union which asserted that it should have absolute loyalty from its people.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Jakyl25 posted...

In other news

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/donald-trump-medicare-entitlements-cuts/index.html

The economy is so great, Trump might cut entitlements

Not until after the election, Im sure

About time. I can't afford to pay social security tax. I think that tax should be eliminated and Mexico and China should pay our retirees their social security through tariffs.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Tucker is awful based on what I've seen. It seems to be mostly hatemongering and fearmongering. And ridiculing defenseless people.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Xiahou Shake posted...

I would wager 90% of this board, if born with Trump's assets and resources, could indeed easily perform far better than he has. Funny thing about class!

Many people were born with Trump's assets and resources. Only a tiny fraction of them have become US President.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Jakyl25 posted...

You know whats really not politically correct?

Saying USA isnt #1

That's old now. After Obama took office it became politically correct to say the US is not #1.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Jakyl25 posted...

Like I dont see how anyone could be against hunting for food unless they are militantly vegetarian or vegan

The left is anti-human so they want us all to die.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Jakyl25 posted...

One of his new slogans is Mike Will Get It Done

Not gonna be a great slogan if something happens to Trump and hes running against Pence

It'll do better than "I'm richer than you."

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Schiff is a problem because he is unrepentant. He does not acknowledge that the Democrats are a huge part of the problem. He does not acknowledge that Democrats are corrupt. He does not acknowledge that they are hypocrites. He does not acknowledge that they support the rich and corporations over the working class at every opportunity. He is from California.

Without true contrition, the people will not listen to the Democrats.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Vote Trump 2020

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

StealThisSheen posted...

You say this like anybody from the left could change any minds on the right

The best chance would be Bill Clinton.....right after he announced he was divorcing Hillary because he couldn't stand her corruption anymore.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Wanglicious posted...

maybe i'm misremembering but weren't you bi? Nigeria, like most of Africa, ain't very LGBT friendly. and by that i mean openly violent against them. you'd also have to be careful for being white as there's going to be some notable racism involved, expect to pay off cops on a regular basis because otherwise you're at the least getting robbed regularly if you don't. low scale bribes like this are quite common.

...same as any trial? reverse and remand or dismissal instead of actually having a trial. you know, the usual things courts do to punt.

This isn't an appellate court. There's no lower court to remand the case to. There's no higher court to seek the guidance of. There's no way to punt like a normal court does.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Jakyl25 posted...

I asked for a middle ground for handling the Senate trial

"And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present."

So if the vote is 66 guilty, 34 present, 0 not guilty, then the President is acquitted.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Well, the Senate can do what the jury that first came up with the "Not Guilty" verdict did and just invent a verdict of "Not Impeachable." At that time the options the jury was supposed to choose from were "Proven" and "Not Proven." It was obvious the guy did it but the jury didn't think he did anything wrong. So they came up with "Not Guilty." You could argue that the jury didn't have the authority to make that call, but as far as the law was concerned, they did not reach a verdict of "Proven." So the defendant walks.

Or the easier way is to dismiss the charges for failure to charge an impeachable offense. That means that even if he did everything alleged, it's not impeachable. Then you don't have to deny that he did any of it.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Or to put it this way, if Trump demanded that the USA pay him 50 billion dollars as his price for being president and draining the swamp, that would be well worth paying. I think the voters would have agreed to pay it.

If Congress doesn't like it they should pass a bill banning the forms of corruption that are legal now. Then if Trump keeps doing those things, you can impeach him and his removal will be the fulfillment of his own campaign promises. But at this point, Congress and the Democrats are still trying to stop the draining of the swamp.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

Very interesting:

https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1220174954358067204?s=21

I dont know if living in a misinformation bubble is much better than knowing what Trump did and shrugging, but Ive always assumed most members of Congress fell in the latter rather than the former camp. But maybe Im wrong!

We are sort of in a bind here. Trump is only doing what the Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden have done for decades. If Trump is removed there is no question that the Democrats will win the 2020 election and very little doubt that it will be one of the corrupt centrists. With Trump out of the picture the Democrats will go all out against the left since they know the voters won't be able to hold them accountable at the polls. So we'll end up with corruption being legal as long as you speak civilly and cozy up to big corporations.

I think to fight corruption, Trump must be acquitted. The voice of the people must be heard and their decision must be honored. Trump's corruption is of a very venal sort, just seeking personal enrichment for himself only. His message is not that it is okay for everyone, only for him. Whereas Hillary's message was that she did nothing wrong and that any rich person can follow in her footsteps down the path of legal corruption.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Corrik7 posted...

Their government cannot reasonably protect them. That is an issue. A major one.

Ours can't either. Vladimir Putin could have us all killed tonight and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

I think the Republican Party should set up a program to pay people to leave. After a few million liberals leave the US the Democratic Party will never win another national election.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Corrik7 posted...

If your goal is the best country to live in, you will realize the US is a better country and thus want to come back.

If the basis for that is safety from invasion, Canada is almost as safe from conventional attack as the US and probably safer from nuclear attack (Russia might not launch against Canada should there be global thermonuclear war).

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Corrik7 posted...

25% of all shooting homicides are in the largest 25 cities of America where less than 10% of the American population lives. I would venture to guess those cities are almost all liberal bastions of support.

These cities are largely one-party states where most of the population doesn't vote because they realize they don't really live in a democracy and it would be a waste of time.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Trump made reducing crime by non-police against minorities a central campaign issue. Unfortunately I think the primary way he has tried to fulfill that promise is to increase the police presence. But I think they are 2 distinct issues and Trump has had different effects on both.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Mr Lasastryke posted...

in your example of "countless black men being shot," i'd say trump is absolutely exacerbating the situation with his racist rhetoric and glorification of gun culture, even if he's not the real problem.

i'm not saying it will be all butterflies and rainbows if bernie becomes president. but we shouldn't downplay the role trump plays in this.

Do you mean shot by police or by non-police? I think Trump is exacerbating the problem but only for shootings by police.

But I think the crux of the problem is that there is no moderation in the treatment of police officers. In our current system, a police officer who shoots someone is either completely innocent and subject to absolutely zero consequences, or he's a murderer who is going to prison for the rest of his life. Not surprisingly, other police and people who support police try their hardest to protect their comrades.

The reality is that a police officer in an area with violent crime encounters a lot of dangerous situations and is called upon to make very fast decisions many times. Given a high number of such decisions some of those decisions are inevitably going to be bad, but that doesn't mean the officer is a bad person or deserves to go to prison for life. I think we need some kind of intermediate consequence so that people can hold officers accountable without destroying their lives over one mistake. And of course for the cases where it's not a mistake, but intentional, you can still charge the officer with murder.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

I have literally seen M4A proponents say that people who oppose it are guilty of murder (which, fine, I guess is not quite the same as saying pro-people-dying, but its not any better)!

As I said, I dont dispute that the American healthcare system has huge problems. I even would be willing to admit that M4A could very well end up being the best system if properly implemented. What proponents have completely failed to convince me of is that
a) The chance that it will be properly implemented is not significantly less than 100%
b) we couldnt get to a system thats almost as good via a public options together with other reforms

Hopefully you get how I feel as someone who's opposed Obamacare from the start.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

Republican Senators not even pretending:

https://twitter.com/mmcauliff/status/1220078694481395713?s=21

21 and 2? So we have 43 Dems, 2 independents, and 31 Republicans in the chamber. If they can convince 9 more Republicans to leave the chamber.....they could adopt new rules skipping the rest of the trial and going straight to voting on the verdict.....then convict with 45 out of 67 votes.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

DoomTheGyarados posted...

It's actually only asking people 55-64 to take the initial risk! Almost as if a slow, steady rollout would smooth over issues.

In fairness, these are the people with the greatest need for medical care who aren't already on Medicare and with the greatest risk of downside if their level of care deteriorates.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

The issue is that M4A proponents are demanding that I (and all other Americans) gamble on things indeed being properly constructed. Thats a pretty damn big ask when there are plenty of alternative systems that cover everyone and wouldnt require everyone to take that risk.

Yes, there is some risk. But for everyone who isn't covered under an employer/school plan right now, there's also a lot of risk in staying with the system we have or with any alternative system that I've seen proposed.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Corrik7 posted...

I assume it costs money to move.

Between Canada and the US, the actual moving cost isn't much. I assumed he was talking about the cost of finding a new job, getting immigration status, etc. For an American citizen, that will be a lot easier coming back to the US than going to Canada.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Corrik7 posted...

Who is going to pay your way back when you realize you made a mistake?

He's a US citizen, he can just come back.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Monaco is a good place to live because if you live there, you are probably rich.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LOTM, unless your relative was a super rich person that got the treatment they needed by being able to pay for it out of pocket, like when Saudi princes travel here for treatment they can't get anywhere else, they would have probably gotten as good or better treatment in any first world country. And it would have cost less everywhere else.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Jakyl25 posted...

What country wants to do that to Monaco?

The USSR.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Mr Lasastryke posted...

real genius would be the dutch system where multiple parties work together in the government. the american equivalent would be the democrats, republicans and green party (or whatever) all working together on compromises, instead of one republican asshole running the show in the white house.

checks and balances seems nice, but it means absolutely nothing when you have a senate that's just there to suck trump's dick (as we're seeing right now with the impeachment bullshit).

Well, America did have parties cooperating and working together for decades. But it was producing bad results, so the voters decided to change things and voted for more adversarial politicians. The beauty of the US system is that while the checks and balances can seem to prevent anything from getting done, when you have truly massive support (a majority of the states, a majority of the districts, a majority the states weighted by population (for the electoral college), and have had the above for a long enough time to get the courts on your side), you can act decisively.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

Best system of government, guaranteed rights, historically most open to immigrants (which has a lot to do with our economic power; we take in the best from around the world), etc etc etc. As much as Trump is trying to take a wrecking ball to what actually makes America great, the fact that hes only damaged the walls and not leveled everything is a testament to how well everything was set up.

Honestly, this is probably privileged wishful thinking. It's like Jacob Rees-Mogg saying that the UK had the best judicial system in the world, and the US was #2. That's possible for a patrician like him, maybe, but absolutely false for poor people and middle class people.

US rights are remarkably legalistic. You have the right to have a police officer tell you that you have the right to remain silent, but police are allowed to lie to you. You have the right to be defended by an attorney but if you speak with your attorney for all of five minutes before pleading guilty because the prosecutor offered a deal where you plea guilty and immediately go home (or plead not guilty and go to jail to wait for trial) no one will take a second look at it. You have the right to kill an preborn baby but you don't have the right to place any marijuana at all into your body.

The one area where I do think the US is really great on is our electoral system, which delivers an exceptional level of separation and balance of powers.


---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

McConnell is on tape saying that he is absolutely not an impartial judge and is coordinating with the White House

I think he said he would not be an impartial juror. But even if he meant he would be a biased juror and judge, and even if that wasn't allowed in impeachment trials (which it is probably is), that has nothing to do with the rules, which are fair on their face.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

America has a lot of problems but it absolutely is the best country on earth.

The best as in most powerful or richest by total wealth?

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

If a truly impartial juror was in that scenario, wouldn't he want to hear all relevant witnesses and see all relevant documents? Is there any reason he would possibly vote not to see that material if given the option?

But the senators are not only the jury. They are also the judge. Judges frequently disallow evidence they decide is inadmissible, and prevent the jury from hearing or seeing it.

The order is always that first the judge will decide if evidence is admissible, and then the jury will consider it. Because if the jury has already seen the evidence, what's the point of the judge finding it inadmissible?

I just don't see what is unfair about McConnell's trial process here. First both sides will be able to make opening statements and submit trial briefs. Then the Senate will decide if the House has made enough of a case to get past a motion to dismiss. If they have, then both sides can present the witnesses they want to call and can object or not object to each witness. If there are objections, the Senate will decide which witnesses are admissible. Same with documents.

Then, if there is any admissible evidence, it gets presented. Then the senators put on their juror hats and give a verdict. But not until after they have discharged their preliminary duties as judges.

It's exactly the same process as a regular court. The ranting and raving coming from the Democrats is because they apparently do not trust the Republican senators to be fair judges. It's like Trump saying that he didn't trust a federal judge to rule in the Trump University case because his parents were born in Mexico. Coming from the House managers, it's inherently contemptuous, and coming from a senator, it violates the Senate rule against impugning the character of members.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

This is false. If Trump actually presented evidence which disproved the seemingly inescapable conclusion painted by all of the evidence currently publicly available they would vote to acquit. But Trump hasn't done that; hell, he freely provided one of the most damning pieces of evidence (the "Perfect Phone Call") himself!

You're basically saying that a jury that's seen a tape of Trump shooting someone on Fifth Avenue shouldn't even be entertaining the idea of convicting him until the trial's over.

They should keep an open mind. Maybe Trump acted in self-defense. Maybe the legislature legalized shootings on Fifth Avenue. Maybe the Democrats entrapped Trump. Maybe the Democrats offered to release Hillary's emails in exchange for a false confession.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

On one hand, all of the facts show that Trump clearly did withhold Congressionally appropriated military aid to an ally at war with Russia in order to pressure them into announcing a sham investigation into his most likely reelection opponent and his son. On the other hand, we have no actual dispute of the underlying facts, but "get over it." Guess each side is equally valid!

The Democrats clearly have no case. They're not equally valid.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Jakyl25 posted...

Finally youre understanding that the system doesnt work

Lets take the next step and realize that laws created by such a polarized system are not inherently just.

It's a different issue. Laws are to be obeyed not because they are just, but to maintain order. The sovereign (the king traditionally, but in the USA the people) are responsible before God for making their laws just, but as between a person and the sovereign, they simply have to obey.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Fortunately there is something called an election which is scheduled for November!

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

LordoftheMorons posted...

Hes not being ordered to produce evidence against himself. Various members of the executive branch are being ordered to produce evidence against him. Trump is not the executive branch. And in an extremely relevant precedent, Richard Nixon was forced to hand over the White House tapes.

If the House wanted that evidence and believed the Nixon precedent applied they could have gone to court and asked for an order compelling production. Now, you can argue that they are going to court now, in that they are asking the Senate to compel the production of the evidence in its capacity as a court of impeachment. Well, they can ask and the court can say no!

I think that the House would have much better chances of getting that production compelled in a regular court and not a partisan one like the Senate. But they chose to do this in the Senate, no one forced them to, and now they will reap the consequences of their strategy.

---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!

Ok, so I've heard a really bad argument that's been making the rounds lately which I want to address, which is the idea that because the Constitution does not specify what is an impeachable offense, the Senate cannot dismiss the articles of impeachment for failure to charge an impeachable offense.

The Constitution gives the House the sole power to charge impeachments and the Senate the sole power to try them. That means that they both have a role in deciding what is an impeachable offense. Both of them have to agree than an act is impeachable for anyone to be convicted for that act. If the House doesn't think an act is impeachable it won't impeach. If the Senate doesn't it won't convict. This mirrors the usual relationship between a grand jury and a court of law - if the grand jury doesn't believe there was a crime, it won't indict, and if the court believes that the grand jury indicted for an act that is not a crime, it will dismiss the case.

The Senate absolutely has the power and obligation to determine the meaning of "treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors." The House determination of the meaning of this phrase is not binding on the Senate and never could be. So all the articles I've seen in the media arguing that the Senate cannot interpret the Constitution are ridiculous, and their attempts to attack Trump's lawyers for making bad arguments are even worse. The media people make a contention about the state of the law (an opinion) as if it were a fact, then attack others for disagreeing with them.

And yes, that means that the Senate can decide that engaging in a quid pro quo with a foreign government is not impeachable, but lying about an affair is. They could, but in fact they did decide 20 years ago that lying about an affair was not impeachable.


---

September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013
Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest!