|
Post by johneaztec on Feb 9, 2021 21:05:44 GMT -8
No, when you originally posted that, I thought to myself that it was an ignorant statement, but I didn't want to ruffle feathers. After reading Alometer's response to you on the subject, I started thinking about all the times you call peoples thoughts and posts dumb or stupid, so I thought I'd lump that one in with the rest of them. That's all. So you just proved my point. I call things stupid for a reason. Because most of them are outlandish, not of this planet believable, from very specific posters promoting very specific agendas. It's not because I'm a mean person, it's because we are exhausted of trying to establish undebatable conclusions. No spin, no indifference, no misdirection. You aren't going to ruffle feathers and you shouldn't be afraid to do so. It's a poltiical forum. Ok, but I happen to choose, most of the time, to let people have their opinions without calling them stupid. I don't know, that's just me. That's why I didn't call your opinions stupid when I first read them.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 9, 2021 21:06:41 GMT -8
Another thing - If you're just casually skimming this thread and take the words from the OP at face value...you are being cheated. The claims of the impeachment being unconstitutional, for example. (It isn't) and the majority of law scholars agree on that. You have to be very careful when you start taking words as gospel. Snakes in the grass. Not skimming, but I get what you're saying. Saying in general if you (or anyone) wasn't following the events in court today or the events following the 6th comprehensively. It feels like we spent days dissecting AOC's character but never even mentioned the real stories that actually matter in a larger scheme.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 9, 2021 21:10:48 GMT -8
So you just proved my point. I call things stupid for a reason. Because most of them are outlandish, not of this planet believable, from very specific posters promoting very specific agendas. It's not because I'm a mean person, it's because we are exhausted of trying to establish undebatable conclusions. No spin, no indifference, no misdirection. You aren't going to ruffle feathers and you shouldn't be afraid to do so. It's a poltiical forum. Ok, but I happen to choose, most of the time, to let people have their opinions without calling them stupid. I don't know, that's just me. That's why I didn't call your opinions stupid when I first read them. I appreciate that, but I've survived more in my life than some do in ten. I'm tougher than I look, I promise. And it's not meant to be insulting, but certain things are not entitled to a free pass in life. I would expect the same standard if the roles were reversed, believe me.
|
|
|
Post by Al-O-Meter on Feb 10, 2021 8:09:34 GMT -8
Relax Francis, from what Trump's #1 high paid bozo said it's obvious the fix is in since he made no sense. Of course the fix is in. It is called precedent and it is the way our system works. This impeachment effort is going to fail on constitutional grounds. Bank on it. Exactly as happened in 1876 when the House voted to impeach an out-of-office William Belknap, the Senate took up the trial and made a decision to acquit Belknap on the grounds that conviction of an out-of-office citizen in an impeachment trial is not constitutional. That wording was used by every Senator voting to acquit except 3 who claimed they voted on the evidence and 1 who didn’t give a reason for the vote. Article I of the US Constitution states “Judgement in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office”. Trump isn’t in office and so can’t be removed from office which make the judgement to do so outside of the Senate’s powers. The prohibition is against “Judgement in Cases of Impeachment” and not “Impeachment”. This is a very important distinction and where everyone is playing word games. The Impeachment *IS* constitutional. Even if the House had voted to impeach Trump after he left office, it is still constitutional. The House has done nothing wrong, and AztecRyan is correct when he says the “the impeachment is constitutional”. It is the “Judgement” that is constitutionally prohibited, and prohibited by the precedent set in the 1876 impeachment trial of William Belknap. The House can bring the impeachment and politicians can politically posture with whatever votes or speeches they want to make but the only constitutionally legal option open to the Senate body as a whole is to acquit Trump. The fix is in and this is nothing but a publicity stunt to get some camera time. Don't believe anyone telling you this is about holding anyone accountable because that is fake news misinformation.
|
|
|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Feb 10, 2021 8:25:53 GMT -8
Actually it's the Senators like Cruz and Rubio that have their minds made up already that are the fixers. Let's agree to disagree. Good day.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 10, 2021 9:00:12 GMT -8
Relax Francis, from what Trump's #1 high paid bozo said it's obvious the fix is in since he made no sense. Of course the fix is in. It is called precedent and it is the way our system works. This impeachment effort is going to fail on constitutional grounds. Bank on it. Exactly as happened in 1876 when the House voted to impeach an out-of-office William Belknap, the Senate took up the trial and made a decision to acquit Belknap on the grounds that conviction of an out-of-office citizen in an impeachment trial is not constitutional. That wording was used by every Senator voting to acquit except 3 who claimed they voted on the evidence and 1 who didn’t give a reason for the vote. Article I of the US Constitution states “Judgement in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office”. Trump isn’t in office and so can’t be removed from office which make the judgement to do so outside of the Senate’s powers. The prohibition is against “Judgement in Cases of Impeachment” and not “Impeachment”. This is a very important distinction and where everyone is playing word games. The Impeachment *IS* constitutional. Even if the House had voted to impeach Trump after he left office, it is still constitutional. The House has done nothing wrong, and AztecRyan is correct when he says the “the impeachment is constitutional”. It is the “Judgement” that is constitutionally prohibited, and prohibited by the precedent set in the 1876 impeachment trial of William Belknap. The House can bring the impeachment and politicians can politically posture with whatever votes or speeches they want to make but the only constitutionally legal option open to the Senate body as a whole is to acquit Trump. The fix is in and this is nothing but a publicity stunt to get some camera time. Don't believe anyone telling you this is about holding anyone accountable because that is fake news misinformation. It will fail not because of the honor and integrity of the "jurors" who are sworn to uphold the "Constitution", but because of the lack of integrity and complicity of those who enabled the act to happen being forced to cover their own backside. As Ted Cruz said yesterday, a verdict is "preordained." (And Ted Cruz wouldn't know William Belknap if you gave him a history book and told him the chapter). A truly sad day in America where acts of violence against a coequal body of government have no real ramifications. For transparency, this is the entire text of the clause in question : "Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law." You obviously cannot hold the vote of disqualification without first reaching a guilty verdict, and it's highly unlikely the Founders envisioned a scenario such as this one unfolding on a presidential level. At some point, there needs to be changes made to ensure a scenario like this isn't open to subjectivity.
|
|
|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Feb 10, 2021 15:42:29 GMT -8
Perfect word for the insurrection sh%t show: complicit!!
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on May 19, 2021 13:16:01 GMT -8
Speaking of complicit...
|
|
|
Post by azson on May 19, 2021 13:52:23 GMT -8
"Leader" - I'd argue the least appropriate use of the term in recent memory, but then I remember who's been president the past four years.
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on May 20, 2021 5:05:28 GMT -8
This entire circus is a joke.
Let's punish the idiots who got misled by politicians rather than do anything to the political elite who led them.
This is so stereotypically Murican.
Weimar only imprisoned Hitler for 5 years. How'd that work out for them?
We're doing far less to fight fascism. Every politician responsible should've been shoved into a wood chippper.
|
|
|
Post by azson on May 20, 2021 8:32:07 GMT -8
This entire circus is a joke. Let's punish the idiots who got misled by politicians rather than do anything to the political elite who led them. This is so stereotypically Murican. Weimar only imprisoned Hitler for 5 years. How'd that work out for them? We're doing far less to fight fascism. Every politician responsible should've been shoved into a wood chippper. Unrelated to this topic but related to a broken, joke-circus of a system, check out the new HBO doc Crime of Century re the evils of big pharma/legalized drug pushing.
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on May 20, 2021 13:34:35 GMT -8
This entire circus is a joke. Let's punish the idiots who got misled by politicians rather than do anything to the political elite who led them. This is so stereotypically Murican. Weimar only imprisoned Hitler for 5 years. How'd that work out for them? We're doing far less to fight fascism. Every politician responsible should've been shoved into a wood chippper. Unrelated to this topic but related to a broken, joke-circus of a system, check out the new HBO doc Crime of Century re the evils of big pharma/legalized drug pushing. Interesting you bring that up. As I was growing up, the dominant American culture / society looked down upon "primative" cultures like Native Americans, Inuit, and other indigenous peoples. As they were contacted, and their societies broke down, they were extremely susceptible to alcohol and drug abuse. Fast forward 40 years later, and look how easy it was to do here! So, maybe...just maybe..on many levels humans are the same.
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on May 21, 2021 4:13:11 GMT -8
This entire circus is a joke. Let's punish the idiots who got misled by politicians rather than do anything to the political elite who led them. This is so stereotypically Murican. Weimar only imprisoned Hitler for 5 years. How'd that work out for them? We're doing far less to fight fascism. Every politician responsible should've been shoved into a wood chippper. Unrelated to this topic but related to a broken, joke-circus of a system, check out the new HBO doc Crime of Century re the evils of big pharma/legalized drug pushing. Will do. Is this related to generations of a failed Drug War imprisoning the poor & minorities while we now allow rich, mostly white people to become richer for the same $#!+?
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on May 21, 2021 4:15:31 GMT -8
Unrelated to this topic but related to a broken, joke-circus of a system, check out the new HBO doc Crime of Century re the evils of big pharma/legalized drug pushing. Interesting you bring that up. As I was growing up, the dominant American culture / society looked down upon "primative" cultures like Native Americans, Inuit, and other indigenous peoples. As they were contacted, and their societies broke down, they were extremely susceptible to alcohol and drug abuse. Fast forward 40 years later, and look how easy it was to do here! So, maybe...just maybe..on many levels humans are the same. Truth But, as US history demonstrates, any attempts to create a society based on this will be immediately propagandized as unAmerican & unpatriotic for no other reason than the unrelated "Murican freedoms" used to ironically deny Muricans of actual freedoms. And any leaders of said movements would meet the fate of Fred Hampton or Dr King.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on May 28, 2021 11:32:23 GMT -8
In a serious blow to democracy, the GOP has blocked a bipartisan attempt to establish a committee to investigate January 6th.
If there was any doubt that the party is beholden to the former president, this removes all of it.
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on May 28, 2021 14:52:46 GMT -8
In a serious blow to democracy, the GOP has blocked a bipartisan attempt to establish a committee to investigate January 6th. If there was any doubt that the party is beholden to the former president, this removes all of it. If trump asked his followers to drink the purple stuff, I wonder how many really would? I'd say enough to make Jim Jones body count look like a nothing burger. Worse than this, if he asked his followers to take up arms and attack...wow scary thought. If you think this is far fetched, his protégé geatz just told his audience that they sound use the second amendment against Silicon Valley execs. If you showed this script / movie to Hollywood 30 years ago..you would have been laughed out of the lot.
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on May 31, 2021 11:58:10 GMT -8
Nevermind...its even dumber than that. Trump's former Security Adviser..Flynn calling for a Myanmar style coup to reinstall Mango Mouselini into power. With special guest appearance at the Q event by Sydney Powell. America is rapidly hurtling towards "Idiocracy" .... oh well maybe we already passed it!
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jun 10, 2021 6:29:48 GMT -8
Nevermind...its even dumber than that. Trump's former Security Adviser..Flynn calling for a Myanmar style coup to reinstall Mango Mouselini into power. With special guest appearance at the Q event by Sydney Powell. America is rapidly hurtling towards "Idiocracy" .... oh well maybe we already passed it! We laid the foundation. We live in a society that doubts experts because their cult (Red & Blue) leaders said so.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 27, 2021 11:48:47 GMT -8
The testimony today has brought a few things to light - Some of which we already know, but worth reiterating because most of it is indefensible.
- Multiple Republican members of Congress have indicated they want to remove Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger from the party for telling the truth about January 6th.
- There is a massive amount of delusion surrounding the GOP as to the events of January 6th. At least one member stated on the record that no insurrection occurred, brushing it off as a "breach of security."
- Kevin McCarthy and others in the party have acted as obstructionists from the get-go, then turn around and cry wolf when they don't get their way. They blame Nancy Pelosi, even when they had the chance for a bipartisan investigation.
- Capitol Police testimony today was chilling. From their own words, it's crystal clear what took place on January 6th.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 27, 2021 17:16:23 GMT -8
I woke up this morning in a very masochistic mood. After thinking it over, I decided that the best way to receive some serious hate was to comment on January 6th, 2021. Here goes. (Start sharpening your keyboards.)
Regarding the riots (my preferred term) of the 6th of January, nothing positive can be said. Many people committed crimes at the Capitol that day, some serious and others not so serious. I think we will see some of the indicted ultimately receive some pretty harsh sentences. Others are being charged, I believe, on much less serious crimes such as trespassing.
How should we view the events of Jan. 6th in DC? A bunch of rag-tag partisans, mostly supporters of Donald Trump, who came looking for trouble and found the Capitol security unprepared to defend the center of republican government? Or perhaps a well-organized attempt by right-wing, well-armed stormtroopers to seize the government of the United States?
It certainly was at least the former of those two possibilities. As for the latter, one must ask some questions. How many of those who stormed the capitol brought firearms? (Let me emphasize the word "firearms", not "weapons". One does not knock over a government armed with slingshots and baseball bats.) I looked that up and found that only "Christopher Michael Alberts was arrested by Metropolitan Police on Jan. 6 for carrying a pistol without a license, possession of a firearm on Capital grounds". The the item did not say whether the man had actually entered the building. In any case, if what he is charged with is true, it's a crime and he should be prosecuted.
But if it was a serious attempt to seize control of the U.S. government, it was a pretty pathetic one. Take a look at the videos of some of boobs walking around the House chamber looking like drunken college sophomores after a football game. Do you think that they constituted a threat to our government? That does NOT mean it was not a serious breach of the law and a gross affront to our concept of civilized government. I condemn it without reservation.
But, as serious as the riot was in a number of ways, it never had a chance of overthrowing he U.S. government. Even if they had succeeded in killing many Representatives and Senators, they would not have achieved their goal. The military would have killed most of them when it, inevitably, retook the premises by force. And, no, it's very unlikely that the evil monster Donald Trump would have ordered the army to install him as President by force. Anyway, we have heard how Gen. Milley, eager not to allow the POTUS to do anything untoward, would have stepped in to stop him.
As bad as the riot was, there is one thing that worries me more. That is the obvious attempt by the Democrats to portray ALL their political opponents as, in essence, being as guilty as those who stormed the Capitol. That of course is rubbish. I can't imagine that, out of the 74 million Trump voters, more than a handful actually approve of what happened on Jan. 6th.
If the Democrats can convince even a relatively small percentage of the 74 million who voted for Trump that the GOP is synonymous with National Socialism and White Supremacy, I don't see how they can ever again fail to win the presidency.
Okay, I'm ready for the hate. Bring it on.
AzWm
|
|