US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by bstanko6

Mapuc...

Let’s not talk about that. I wanna have a conversation with you about how this government is handling all of this. No one cares about BLM deaths and murders. Chop zone had rapes and murders and no one cared. More people died in the name of George Floyd and no one cares. Angry Trump supporters supposedly take over Capitol Hill… Fine will say that. Now the whole country is up in an uproar.

That kind of double standard by liberals is nothing new. Hypocrisy is baked into their beliefs. And if one points this out, they get slapped down with "whatboutism".

The sad thing now is, as we saw in the riot in DC, the other side is now following the same playbook. Conservatives are supposed to be above that kind of criminal mischief, that's what we all said over the nine months of antifa and BLM mobs rioting and burning.

Of course, it does make a difference when the riot takes place in the US capital building, that kind of behavior is obscene.

[skidman]

Originally Posted by u crank

That somewhat hysterical 80 year old dingbat from California has signalled that she wants to impeach Trump and will procede to do so if Pence does not agree to a 25th amendment removal of the President. My money is on Pence not doing something that stupid or unconstitutional.

Why exactly would it be unconstitutional?

And for Pence it would also be political suicide if he wants to be the GOP nominee in 2020.

You really expect him to run? Really? A man who asks the Good Lord for permission before tying his shoes? A man who could be replaced by a cardboard cutout and nobody would notice?

[Dowly]

@BStanko6: How can you talk neutrally, when you've already made your mind about there being red flags?


Prove your premise first, I'll be happy to talk with you after that.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by skidman

Why exactly would it be unconstitutional?

Because the reason that the Democrats want to use it is not what was intended for. That is what impeachment is for. But then again I'm not sure Nancy is an expert on the Constitution.

You really expect him to run? Really?

And for Pence it would also be political suicide if he wants to be the GOP nominee in 2020.

Did I say that I expected him to run?

[bstanko6]

First red flag before I put a whole bunch of stuff down on paper. Let’s talk about this one, as soon as Pelosi’s laptop is stolen, all of a sudden they want to impeach Donald Trump. Why? He’s on his way out. Why are they so quick to remove him from office?

Now they say he incited violence, but if you watch the video he never once told anyone to go out and hurt anyone or take over anything.

And immediately after they try to go for the 25th amendment, all of the social medias kick him off. Now I know they are private entities, but wouldn’t you want to hear what he has to say? The problem is when they cut him off, they cut the American people off from his conversation.

Now there’s power outages in the area of DC and surrounding states. Does anyone think this is odd? I’m not asking to dispute this, or support this, I just want to know what you think about that.

Don’t you think it’s a little strange? And if you do think it’s strange what is your theory?

[Catfish]

There were no babies or women killed during the BLM protests. "Baby killers" is usually preserved for english propaganda describing german Zeppelin attacks in WW1.
What surprises me is that those who claiming such, are usually also spreading false stories of raping of good citizens and upright (white) women and the like, so why not here?

Can you imagine what would have been done by the police at the Capitol if those wannabe-revoluzzers would have been black? And who invented this "antifa" idea lmao, clutching at straws to have someone else to blame.

No one accuses you, not that that you did any racially biased prosecution or action, nor that you support it, but you posts here paint a very strange picture of what you perception is of what a cop should do, apart from being loyal to America (not the president! Words matter, as do oaths. OT here but certain dictators know exactly why they let people swear an oath to them, and not the constitution or state).
No one looks down upon you or attacks you when you are a good cop and do things right, on the contrary. Indeed there have been a lot of good cops seen recently, as usually a few bad ones spoil it for the greater rest.
But why defend the bad on ones then?

This is old, a 1964 picture of two police officers during a trial in which has been going around the world back then. Blame the "fake media" in Trump-style?

https://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2...sippi-burning/

LIFE magazine devoted two pages to the above photo made by Paul Reed, which showed defendants hollering and mocking the court. Rainey was seen flamboyantly chewing his tobacco in the picture. All good people, some belonging to the Kukluxklan, nice chaps and we love you Trump said to the today's representatives of this exclusive club.
(some friend from the US recently had the brazenness to say that "there was never police brutality or racially based prosecution" in the US. No he is not a "friend" any more).

You have not stated what you think of the Floyd murder (and this is what it was), or shooting someone in the back in "self defence". seven. times.
Don't you think that at least the initial BLM movement had a damned good reason to act like it did?
What about all those other black people being killed because being suspicious in the minds of racists, without being a criminal or even be involved in anything?

No they do not have the right to plunder or to attack, but as we saw here most of those protests had been peaceful in the beginning.
I bet most looters and destroyers have nothing to do with BLM, antifa or any political matter. They are just looting swines who mixed with the protests to be shielded and camouflaged in the crowd.

"There have also been numerous reports and videos of aggressive police actions using physical force including "batons, tear gas, pepper spray and rubber bullets on protesters, bystanders and journalists, often without warning or seemingly unprovoked. "[13] These incidents have provoked "growing concern that aggressive law enforcement tactics intended to impose order were instead inflaming tensions."[13] The police responded that such tactics are necessary to prevent vandalism and arson, and that police officers have been assaulted with rocks and water bottles.[13] Amnesty International issued a press release calling for the police to end excessive militarized responses to the protests."

What about the some of the police obviously intentionally fanning the flames? No sympathy for obvious injustice being done? How did this police officer shooting Blake in the back manage to get out free? Are those other special cops, or is this a systemic problem?

[skidman]

Originally Posted by u crank

Because the reason that the Democrats want to use it is not what was intended for.

You are missing the point here. The 25th Amendment does not cover reasons or political intentions of the participants involved in the process. It is just a technical rider on how to proceed if the mentioned constitutional bodies agree on the President's incapacity.

[bstanko6]

Catfish...
You brought up a lot. So I will pick one. George Floyd.

The George Floyd incident was tragic. But unfortunately now that there’s more evidence, especially body worn cameras from the police officers, it’s more apparent that excited delirium had a lot to do with this. Now before you go crazy and say that I’m trying to deflect from what the police officers did I’m not.

Excited delirium is a rat a new concept, about what our bodies go through when there’s high levels of drugs specifically uppers and downers. George Floyd had an extremely amount of high levels of math, mixed in with fentanyl. Very bad mix.

On camera he’s asking the police officers to be put on the ground after he was resisting going into the squad. Which they compromise and let him do.

The cop putting his knee on his back... I don’t understand that. It is a technique that is taught to police officers. It’s a type of pin. But the man was handcuffed and it didn’t seem that he was kicking at the time. Now I haven’t seen all of the body cameras footage but maybe he was fighting? I don’t know. I think he should’ve been put into a fetal position until the ambulance arrived. But I do know from personal experience you could put a knee on a person and not put pressure on his back or neck. That’s actually quite simple to do. It does look terrible. I’m not at all disputing that.

When they did the autopsy on George Floyd, they flew in a medical examiner from another state for a second opinion. I don’t think two doctors, that’s what they are doctors, are going to risk their careers in lying that George Floyd died from his heart failing and not from asphyxiation.

Now I know that sounds terrible, but I can’t see higher level elected officials like ME/coroners sticking up for police officers. Especially not in that city.

But at the end of the day people did riot over this, people lost their jobs, their way of living, and people lost their lives including children. One store was burned in the apartment above went up in flames killing women and children. There is no excuse for that ever. I don’t care how many people the police kill, you don’t kill women and children over it.

The problem is people want the police to be predictable, but the job that they work in is completely unpredictable along with unpredictable criminals. My first week in training a guy almost hit me in the head with an ax, I didn’t shoot him, but I beat the crap out of him. And I don’t feel bad about it. It is a crazy job! I encourage anyone who can, do a ride along with the police. Just try it. It’ll open your eyes to what we do.

[Catfish]

^ Ok I did not see this explanation coming. Thanks for answering.

[mapuc]

A Law technical question about this 25th Amendment.

1. Let say they invoke this Amendment-What happens then ?
(I can imagine many things-But I prefer the real thing)

2. Impeachment-Can a President still be impeached after s/he has left the White House ?
Or will it be an ordinary trial, since he is not longer President ?

Extra.
I know now what the indictment will be against those who have been arrested.

Some of them will be accused for riots and destruction
While some, and this is serious.
Will be accused of terrorism.

Markus

[u crank]

Originally Posted by skidman

The 25th Amendment does not cover reasons or political intentions of the participants involved in the process.

Exactly. It is not for the removal of a President for any reason other than being medically or mentally incapacitated. If Democrats think that Trump actually did something illegal (high crimes and misdemeanors) as per Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution then impeach him. These two processes, 25th Amendment and impeachment are not meant to be interchanged to suit the moment. It has to be clear that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Even if he is incompetent or even reckless it doesn't apply. That's what impeachment is for and even then there has to be a crime committed not just we don't like the guy.

It is just a technical rider on how to proceed if the mentioned constitutional bodies agree on the President's incapacity.

And just what is that incapacity?

[u crank]

Originally Posted by mapuc

Impeachment-Can a President still be impeached after s/he has left the White House ?

Markus

Congress has no power to impeach a private citizen which is what Trump will be on Jan 20, 2021.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by u crank

Congress has no power to impeach a private citizen which is what Trump will be on Jan 20, 2021.

So if the authorities want to charge him-it has to be done in a civilian court.

Additionally

In this weeks magazine on our news channel The world according to Trump and Biden.

They were interviewing some member of the Congress-Who said removing Trump by invoking 25th amendment-would make things even worse.

I had never crossed my mind-situation would get worse if Trump is removed before 20th of Jan -21.

Markus

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by skidman

Why exactly would it be unconstitutional?

You really expect him to run? Really? A man who asks the Good Lord for permission before tying his shoes? A man who could be replaced by a cardboard cutout and nobody would notice?

Vice President Mike Pence could very well become the next POTUS before President elect Biden.

The days are just like sand in the hour glass ...

President Trump isn't stepping down voluntarily that's for sure

I'm worried about Trumps little visit to Alamo, Texas tomorrow with Iran's bounty on his head.

It's not the Alamo in San Antonio it's a little town in South Texas

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/San+...6854!3e0?hl=en

[Bilge_Rat]

Tech Censorship Is the Real Gift to Putin

Authoritarian leaders will use Twitter’s ban on Trump to justify their own deplatforming of political opponents for inciting “terrorism.”

I don’t know which of the two was the actual deciding factor in the tech giants’ Trump crackdown. But look at it from the point of view of someone fighting an authoritarian regime in Russia, Turkey, Belarus or elsewhere. What you’ll see is the U.S. president-elect declaring protesters who broke into a government building “domestic terrorists” — and an immediate response from the tech companies, which fall all over themselves trying to prove they aren’t providing “terrorists” with a platform. Are they suddenly outraged because a Democratic administration, in control of the House and Senate, can quickly regulate them in all kinds of painful ways? Seen from Russia, or Turkey or China, where concerns about politically motivated regulatory moves by single-party governments are top of mind for every business owner, this picture is familiar.

One could argue that even if U.S.-based tech platforms have rushed to align themselves with the political winners in their country to avoid a costly confrontation, they won’t do the same for Russian President Vladimir Putin or his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan. It’s more complicated than that. On paper, authoritarian regimes’ terrorism and insurrection laws are similar to those of the U.S. Now, the regimes have cover to demand from the U.S. networks that they ban Russian, Turkish, Belarussian “domestic terrorists” on the same grounds as the ones used against Trump and Trumpists — inciting aggressive, violent protest. And if the platforms refuse, they will be accused of double standards, declared tools of the U.S. government and themselves harassed and possibly banned. That one-two combination wasn’t possible before, because even authoritarians these days have to pay lip service to freedom of speech; what the platforms have done takes that concern out of the equation. Russian propagandists such as Margarita Simonyan, head of the RT channel, have long waited for such a golden opportunity to agitate for retaliation against U.S. platforms, ever since they started flagging content from Russian government-funded media.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...n?srnd=premium