• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump - One Term or Two

Jrrarglblarg said:
Can a president be impeached for pre-presidential infractions? That could get ugly.
Click to expand...

THis might be interesting:

2. Through the 25th Amendment: A section of this Amendment empowers the President's Cabinet by majority vote to transfer the powers of the President to the Vice President or absent a Vice President, to the person next in line. If the President challenges this decision, it falls to Congress to decide whether to restore the President to power; in the absence of a two-thirds negative vote in both house, the President is back in power. This has never happened.

There were several reasons this Amendment was drafted: first, as a contingency should the President be incapacitated (thus unable to resign); second, if the President were to be captured or kidnapped and unable to act (which could have happened to James Madison when the British captured Washington, DC) or, third, in the Night at Camp David scenario (the name of a best-selling novel) where there is a concern that the President may not be mentally capable of fulfilling his duties. Another provision of the 25th Amendment allows the President to voluntarily step aside (for example, if he or she were to undergo surgery). In the television series West Wing, the President invoked the 25th Amendment when his daughter was kidnaped to insure that someone not emotionally compromised would be making the necessary decisions
Click to expand...

In other words,Trump would still be President on paper but have no power.

Also, the things a President can be impeached for are vague,the only description is "High Crimes And Misdemeanors" and that could cover just about any misstep a President could make in office. They could find some dinky questionable thing or some obscure Regulation the Pres violated
and, look, you have an impeachable charge.
Though, if the President was convicted of a serious felony,I am betting they will go the "incapable of executing the office" routine and transfer the power ot the Veep.
 
Border Reiver said:
His recent nomination for the Supreme Court even considered by the Senate.
Click to expand...

Uh no, that's too thin, considering the "Biden rule" , an outgoing President should not appoint a Justice to the Supreme Court. For some reason Liberals seem to forget "their own" rules when the situation is reversed. Fair is fair however.
Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Uh no, that's too thin, considering the "Biden rule" , an outgoing President should not appoint a Justice to the Supreme Court. For some reason Liberals seem to forget "their own" rules when the situation is reversed. Fair is fair however.
Chris B.
Click to expand...
First of all, that was never a "rule". There was a statement from Biden, but it was never codified into any sort of law or procedure of the House. Nor is there any tradition.

Secondly, when Biden made the statement it was much later in the election cycle. (Scalia died in February. The "Biden rule", if it even existed, was in June.) His argument was not to stop all appointments but to avoid conflicts with the election itself, something that wouldn't have been an issue had the nomination process been held shortly after Scalia's death.

Lastly, Biden never said that court appointments shouldn't wait until the change in president. He said they should wait until the election is over. It would not stop the nomination from happening after the election but before the nomination (as Obama is being prevented from doing.)

So yes, Obama was obstructed from appointing a supreme court justice. You loose.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...context-biden-rule-supreme-court-nominations/

Here are a few other examples:

From:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ba9022-e723-11e5-b0fd-073d5930a7b7_story.html
http://www.salon.com/2016/09/08/the...n-and-anti-planned-parenthood-crusade-a-pass/
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/opinion/fl-dwscol-zika-20160917-story.html
- 14 month delay in handling Banking committee nominations
- The Republican-controlled house has passed 1/3rd fewer bills than when the Democrats had the senate
- Use of a "poison pill" to stop funding to handle the Zika virus
 
Last edited:
Border Reiver said:
As an outsider looking in, I must say that your reaction to what was being proposed seems remarkably hypocritical given the way the Republicans set out to stall, delay or just plain refuse to work with President Obama. Odd that.
Click to expand...
It was worse than that. The shutdown was causing serious self harm to America.
 
Craig4 said:
One or less. The only true patriotism now is to actively seek to undermine Trump. What damages him is medicinal to the nation.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the tea party perspective of the Obama administration.
 
lionking said:
Yes. Your president represents and reflects your country, whether you like it or not. The US is now, officially, a sexist, racist supporter of elites and enemy of the poor.

Congratulations US electorate. **** you Trump voters.

Ironically I visited Pearl Harbour today and was moved by the resolve and determination after the attack. The US response led to it becoming the most powerful and just country in the world. Trump inheriting this legacy? What a pathetic joke.
Click to expand...



Watching you implode, was completely worth a Trump victory for me.
 
McHrozni said:
Look at what he said when the results were clear.

"For those that have chosen not to support me in the past, of which there were a few people, I'm reaching out to you for your guidance and you help so we can work together and unify our great country."

And this:

"Hillary has worked very hard and very hard over a very long period of time and we owe her a major debt of gratitude for her service to this country," Mr Trump says. "Now it is time for America to bind the wounds of division."

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/election-us-2016-37899679

These are indeed things America needs. I sincerely doubt Donald Trump is the person to provide them, but he is saying precisely the right thing now - and only now. He could afford to gloat if he wanted to, we expected him to, his voting base expected him too, but he didn't, he said the right thing. It's a positive development, and improves on my hope somewhat.

McHrozni
Click to expand...

**** that. He needs to be handed harsh defeats, and humiliated at home and abroad. I'm not getting behind that filth.
 
Trakar said:
Sounds like the tea party perspective of the Obama administration.
Click to expand...


From the outside looking in, the 'right'* in the US has done everything it possibly can to prevent a president with left* leaning views from getting anything done - to the point of voting against their own proposal for healthcare reform.

Why would the left* not retaliate in kind? (although they may be less able to). If one side is reasonable and compromises, and the other side isn't and doesn't, the ratchet is only ever going to turn one way.






(*Defining complex sociopolitical beliefs in terms of a point on a line is *********** stupid, divisive and not at any point helpful to the political discussion, I am reluctantly using the accepted shorthand here)
 
Trakar said:
One or less. The only true patriotism now is to actively seek to undermine Trump. What damages him is medicinal to the nation.
Click to expand...
Sounds like the tea party perspective of the Obama administration.
Click to expand...
On the surface yes, it does sound like there are some similarities between the Anti-Obama and Anti-trump protests.

I think the key difference is that many of the complaints against Obama were fabrications (Not born in America! He's going to take our guns!) On the other hand, the protests against Trump are largely based on things that he has actually said and done (Stop Abortion! Build a wall! Mexicans are Rapists!)
 
Craig4 said:
**** that. He needs to be handed harsh defeats, and humiliated at home and abroad. I'm not getting behind that filth.
Click to expand...

Congratulations, you now feel the same way that some of the Republicans did when Obama won his 2008 election. You also now know the feelings of those whom were called the party of "no" when they felt they could not follow Obama. No complaints when the criticisms are turned upon those who think this way now.

I'll repeat what I've said before, since Sanders ironically expressed it best. To the extent that his policies help the country he should be supported. On that token, to the extent that his policies and views hurt the country he should be stopped. But blindly behaving like the ones you criticized previously opens yourself to hypocrisy and for that I have no sympathy, but I do have empathy.

And for that matter, blindly hoping Trump fails is like hoping that the plane we're all passengers of crashes into the ocean. So... I'm rather hoping he actually does some good in contrary to what people have seen of his. At least that way we don't devolve into a country of absolute neanderthals
 
Last edited:
McHrozni said:
I'm holding on hope that most of his campaign was bluster and he will enter the presidency a changed man and be a great president.

I'm an optimist to a fault, but what can you do in a situation like this anyway?

McHrozni
Click to expand...
One of the most egotistical, narcissistic, unmannered, ignorant, selfish people in recorded history, who just defied odds while running a third-rate campaign and therefore is likely even more convinced of his genius, all while now being cowtowed to in a manner befitting his sense of entitlement and grandeur, is going to change? After 70 years of self indulgence? No.

Trump was Trump will be Trump.
 
McHrozni said:
I'm actually serious, but it's a real long shot. He doesn't come off as a particularly stupid person, he's obnoxious and outrageous and many other things, but he is not stupid. He knows what to say and to whom to get what he wants. He knows how to manipulate, there was too much of that in his speeches to all be coached. He also knows how to talk, which is a useful skill not everyone possesses.

This unpalatable but not stupid person just won the elections. What are the chances he figured out the way to win the election was to act the way he did, but his policies will not match the persona? I agree they aren't very good, but they aren't zero either.

He would never be my choice, but now that the choice has been made we might as well hope for the best. It's not like we can change the situation we're now in, and simply wailing in despair won't help anyone.

McHrozni
Click to expand...
What?!?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom