• 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.

Cont: The Trump Presidency IX: Nein, Nein!

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobTheCoward said:
They can make anything up they wish. We are trying to decide what it is appropriate for them to use.
Click to expand...

That is for them to decide. Dereliction of Duty by the CIC is therefore, as I or even possibly they see it, perfectly cromulent. When you get to be VP, your perogative will matter.

With that, I leave you to your Empire of Bob.
 
LSSBB said:
That is for them to decide. Dereliction of Duty by the CIC is therefore, as I or even possibly they see it, perfectly cromulent. When you get to be VP, your perogative will matter.

With that, I leave you to your Empire of Bob.
Click to expand...

You are undermining your own position by arguing that there are reasons to consider CIC duties. Since your position. Is they get to decide simply by their position, they could declare him unable because he signed a law they didn't like.
 
Babbylonian said:
A lawyer can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the standard is that to commit libel requires intent, e.g., knowledge that the statements in question are lies. Given the huge number of subjects on which Trump is ignorant, proving that he has any knowledge would be incredibly difficult.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. There are different standards depending on the nature of the individual and how public they are. It can be enough to have reckless disregard to the truth and so on. You do not have to know it is untrue for it to be libelous.

So depending on the nature of the individuals it gets complex.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/libel
 
The Big Dog said:
so, no?

Say, y'all think it might be a disingenuous to refuse to give a straight answer to a simple question?

YES___
NO___
Click to expand...

Too quick on the draw, partner. See my edit. I recently answered another question of this nature, didnt I.


ETA: At what point do you begin to admit Trump’s glaring flaws?
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
So, yes it is disingenuous.

Cool beans.
Click to expand...

I did give a straight answer. I did denounce the violence.

These kind of silly point-scoring games are no substitute for real political discussion. Though I see how honest and open discussion would be difficult in defending this president. Snipe away.
 
Last edited:
LSSBB said:
That is for them to decide. Dereliction of Duty by the CIC is therefore, as I or even possibly they see it, perfectly cromulent. When you get to be VP, your perogative will matter.

With that, I leave you to your Empire of Bob.
Click to expand...

The term "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" is pretty broad;as one constitutional law scholar said, that a Congress could probably impeach a President it really did not like for eating a Cheese Sandwich.
 
jimbob said:
True - but dudalb is pointing out that *if* the First Amendment is curtailed, then the main defence against tyranny is lost.

It's no coincidence that the archetypal coup involves seizing "the TV station" as one of the first objectives.

As an outsider - I don't think that the Second Amendment is that useful in modern situations, but the first is vital.
Click to expand...

To clarify, if a Presidenn manages to basically gut the bill of rights,and the congress and Superme court is unwilling to stop him, then, yes, I think he must be opposed by any means necessary.
 
Sideroxylon said:
I did give a straight answer. I did denounce the violence.

These kind of silly point scoring-games are no substitute for real political discussion. Though I see how honest and open discussion would be difficult in defending this president. Snipe away.
Click to expand...

Say! An open and honest discussion would start without baseless accusations that one is being "disengenuous," that one would not poison the well with loaded questions/statements in every post.

"I think that pointing at extreme reactions to this disastrous presidency while ignoring that is disingenuous."
"I have faith in your democratic system to solve the Trump problem. Violence is just a dumb reaction to a problem of stupidity."
"ETA: At what point do you begin to admit Trump’s glaring flaws?"
"Though I see how honest and open discussion would be difficult in defending this president. Snipe away."

And then to claim that one is interested in an open and honest discussion, that is absolutely marvelous! I am shocked the keyboard did burst into flames.

"Hey how can't we have a super honest and open conversation about how much he totally sucks? All I am looking for is an adult conversation about Trump and why he sucks and why you won't admit it"

That is totes open and honest!

Fantastic.
 
The Big Dog said:
No.
Click to expand...

Color me shocked, but happily so.

Do you think that calling for armed resistance is a reasonable reply to that tweet?
Click to expand...

I thought the call to armed resistance was conditional on Trump actually doing something to change the laws, not in response to his official tweet calling for a change to the laws. Maybe I misread it. eta: Nope, I didn't.
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
Say! An open and honest discussion would start without baseless accusations that one is being "disengenuous," that one would not poison the well with loaded questions/statements in every post.

"I think that pointing at extreme reactions to this disastrous presidency while ignoring that is disingenuous."
"I have faith in your democratic system to solve the Trump problem. Violence is just a dumb reaction to a problem of stupidity."
"ETA: At what point do you begin to admit Trump’s glaring flaws?"
"Though I see how honest and open discussion would be difficult in defending this president. Snipe away."

And then to claim that one is interested in an open and honest discussion, that is absolutely marvelous! I am shocked the keyboard did burst into flames.

"Hey how can't we have a super honest and open conversation about how much he totally sucks? All I am looking for is an adult conversation about Trump and why he sucks and why you won't admit it"

That is totes open and honest!

Fantastic.
Click to expand...

Lets talk about how purple the White House is. Or closer, how white it isn’t.

That Trump has major misalignments with Republican and American values is a statment of fact. His ignorance and eratic behaviour is on display and observations of this by people inside the administration are coming to light. This is a disaterous presidency.
 
Last edited:
Sideroxylon said:
Lets talk about how purple the Whitehouse is.
Click to expand...

That puts the OPEN right where I expected it!

One is always interested in a fantastically open discussion where we start with your position, and y'all are expected to agree with it.

Such open, much honest.

Sensational.
 
Dr. Keith said:
I thought the call to armed resistance was conditional on Trump actually doing something to change the laws, not in response to his official tweet calling for a change to the laws. Maybe I misread it. eta: Nope, I didn't.
Click to expand...

Lets just say that you would have to take into account "body of work."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom