Impeachment

[Captain X]

Red Flag laws absolutely are a bad idea. They fly completely in the face of due process and have already been abused. I literally do not care if the Republicans are getting in on it with the Democrats or not. All that does is help to illustrate that the GoP is all talk and no walk when it comes to the shit they say they stand for.

 

[Emperor Tippy]

Cruze might try to run again. Not sure if he’d be the follow up people would be looking for, maybe a little to polite to the democratic enemies, but he’s been positioning himself as a Trump loyalist ever since the election ended.

What was unpopular about him? I know he fought with Trump and was hated by Democrat supporters for something related to the fundamentalist block. Also nicknamed the zodiac killer as a joke.

Somewhere he grew a beard, got more popular latching onto Trump and proposed using el Chapo's confiscated money to fund the wall.

Cruz is a snake. As Lindsey Graham joked: "If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.”

The reason that it is funny is that it is about half true. Cruz's best chance was against Trump, but against anyone more "normal" than that he can't win. Seriously, Cruz is one of the most disliked people in DC by those who have to interact with him.

Although credit where it is due, the man is very smart and can be very charming when doing the PR thing.

 

[Cherico]

Cruz is a snake. As Lindsey Graham joked: "If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.”

The reason that it is funny is that it is about half true. Cruz's best chance was against Trump, but against anyone more "normal" than that he can't win. Seriously, Cruz is one of the most disliked people in DC by those who have to interact with him.

Although credit where it is due, the man is very smart and can be very charming when doing the PR thing.

he seemed to be very happy when he interviewed the tech companies for censorship, it was the first time he was ever given the moral highground.

 

[Emperor Tippy]

he seemed to be very happy when he interviewed the tech companies for censorship, it was the first time he was ever given the moral highground.

Ted Cruz was on it, that inherently means that the ground was tainted to the point of corruption. He was just lucky enough that the tech companies were even moral immoral and so by comparison he looked good.

Seriously, the only person (with an at least semi realistic chance of winning the primary) who could have gotten me to seriously consider voting for Hillary Clinton was Ted Cruz.

 

[Arch Dornan]

Cruz is a snake. As Lindsey Graham joked: "If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.”

The reason that it is funny is that it is about half true. Cruz's best chance was against Trump, but against anyone more "normal" than that he can't win. Seriously, Cruz is one of the most disliked people in DC by those who have to interact with him.

Although credit where it is due, the man is very smart and can be very charming when doing the PR thing.

What did he do?

he seemed to be very happy when he interviewed the tech companies for censorship, it was the first time he was ever given the moral highground.

I saw him do a video with Alyssa Milano on guns and what the AR 15 is supposed to be. Internet comments were snarky about her abortion history.

 

[Terthna]

Red Flag laws absolutely are a bad idea. They fly completely in the face of due process and have already been abused. I literally do not care if the Republicans are getting in on it with the Democrats or not. All that does is help to illustrate that the GoP is all talk and no walk when it comes to the shit they say they stand for.

Of course they are; they're all career politicians. The only thing any of them stand for, on either side, is more power and money for themselves and their patrons. I have no doubt that some of them believe otherwise, but the machine they've lashed themselves to will inevitable force them to compromise on their principles, and squeeze every drop of integrity out of them, until nothing is left. Trump was an outsider to all that; that's the major reason he turned out the way he did, for better and/or worse, and if we want someone like him again, they cannot be from the political sphere.

 

[Arch Dornan]

If Trump finishes his presidency in one or two terms, do you expect there will still be attempts to impeach him post presidency including post death just like Ahab?

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

If Trump finishes his presidency in one or two terms, do you expect there will still be attempts to impeach him post presidency including post death just like Ahab?

I'm not sure, it's 50/50. Either they will continue to use him as the Great Satan, or he will become Bush Jr. Mk. 2.

Actually scratch that, it's 80/20. He's upset the status quo, and if we are lucky he has incited at least some of the GOPs to refuse ever making deals with the democrats again. Civility in US american politics is dead and has been dead for a long time. Only when the republicans fire back just as hard as the Demorats attack them, will things get better.

 

[Emperor Tippy]

If Trump finishes his presidency in one or two terms, do you expect there will still be attempts to impeach him post presidency including post death just like Ahab?

No, although someone will probably attempt to charge him with some crime related to his time as President.

The only punishment that a Senate conviction in an Impeachment trial can result in is stripping the impeached individual of their office before their lawful term in said office has been fulfilled.

And charging a former President for alleged crime(s) committed in office is virtually impossible. They have absolute immunity for literally anything that is done even slightly as part of their official duties. It essentially has to be a crime committed purely in their own personal capacity. Attempt it and it will go to the Supreme Court, and they are incredibly likely to say that it is a political question outside the courts competence to judge. The former President will say that they took the action in furtherance of their official duties, and SCOTUS really won't want to put the courts in the position of judging whether or not any given act was actually in furtherance of said duties or not.

Nor is any President liable to go after their predecessor with criminal charges. It's simply a can of worms that none of them want to touch. Honestly, attempting it may well get the current President impeached and removed from office (especially if the House & Senate belong to the opposition party).

 

[Lanmandragon]

The entire point of the Constitution is to both acknowledge humans naturally form heirarchys. Combined with the fact that said heirarchies naturally become corrupt. So the founders wisely made a system that created government yet restrained it. We've spent 242 years slowly eroding that. The cure is to return to the OG idead laud our explicitly in that document and sticking to them. That would allow folks to make thier own way or fail. Folks don't want that though as they fear thier own inadquicies(spelling). So we're stuck dojng patch jobs on a perfectly good system. Because most folks are to weak to actually act in a moral manner.

 

[Arch Dornan]

No, although someone will probably attempt to charge him with some crime related to his time as President.

The only punishment that a Senate conviction in an Impeachment trial can result in is stripping the impeached individual of their office before their lawful term in said office has been fulfilled.

And charging a former President for alleged crime(s) committed in office is virtually impossible. They have absolute immunity for literally anything that is done even slightly as part of their official duties. It essentially has to be a crime committed purely in their own personal capacity. Attempt it and it will go to the Supreme Court, and they are incredibly likely to say that it is a political question outside the courts competence to judge. The former President will say that they took the action in furtherance of their official duties, and SCOTUS really won't want to put the courts in the position of judging whether or not any given act was actually in furtherance of said duties or not.

Nor is any President liable to go after their predecessor with criminal charges. It's simply a can of worms that none of them want to touch. Honestly, attempting it may well get the current President impeached and removed from office (especially if the House & Senate belong to the opposition party).

That's going to be fun to watch. More tax payers money wasted to subpoena Trump's staff for questions on their relation to Trump.

 

[Lightershoulders]

What did he do?

Besides all the bullshit he has done in, including cock blocking his fellow Republicans on bills, he's basically insulted every single one of them in one form or another.

One instance that springs to mind is reading Dr. Seuss during a filibuster.

While there is nothing wrong with Dr. Seuss, literally reading a children's book to them, basically treating them like children, was an insult.

 

[Arch Dornan]

Besides all the bullshit he has done in, including cock blocking his fellow Republicans on bills, he's basically insulted every single one of them in one form or another.

One instance that springs to mind is reading Dr. Seuss during a filibuster.

While there is nothing wrong with Dr. Seuss, literally reading a children's book to them, basically treating them like children, was an insult.

No wonder Trump won against him by being better at insults as one factor. American politics is interesting.

 

[Deleted member]

I am confident that impeachment would be a disaster that would be the best way for Trump to win re-election.

 

[Doomsought]

Well, as long as it is a person who refuses to compromise with, or at least demands loopsided-in-GOP's-favor ones from the democrats, it should work somewhat.

The GOP has been compramising with the Democrats for decades, and the democrats have never compromised back. They have only pushed themselves farther and farther out to the left. The time for the GOP to compromise has ended, indeed we should be even more lopsided by charging some members of the democratic party with treason and hanging them for giving aid and comfort to terrorists and human trafficking operations.

 

[Deleted member]

Red Flag laws absolutely are a bad idea. They fly completely in the face of due process and have already been abused. I literally do not care if the Republicans are getting in on it with the Democrats or not. All that does is help to illustrate that the GoP is all talk and no walk when it comes to the shit they say they stand for.

Why are they any different than mental health commitment which is also a civil proceeding and also takes away the RTKAB?

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

Why are they any different than mental health commitment which is also a civil proceeding and also takes away the RTKAB?

From my perspective, Red Flag laws can be abused as Swatting.

 

[Deleted member]

From my perspective, Red Flag laws can be abused as Swatting.

Yes, but vindictive relatives can use the lower standards of evidence in a civil commitment hearing to take away the RTKAB as well on specious grounds. And Red Flag laws aren’t lifetime like that.

 

[Captain X]

But they are still massive civil rights violations, and people have already died as a result of it. Due process means something, and I cannot believe that I have to explain this to you or anyone else who isn't just a wannabe authoritarian.

 

[Doomsought]

But they are still massive civil rights violations, and people have already died as a result of it. Due process means something, and I cannot believe that I have to explain this to you or anyone else who isn't just a wannabe authoritarian.

The letter of the constitutional law is that I should be able to buy a fully armed Abrams main battle tank. if a president wanted to stick it to the anti-gun crowd, he could just order and authorize the militia to buy military equipment if able, citing Article 2 section 1, and enforcing unlawful gun laws becomes insurrection.