ImageImageImage

OT - Current Affairs/Events

Moderators: bwgood77, Qwigglez, lilfishi22, Kerrsed

User avatar
Dr Manute
Senior
Posts: 740
And1: 666
Joined: Jun 23, 2009
Location: Phoenix
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#201 » by Dr Manute » Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:58 pm

RunDogGun wrote:
Dr Manute wrote:
grumpysaddle wrote:Trump supporters just aren't worth the time spent in arguing. They're a lost cause.


I was going to respond to some more of the posts above, but I think you are right we are all too stuck in our beliefs - it would be a waste of time to argue. I heard from someone once that it is easier to persuade someone to change their religion then it is to change their political ideology.

We will see what happens during the impeachment trial. If Trump is found guilty of any high crimes and misdemeanors then I would want him to be removed. Know that I care about this country and I only want the best for our future. Peace be to you all. :nod: :usa:

Oddly, this doesn't have to do with beliefs really. This comes down to facts. trump has committed crimes, this is according to his own mouth, sworn testimony from his own people, and court documents. He literally just admitted to obstruction of justice yesterday. The problem is many Americans either don't care, or are just uniformed of the known facts.

He won't be found guilty, because the republicans in the senate are in lock step with the president. They don't seem to care that trump has blocked all evidence and witnesses from telling the American public the truth. One's political party shouldn't matter when it comes to the truth. You either see it, refuse to see it, or just completely blind to it. The good news is that these are all things you can look up for yourself. Start with reading the Mueller report. Right there will give you at least 10 counts of obstruction of justice.


https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/19/nolte-15-ways-the-mueller-report-proves-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice/
User avatar
Dr Manute
Senior
Posts: 740
And1: 666
Joined: Jun 23, 2009
Location: Phoenix
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#202 » by Dr Manute » Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:09 pm

RunDogGun wrote:
Dr Manute wrote:
grumpysaddle wrote:Trump supporters just aren't worth the time spent in arguing. They're a lost cause.


I was going to respond to some more of the posts above, but I think you are right we are all too stuck in our beliefs - it would be a waste of time to argue. I heard from someone once that it is easier to persuade someone to change their religion then it is to change their political ideology.

We will see what happens during the impeachment trial. If Trump is found guilty of any high crimes and misdemeanors then I would want him to be removed. Know that I care about this country and I only want the best for our future. Peace be to you all. :nod: :usa:

Oddly, this doesn't have to do with beliefs really. This comes down to facts. trump has committed crimes, this is according to his own mouth, sworn testimony from his own people, and court documents. He literally just admitted to obstruction of justice yesterday. The problem is many Americans either don't care, or are just uniformed of the known facts.

He won't be found guilty, because the republicans in the senate are in lock step with the president. They don't seem to care that trump has blocked all evidence and witnesses from telling the American public the truth. One's political party shouldn't matter when it comes to the truth. You either see it, refuse to see it, or just completely blind to it. The good news is that these are all things you can look up for yourself. Start with reading the Mueller report. Right there will give you at least 10 counts of obstruction of justice.



Didn't Democrat Congress say they have “Overwhelming And Uncontested” evidence for impeachment? - why do they even need more witnesses?

Were Republicans, the President allowed to call ANY witnesses in his defense in the House? Why didn't the Democrats call all the witnesses they wanted (not really witnesses - No Evidence Against Trump, Just Opinions) in the Congress - then bring all evidence to Senate (acting as Jury) for a verdict.

Was the procedure in the House unprecedented? No due process for accused, witness originally interviewed behind closed doors and not all transcripts released - only some witnesses allowed to be publicly interviewed, trying to hide/protect - Eric Charamela and the real Quid Pro Quo Joe, starting impeachment without full house vote.

What about how the Senate is conducting things - Is the process the same as the Clinton Impeachment?

RunDogGun wrote:One's political party shouldn't matter when it comes to the truth. You either see it, refuse to see it, or just completely blind to it.


"impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.” - Pelosi

Impeachment Vote = 0 Republicans

Actual bipartisan support was against impeachment

This is all a show - A Political partisan attempt to alter the 2020 election with the help of their biased media assets to sway the sheep and hide the true crimes that they are guilty of.

An outsider got in - The establishment politicians will do whatever they can to hide what is going to be exposed. Let's watch and see - should be more exciting than the way the Suns are playing. :D
User avatar
bigfoot
Suns Forum Anti-Tank Commander
Posts: 7,460
And1: 3,975
Joined: Sep 16, 2010
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#203 » by bigfoot » Fri Jan 24, 2020 3:03 am

Dr Manute wrote:
RunDogGun wrote:
Dr Manute wrote:
I was going to respond to some more of the posts above, but I think you are right we are all too stuck in our beliefs - it would be a waste of time to argue. I heard from someone once that it is easier to persuade someone to change their religion then it is to change their political ideology.

We will see what happens during the impeachment trial. If Trump is found guilty of any high crimes and misdemeanors then I would want him to be removed. Know that I care about this country and I only want the best for our future. Peace be to you all. :nod: :usa:

Oddly, this doesn't have to do with beliefs really. This comes down to facts. trump has committed crimes, this is according to his own mouth, sworn testimony from his own people, and court documents. He literally just admitted to obstruction of justice yesterday. The problem is many Americans either don't care, or are just uniformed of the known facts.

He won't be found guilty, because the republicans in the senate are in lock step with the president. They don't seem to care that trump has blocked all evidence and witnesses from telling the American public the truth. One's political party shouldn't matter when it comes to the truth. You either see it, refuse to see it, or just completely blind to it. The good news is that these are all things you can look up for yourself. Start with reading the Mueller report. Right there will give you at least 10 counts of obstruction of justice.


https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/19/nolte-15-ways-the-mueller-report-proves-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice/


Citing breitbart isn't really a good idea. It would be like citing CNN or some other left leaning media group. Herein lies one of the big problems. People only find sources, usually opinions, that are inline with their political beliefs. I believe Donald Trump has done a bang-up job of trying to trample the U.S Constitution. Now I'll give an example. He has gone after the media from his bully pulpit whenever they publish material he doesn't like. This you can not deny. Obviously he has hit CNN and left leaning groups but has even gone after Fox News. There is plenty of footage with him saying as much. Now take a bit to read this article from the American Bar Association ... https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/the-ongoing-challenge-to-define-free-speech/getting-to-the-truth/

It's a fairly balanced article citing plenty of case law. Now take a minute to read this article from the Wall Street Journal, which might be considered a more conservative newspaper ... https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-allies-explore-buyout-of-conservative-news-channel-one-america-news-network-11578696767

So what I hear Trump saying after reading these articles, his twitter feed, and watching his speeches is the media is corrupt, especially if it says anything negative about him. Even more scary, he wants a form of media that only pats him on the back and says good things about him. The most frightening, he wants to expand libel laws so he can sue the pants off of any media outlet that publishes information he doesn't like. Now he swore to protect the U.S. Constitution when he took the oath of office. It's pretty apparent he doesn't care about or understand the first amendment. There are other examples too in regards the 22nd amendment.

So how does this matter to impeachment. It tells me that Trump is playing the dictator-for-life role just fine. If he is willing to saying crazy stuff in public, why wouldn't he do even crazier things behind closed doors. Yeah to me the old saying "where there is smoke, there is fire" holds true. Add in the fact he has done everything possible to keep people from testifying and suppressing documentation in this trial and what does that say? The dude is guilty. Certainly of obstruction and because it's "always all about helping himself" very likely he was trying to get dirt on Biden from Ukraine.

He's a sad excuse for a human and is the ultimate definition of corrupt. He boasted about draining the swamp ... the guy is the worst form of pond scum around. I really wish there where term limits on congress. It would do two things ... 1) drain the swamp and 2) I guarantee Trump would be removed from office as more Republican congress persons wouldn't be worried about re-election.
RunDogGun
RealGM
Posts: 13,044
And1: 2,315
Joined: Jun 27, 2009
Location: Beyond the Sun
       

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#204 » by RunDogGun » Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:40 pm

Dr Manute wrote:
RunDogGun wrote:
Dr Manute wrote:
I was going to respond to some more of the posts above, but I think you are right we are all too stuck in our beliefs - it would be a waste of time to argue. I heard from someone once that it is easier to persuade someone to change their religion then it is to change their political ideology.

We will see what happens during the impeachment trial. If Trump is found guilty of any high crimes and misdemeanors then I would want him to be removed. Know that I care about this country and I only want the best for our future. Peace be to you all. :nod: :usa:

Oddly, this doesn't have to do with beliefs really. This comes down to facts. trump has committed crimes, this is according to his own mouth, sworn testimony from his own people, and court documents. He literally just admitted to obstruction of justice yesterday. The problem is many Americans either don't care, or are just uniformed of the known facts.

He won't be found guilty, because the republicans in the senate are in lock step with the president. They don't seem to care that trump has blocked all evidence and witnesses from telling the American public the truth. One's political party shouldn't matter when it comes to the truth. You either see it, refuse to see it, or just completely blind to it. The good news is that these are all things you can look up for yourself. Start with reading the Mueller report. Right there will give you at least 10 counts of obstruction of justice.



Didn't Democrat Congress say they have “Overwhelming And Uncontested” evidence for impeachment? - why do they even need more witnesses?

Were Republicans, the President allowed to call ANY witnesses in his defense in the House? Why didn't the Democrats call all the witnesses they wanted (not really witnesses - No Evidence Against Trump, Just Opinions) in the Congress - then bring all evidence to Senate (acting as Jury) for a verdict.

Was the procedure in the House unprecedented? No due process for accused, witness originally interviewed behind closed doors and not all transcripts released - only some witnesses allowed to be publicly interviewed, trying to hide/protect - Eric Charamela and the real Quid Pro Quo Joe, starting impeachment without full house vote.

What about how the Senate is conducting things - Is the process the same as the Clinton Impeachment?

RunDogGun wrote:One's political party shouldn't matter when it comes to the truth. You either see it, refuse to see it, or just completely blind to it.


"impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.” - Pelosi

Impeachment Vote = 0 Republicans

Actual bipartisan support was against impeachment

This is all a show - A Political partisan attempt to alter the 2020 election with the help of their biased media assets to sway the sheep and hide the true crimes that they are guilty of.

An outsider got in - The establishment politicians will do whatever they can to hide what is going to be exposed. Let's watch and see - should be more exciting than the way the Suns are playing. :D

The House had overwhelming evidence to charge the president, which they do. You do understand that an impeachment merely means a charge. The senate then has a trial. The trial in any court in the US and in many other places is when witnesses and evidence is shown so both sides can argue their case for or against. Every impeachment trial in the US have had witnesses and documents. What is new, is a complete blockade of witnesses and documents by the person who is on trial.

The due process comes in the trial portion, and has been there throughout the impeachment hearings. I don't know where you are getting your information from, but it is lacking greatly. The House did call witnesses, even subpoenas sent out. The president said publicly that they were not going to honor any subpoenas and refused to turn over any documents. That is obstruction of Congress. The information we have received has been through other court cases, trump's mouth, the brave civil servants who came forward, and many of trump's people on tv. We know what happened. The president just bragged about withholding evidence, by saying, "we have all the material".

Here is why it matters to every American: the president works for We The People, as well as our representatives in Congress. From the known evidence and sworn testimony, we know the president extorted UKraine to get announced investigations into his political rivals. The GAO has said that withholding the congressionally approved aid was illegal. So besides the massive amount of obstruction of both Congress and justice, this act was against the law. Withholding the truth from Americans is unacceptable. We shouldn't have to sue the president to get him to release public information. Congress should not be in league with the president to cover up crimes, and aid him in withholding the truth. Congress is supposed to be a check on the executive branch. By denying the Congress all these witnesses and documents, the president has effectively taken that check away. Without these checks, we lose the main cog our founders created to have a strong working government, where one branch doesn't have ultimate power.

As for quoting Pelosi, she had been against impeachment until she was forced to do it. Honestly, the House had enough evidence to charge the president with a crime from the Mueller report. But since the AG refused to indict a sitting president, and misrepresented the findings from that report, public awareness of the crimes committed wasn't as high as the concern for the country as a whole. But with this current crime (according to the law cited in the GAO report), the president was attempting to influence the upcoming election. This goes completely against our Constitution and what the founders wanted. They were against foreign influence in our elections, and never wanted a president beholden to foreign powers. It was bad enough there was such an attack on our election by the Russians in 2016, there is no way We The People should accept another meddling.

Do you think any of the evidence we know now would be public knowledge if the House was still under republican leadership? Clinton was rightfully impeached for lying under oath. Granted it was over a personal affair with a women, not a crime which was designed to affect his reelection. But witnesses were deposed, testimony was taken, even the president testified, there was a full investigation, where documents were provided. We The People are being denied that testimony, the president has refused to testify in person, documents have been hidden from us, and there has been no attempt to keep Russia from doing what they did in 2016.

So here are a few questions I have for you:
Why did the trump campaign lie about all their meetings and dealings with Russia? We know now that trump was aware of the Russian campaign and effort to help be elected. trump continued to lie to us about it while campaigning and while president, despite being shown all the intel. His ask to Russia to help, and the same day they followed through, seems like there was a clear understanding, just because it was done in plain sight doesn't make it less obvious.
Why did trump use Guiliani to carry out this plan? he holds no state position.
Why hide the call on a top secret server if it was a perfect call?
if trump did nothing wrong, all of the witnesses would easily testify this? All the documents would show this.
Why was trump pushing this "Crowdstrike" conspiracy theory, when only people like Putin was pushing it? There is no evidence supporting it. His own appointed people told him there is no merit to the theory.
Is it ok to ask a foreign power to meddle in our elections?

I think a healthy debate over this is good. Lets try not to bring political talking points into this if we can. Sticking to the known facts and arguing their merits is the best route.
User avatar
Dr Manute
Senior
Posts: 740
And1: 666
Joined: Jun 23, 2009
Location: Phoenix
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#205 » by Dr Manute » Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:35 pm

RunDogGun wrote:The House had overwhelming evidence to charge the president, which they do. You do understand that an impeachment merely means a charge. The senate then has a trial. The trial in any court in the US and in many other places is when witnesses and evidence is shown so both sides can argue their case for or against. Every impeachment trial in the US have had witnesses and documents. What is new, is a complete blockade of witnesses and documents by the person who is on trial.

The due process comes in the trial portion, and has been there throughout the impeachment hearings. I don't know where you are getting your information from, but it is lacking greatly. The House did call witnesses, even subpoenas sent out. The president said publicly that they were not going to honor any subpoenas and refused to turn over any documents. That is obstruction of Congress. The information we have received has been through other court cases, trump's mouth, the brave civil servants who came forward, and many of trump's people on tv. We know what happened. The president just bragged about withholding evidence, by saying, "we have all the material".

Here is why it matters to every American: the president works for We The People, as well as our representatives in Congress. From the known evidence and sworn testimony, we know the president extorted UKraine to get announced investigations into his political rivals. The GAO has said that withholding the congressionally approved aid was illegal. So besides the massive amount of obstruction of both Congress and justice, this act was against the law. Withholding the truth from Americans is unacceptable. We shouldn't have to sue the president to get him to release public information. Congress should not be in league with the president to cover up crimes, and aid him in withholding the truth. Congress is supposed to be a check on the executive branch. By denying the Congress all these witnesses and documents, the president has effectively taken that check away. Without these checks, we lose the main cog our founders created to have a strong working government, where one branch doesn't have ultimate power.

As for quoting Pelosi, she had been against impeachment until she was forced to do it. Honestly, the House had enough evidence to charge the president with a crime from the Mueller report. But since the AG refused to indict a sitting president, and misrepresented the findings from that report, public awareness of the crimes committed wasn't as high as the concern for the country as a whole. But with this current crime (according to the law cited in the GAO report), the president was attempting to influence the upcoming election. This goes completely against our Constitution and what the founders wanted. They were against foreign influence in our elections, and never wanted a president beholden to foreign powers. It was bad enough there was such an attack on our election by the Russians in 2016, there is no way We The People should accept another meddling.

Do you think any of the evidence we know now would be public knowledge if the House was still under republican leadership? Clinton was rightfully impeached for lying under oath. Granted it was over a personal affair with a women, not a crime which was designed to affect his reelection. But witnesses were deposed, testimony was taken, even the president testified, there was a full investigation, where documents were provided. We The People are being denied that testimony, the president has refused to testify in person, documents have been hidden from us, and there has been no attempt to keep Russia from doing what they did in 2016.

So here are a few questions I have for you:
Why did the trump campaign lie about all their meetings and dealings with Russia? We know now that trump was aware of the Russian campaign and effort to help be elected. trump continued to lie to us about it while campaigning and while president, despite being shown all the intel. His ask to Russia to help, and the same day they followed through, seems like there was a clear understanding, just because it was done in plain sight doesn't make it less obvious.
Why did trump use Guiliani to carry out this plan? he holds no state position.
Why hide the call on a top secret server if it was a perfect call?
if trump did nothing wrong, all of the witnesses would easily testify this? All the documents would show this.
Why was trump pushing this "Crowdstrike" conspiracy theory, when only people like Putin was pushing it? There is no evidence supporting it. His own appointed people told him there is no merit to the theory.
Is it ok to ask a foreign power to meddle in our elections?

I think a healthy debate over this is good. Lets try not to bring political talking points into this if we can. Sticking to the known facts and arguing their merits is the best route.


Thank you guys for your civility during this debate. I want to respond to the first part of your post, but I think answering your questions from the second part will be a better use of my time. Most of the items I would comment on from the first part will hopefully be addressed by the Republicans during the trial in the next few days:

Why did the trump campaign lie about all their meetings and dealings with Russia? - Are you refering to General Flynn. I believe General Flynn was set-up - We should learn more about this because he is currently fighting this in court - and I expect he will be vindicated.

His ask to Russia to help, and the same day they followed through, seems like there was a clear understanding, just because it was done in plain sight doesn't make it less obvious. - Not aware of this - What are you referring to? I find this hard to beleive, maybe his words are taken out of context - what was the help Russia gave?

Why did trump use Guiliani to carry out this plan? he holds no state position. Giuliani is Trump's personal lawyer and friend - someone Trump could trust. Giuliani has experience taking down the Mob in New York - Trump is surrounded by organized crooks - The swamp. They basically have the power and money to do almost anything they want - and no morals. Why would you not want to use Giuliani to help expose the corruption of these people. Is this unusual - Did Obama have unelected aids to assist him?

Why hide the call on a top secret server if it was a perfect call? - TRUMP RELEASED THE TRANSCRIPT! READ IT! THERE IS NOTHING THERE! It is the President's prerogative to put any call he wishes on the server - Was this the only call he put on a secure server - did other Presidents (Obama) put calls on a secure server?

if trump did nothing wrong, all of the witnesses would easily testify this? All the documents would show this - I agree - the witnesses would not be able to show any wrong doings of Trump - Just like all the other so-called witnesses that were armed with only hearsay and opinions. What law was broken by Trump - what is the crime? ABUSE OF POWER - OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS - no laws broken. This is just a waste of time - a show - Presidential Harassment! If Trump doesn't have to help them - then I wouldn't - can you blame him.

Why was trump pushing this "Crowdstrike" conspiracy theory, when only people like Putin was pushing it? There is no evidence supporting it. His own appointed people told him there is no merit to the theory. Crowdstrike was paid by the DNC to say Russia hacked the server - but it could not have been hacked by Russia - data speeds could only have been extracted locally, by a Thumb drive - Jullian Assange even said his source was not Russia - Soon we will learn the truth. Seth Rich rest in peace.

Is it ok to ask a foreign power to meddle in our elections? - No asking a foreign power to meddle in our elections is not "ok"...But what about asking an allie to help fight corruption in his country? What if you had a mutual obligation to assist them in fighting corruption signed in 1999? https://www.congress.gov/106/cdoc/tdoc16/CDOC-106tdoc16.pdf
If a criminal decides to run for president does that mean he can not be investigated for his crimes?




I wish I had more time to defend my points, but doing it at work is hard, and even harder with kids to do it at home. I may have to tap-out. You are all very articulate and knowledge on the issues - But your view points very different then mine. I don't watch cable news - I don't trust them. So, getting information is not as easy and time consuming. Luckily the Suns stink and I haven't needed to invest more time in them. :D
User avatar
Dr Manute
Senior
Posts: 740
And1: 666
Joined: Jun 23, 2009
Location: Phoenix
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#206 » by Dr Manute » Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:38 pm

bigfoot wrote:
Dr Manute wrote:
RunDogGun wrote:Oddly, this doesn't have to do with beliefs really. This comes down to facts. trump has committed crimes, this is according to his own mouth, sworn testimony from his own people, and court documents. He literally just admitted to obstruction of justice yesterday. The problem is many Americans either don't care, or are just uniformed of the known facts.

He won't be found guilty, because the republicans in the senate are in lock step with the president. They don't seem to care that trump has blocked all evidence and witnesses from telling the American public the truth. One's political party shouldn't matter when it comes to the truth. You either see it, refuse to see it, or just completely blind to it. The good news is that these are all things you can look up for yourself. Start with reading the Mueller report. Right there will give you at least 10 counts of obstruction of justice.


https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/19/nolte-15-ways-the-mueller-report-proves-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice/


Citing breitbart isn't really a good idea. It would be like citing CNN or some other left leaning media group. Herein lies one of the big problems. People only find sources, usually opinions, that are inline with their political beliefs. I believe Donald Trump has done a bang-up job of trying to trample the U.S Constitution. Now I'll give an example. He has gone after the media from his bully pulpit whenever they publish material he doesn't like. This you can not deny. Obviously he has hit CNN and left leaning groups but has even gone after Fox News. There is plenty of footage with him saying as much. Now take a bit to read this article from the American Bar Association ... https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/the-ongoing-challenge-to-define-free-speech/getting-to-the-truth/

It's a fairly balanced article citing plenty of case law. Now take a minute to read this article from the Wall Street Journal, which might be considered a more conservative newspaper ... https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-allies-explore-buyout-of-conservative-news-channel-one-america-news-network-11578696767

So what I hear Trump saying after reading these articles, his twitter feed, and watching his speeches is the media is corrupt, especially if it says anything negative about him. Even more scary, he wants a form of media that only pats him on the back and says good things about him. The most frightening, he wants to expand libel laws so he can sue the pants off of any media outlet that publishes information he doesn't like. Now he swore to protect the U.S. Constitution when he took the oath of office. It's pretty apparent he doesn't care about or understand the first amendment. There are other examples too in regards the 22nd amendment.

So how does this matter to impeachment. It tells me that Trump is playing the dictator-for-life role just fine. If he is willing to saying crazy stuff in public, why wouldn't he do even crazier things behind closed doors. Yeah to me the old saying "where there is smoke, there is fire" holds true. Add in the fact he has done everything possible to keep people from testifying and suppressing documentation in this trial and what does that say? The dude is guilty. Certainly of obstruction and because it's "always all about helping himself" very likely he was trying to get dirt on Biden from Ukraine.

He's a sad excuse for a human and is the ultimate definition of corrupt. He boasted about draining the swamp ... the guy is the worst form of pond scum around. I really wish there where term limits on congress. It would do two things ... 1) drain the swamp and 2) I guarantee Trump would be removed from office as more Republican congress persons wouldn't be worried about re-election.


I like this idea - see we agree on some things. :lol:
User avatar
sunskerr
Head Coach
Posts: 6,751
And1: 2,953
Joined: Feb 20, 2010
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#207 » by sunskerr » Sat Jan 25, 2020 2:14 am

You really shouldn't speak of Trump being an outsider anymore after he took office. The entire party has fallen in lock step and Trump has abandoned many things he promised on his campaign. The Republican opposition to him (the elites) is also basically zero at this point, and Fox News has switched to near full support mode save for Geraldo Rivera. In turn, the Republican congress has used Trump as a conduit to rubber stamp their agenda and pass horrible bills for the American middle and lower classes. Trump's policy has now morphed into the same as what got us in this mess in the first place, and continues the tradition of helping the elites and wealthy that began with Reagan and continued all the way through Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, and Obama.

All this impeachment discussion is quite frankly a waste to discuss. The importance that it has is to be on public record, so if Trump loses in 2020 he can be thrown in jail swiftly, and also for evidence to sway the remaining undecided voters and uninformed populace. It could backfire on the Democrats, though- I wouldn't actually be surprised if Trump sees a slight bump in favourability once he's acquitted, because uninformed people treat politics like sports. And he will be acquitted.

But my main point is that the only way you're getting these grifters out of Washington is to go to the polls in November. And the best way to convince people to go to the polls in November is to give them an agenda that has tangible positive effects on their lives.
TheLogician
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,571
And1: 1,344
Joined: Apr 01, 2018
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#208 » by TheLogician » Sat Jan 25, 2020 4:11 am

Image
User avatar
SuperSunsFan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,412
And1: 1,111
Joined: May 24, 2018
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#209 » by SuperSunsFan » Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:09 am

That Biden video is troubling to me, as an American voter i have as much concern on Biden who could be president someday potentially having dirt being held by foreign powers that could be used to leverage him into doing things against American interest as Trump being an Russian asset. If there are democart holdovers intentionally not investigate despite the present of probable cause than the President for the interest of the country should investigate. to be honest, it looks more like democrats using the impeachment to protect Biden than anything.
He is the Aytonator, a sophisticated Basketball-Robot sent through time to destroy the future for one very unlucky franchise - my Phoenix Suns.
User avatar
SuperSunsFan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,412
And1: 1,111
Joined: May 24, 2018
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#210 » by SuperSunsFan » Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:36 am

it seems to me that many things that past presidents used to do in a regular basis without raising concerns are now unlawful when trump does it. Was Trump not investigated when he was the political opponent of the incumbent democratic administration, why is it suddenly a political opponent of the incumbent admin is off limit now? I don't know, I thought the executive branch was responsible for foreign affairs, how is that not appropriate for the president to look into this matter and get foreign leaders to corporate in assisting the investigation of possible corruption of someone who could be president when the intelligence refuse to take action because they favor Biden over this president. I don't know much but I thought you need intention for an impeachment to stand, which means the president must knew he was breaking the law and chose to do it anyway to be impeachable not negligent, how did Trump know what he did was illegal if like the democrats said it was unprecedented and even now legal experts can't even come to a consensus conclusion whether what the admin did was lawful or not?
He is the Aytonator, a sophisticated Basketball-Robot sent through time to destroy the future for one very unlucky franchise - my Phoenix Suns.
User avatar
bigfoot
Suns Forum Anti-Tank Commander
Posts: 7,460
And1: 3,975
Joined: Sep 16, 2010
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#211 » by bigfoot » Sat Jan 25, 2020 6:42 pm

SuperSunsFan wrote:it seems to me that many things that past presidents used to do in a regular basis without raising concerns are now unlawful when trump does it. Was Trump not investigated when he was the political opponent of the incumbent democratic administration, why is it suddenly a political opponent of the incumbent admin is off limit now? I don't know, I thought the executive branch was responsible for foreign affairs, how is that not appropriate for the president to look into this matter and get foreign leaders to corporate in assisting the investigation of possible corruption of someone who could be president when the intelligence refuse to take action because they favor Biden over this president. I don't know much but I thought you need intention for an impeachment to stand, which means the president must knew he was breaking the law and chose to do it anyway to be impeachable not negligent, how did Trump know what he did was illegal if like the democrats said it was unprecedented and even now legal experts can't even come to a consensus conclusion whether what the admin did was lawful or not?


Let's be clear about what "law" the president broke. The U.S. Constitution created three separate but equal branches of government: legislative, executive, and judiciary. Congress makes the laws. The President enforces the laws. The Supreme Court makes sure the laws jive with the constitution. So congress made a law to support the Ukraine government against Russia. This law said give Ukraine $400M to help defend itself. Trump signed (did not veto) this law and at that point it is his job to enforce this law as the President. So ask yourself, why were members of both sides of congress (bipartisan support) asking Trump to release the funds that he chose to withhold? Those funds were withheld for seven months and it wasn't explained to congress why they were being withheld. The funding wasn't released until after the "perfect" phone call happened and the white house became aware of the whistle blower complaint.

I think it is fine to ask a foreign government to investigate criminal activities. Even if the investigation includes a political opponent. The difference is, Trump withheld funds meant to provide military support to Ukraine. These funds were appropriated by congress. Trump does not control the purse strings, that is the job of congress. So it is not just the activity of asking for an investigation. It is the fact that Trump withheld funds, imperiling national security, in order to try to get an investigation into Biden. Then he proceeded to try to cover tracks in many different ways. Hence the obstruction of justice article.

It's just another example of how Trump doesn't support or defend the U.S. Constitution. I doubt he really cares about or understands it, unless he can use it as a rallying cry to get re-elected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#cite_note-Prakash-44

Clause 5: Caring for the faithful execution of the law
The president must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."[36] This clause in the Constitution imposes a duty on the president to enforce the laws of the United States and is called the Take Care Clause,[37] also known as the Faithful Execution Clause[38] or Faithfully Executed Clause.[39] This clause is meant to ensure that a law is faithfully executed by the president[37] even if he disagrees with the purpose of that law.[40] Addressing the North Carolina ratifying convention, William Maclaine declared that the Faithful Execution Clause was "one of the [Constitution's] best provisions."[38] If the president "takes care to see the laws faithfully executed, it will be more than is done in any government on the continent; for I will venture to say that our government, and those of the other states, are, with respect to the execution of the laws, in many respects mere ciphers."[38] President George Washington interpreted this clause as imposing on him a unique duty to ensure the execution of federal law. Discussing a tax rebellion, Washington observed, "it is my duty to see the Laws executed: to permit them to be trampled upon with impunity would be repugnant to [that duty.]"[38]

According to former United States Assistant Attorney General Walter E. Dellinger III, the Supreme Court and the Attorneys General have long interpreted the Take Care Clause to mean that the president has no inherent constitutional authority to suspend the enforcement of the laws, particularly of statutes.[41] The Take Care Clause demands that the president obey the law, the Supreme Court said in Humphrey's Executor v. United States, and repudiates any notion that he may dispense with the law's execution.[42] In Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court explained how the president executes the law: "The Constitution does not leave to speculation who is to administer the laws enacted by Congress; the president, it says, "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," Art. II, §3, personally and through officers whom he appoints (save for such inferior officers as Congress may authorize to be appointed by the "Courts of Law" or by "the Heads of Departments" with other presidential appointees), Art. II, §2."[43]

The president may not prevent a member of the executive branch from performing a ministerial duty lawfully imposed upon him by Congress. (See Marbury v. Madison (1803); and Kendall v. United States ex rel. Stokes (1838).) Nor may the president take an action not authorized either by the Constitution or by a lawful statute. (See Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952).) Finally, the president may not refuse to enforce a constitutional law, or "cancel" certain appropriations, for that would amount to an extra-constitutional veto or suspension power.[38]

Some presidents have claimed the authority under this clause to impound money appropriated by Congress. President Jefferson, for example, delayed the expenditure of money appropriated for the purchase of gunboats for over a year. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his successors sometimes refused outright to expend appropriated money.[38] The Supreme Court, however, has held that impoundments without Congressional authorization are unconstitutional.[44]

denial
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,304
And1: 854
Joined: Nov 03, 2006
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#212 » by denial » Sat Jan 25, 2020 7:05 pm

I’m very disappointed to see this thread here on a basketball forum.

All I will say is I have lived, worked, and schooled in Mexico. I am a born us citizen. my last name is Spanish. My father was a long time special agent under the department of justice. And I will always stand with America first.

I do have a political leaning. But it’s irrelevant. I stand with all Americans right or left. If you’re feeling divided, I’d say you should spend more time embracing your opponents.
40
User avatar
SuperSunsFan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,412
And1: 1,111
Joined: May 24, 2018
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#213 » by SuperSunsFan » Sat Jan 25, 2020 7:26 pm

bigfoot wrote:
SuperSunsFan wrote:it seems to me that many things that past presidents used to do in a regular basis without raising concerns are now unlawful when trump does it. Was Trump not investigated when he was the political opponent of the incumbent democratic administration, why is it suddenly a political opponent of the incumbent admin is off limit now? I don't know, I thought the executive branch was responsible for foreign affairs, how is that not appropriate for the president to look into this matter and get foreign leaders to corporate in assisting the investigation of possible corruption of someone who could be president when the intelligence refuse to take action because they favor Biden over this president. I don't know much but I thought you need intention for an impeachment to stand, which means the president must knew he was breaking the law and chose to do it anyway to be impeachable not negligent, how did Trump know what he did was illegal if like the democrats said it was unprecedented and even now legal experts can't even come to a consensus conclusion whether what the admin did was lawful or not?


Let's be clear about what "law" the president broke. The U.S. Constitution created three separate but equal branches of government: legislative, executive, and judiciary. Congress makes the laws. The President enforces the laws. The Supreme Court makes sure the laws jive with the constitution. So congress made a law to support the Ukraine government against Russia. This law said give Ukraine $400M to help defend itself. Trump signed (did not veto) this law and at that point it is his job to enforce this law as the President. So ask yourself, why were members of both sides of congress (bipartisan support) asking Trump to release the funds that he chose to withhold? Those funds were withheld for seven months and it wasn't explained to congress why they were being withheld. The funding wasn't released until after the "perfect" phone call happened and the white house became aware of the whistle blower complaint.

I think it is fine to ask a foreign government to investigate criminal activities. Even if the investigation includes a political opponent. The difference is, Trump withheld funds meant to provide military support to Ukraine. These funds were appropriated by congress. Trump does not control the purse strings, that is the job of congress. So it is not just the activity of asking for an investigation. It is the fact that Trump withheld funds, imperiling national security, in order to try to get an investigation into Biden. Then he proceeded to try to cover tracks in many different ways. Hence the obstruction of justice article.

It's just another example of how Trump doesn't support or defend the U.S. Constitution. I doubt he really cares about or understands it, unless he can use it as a rallying cry to get re-elected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#cite_note-Prakash-44

Clause 5: Caring for the faithful execution of the law
The president must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."[36] This clause in the Constitution imposes a duty on the president to enforce the laws of the United States and is called the Take Care Clause,[37] also known as the Faithful Execution Clause[38] or Faithfully Executed Clause.[39] This clause is meant to ensure that a law is faithfully executed by the president[37] even if he disagrees with the purpose of that law.[40] Addressing the North Carolina ratifying convention, William Maclaine declared that the Faithful Execution Clause was "one of the [Constitution's] best provisions."[38] If the president "takes care to see the laws faithfully executed, it will be more than is done in any government on the continent; for I will venture to say that our government, and those of the other states, are, with respect to the execution of the laws, in many respects mere ciphers."[38] President George Washington interpreted this clause as imposing on him a unique duty to ensure the execution of federal law. Discussing a tax rebellion, Washington observed, "it is my duty to see the Laws executed: to permit them to be trampled upon with impunity would be repugnant to [that duty.]"[38]

According to former United States Assistant Attorney General Walter E. Dellinger III, the Supreme Court and the Attorneys General have long interpreted the Take Care Clause to mean that the president has no inherent constitutional authority to suspend the enforcement of the laws, particularly of statutes.[41] The Take Care Clause demands that the president obey the law, the Supreme Court said in Humphrey's Executor v. United States, and repudiates any notion that he may dispense with the law's execution.[42] In Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court explained how the president executes the law: "The Constitution does not leave to speculation who is to administer the laws enacted by Congress; the president, it says, "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," Art. II, §3, personally and through officers whom he appoints (save for such inferior officers as Congress may authorize to be appointed by the "Courts of Law" or by "the Heads of Departments" with other presidential appointees), Art. II, §2."[43]

The president may not prevent a member of the executive branch from performing a ministerial duty lawfully imposed upon him by Congress. (See Marbury v. Madison (1803); and Kendall v. United States ex rel. Stokes (1838).) Nor may the president take an action not authorized either by the Constitution or by a lawful statute. (See Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952).) Finally, the president may not refuse to enforce a constitutional law, or "cancel" certain appropriations, for that would amount to an extra-constitutional veto or suspension power.[38]

Some presidents have claimed the authority under this clause to impound money appropriated by Congress. President Jefferson, for example, delayed the expenditure of money appropriated for the purchase of gunboats for over a year. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his successors sometimes refused outright to expend appropriated money.[38] The Supreme Court, however, has held that impoundments without Congressional authorization are unconstitutional.[44]


were they impeached? Trump is given a much tighter leash than other presidents it seems just because "he is hitler" and he deserves no benefit of the doubt like previous presidents. when other president did something unconstitutional they get a slap on the waist and told not to do again or we might impeach you and that's it. When it comes to trump, there is no need to go to court to decide criminality, there is not a warning that what he did was wrong, face impeachment if you do it again next time. There wasn't even a fair debate, just a partisan house majority with a serious contempt and bias against him decided what he did was impeachable then that is it he is impeached, in time of a month. why wasn't there even a nonpartisan special investigation like mueller's to look into the matter and seek the truth but no it seems like democrats are afraid again a nonpartisan investigation might clear him and they wanted to hasten it to push it through before the election so they can benefit from this and fairness all be damned. everyone uses their power to benefit themselves and pretend to do it for the public, democrats are doing the same thing with their impeachment power to hurt the president for their own gains in the upcoming election just be honest with it, everyone tests the limit to see how far they could use power as leverage before they are guilty of abuse of power all the time, did Pelosi not withholding the impeachment before sending to the senate hoping to leverage a more advantage in the senate trial. Impeach Trump removes him who cares, but democrats are not doing it in a way that is not hypocritical, they accused of Trump of using the advantage of his power to hurt opponent, democrats are using their advantage of impeachment power to hurt trump, trump being a nonlawyer and Amateur politician doing it in a more untactful way doesn't make Democrats saints, which is the way the media is portraying them to be. These are the same people who knowingly bought in not creditable witnesses to frame Kavanaugh as a serial rapist, did they not abuse their power to try to frame an innocent man of rape for political gains?

a censure would have been a much more appropriate action but of course since that won't do the democrats much good in the election so they had to use the full extent of their power to impeach despite how inappropriate and unprecedented it is to impeach in such an unfair, trivial and careless manner.
He is the Aytonator, a sophisticated Basketball-Robot sent through time to destroy the future for one very unlucky franchise - my Phoenix Suns.
User avatar
sunskerr
Head Coach
Posts: 6,751
And1: 2,953
Joined: Feb 20, 2010
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#214 » by sunskerr » Sun Jan 26, 2020 3:08 pm

Again, it's such a waste of time to talk about impeachment. I was going to rip into SuperSunsFans post and I had a lengthy one typed up but I just didn't give a **** enough once I reached my point of Mueller basically saying "yeah, he obstructed justice, but we can't do anything". Because Mueller is right- it's simply up to the people to get this grifter out of office.

I mean, of course the dudes committed many "high crimes and misdemeanors", and actual crimes as well. You can literally google all that stuff and get it from a multitude of independent sources. Nobody really fights that except for really hardcore supporters of Trump. But they just make themselves look stupid trying to come up with legal arguments.

So he's committed many crimes in office, and has a Republican majority in the senate backing him up. What can be done? Nothing. That's why discussing this impeachment strategy, and what the outcome should or should not be, is silly. You know they're going to acquit him in the senate. This just gives Trump more ammunition to brag about. Just move on.

I'm just going to quote my post from above:

sunskerr wrote:You really shouldn't speak of Trump being an outsider anymore after he took office. The entire party has fallen in lock step and Trump has abandoned many things he promised on his campaign. The Republican opposition to him (the elites) is also basically zero at this point, and Fox News has switched to near full support mode save for Geraldo Rivera. In turn, the Republican congress has used Trump as a conduit to rubber stamp their agenda and pass horrible bills for the American middle and lower classes. Trump's policy has now morphed into the same as what got us in this mess in the first place, and continues the tradition of helping the elites and wealthy that began with Reagan and continued all the way through Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, and Obama.

All this impeachment discussion is quite frankly a waste to discuss. The importance that it has is to be on public record, so if Trump loses in 2020 he can be thrown in jail swiftly, and also for evidence to sway the remaining undecided voters and uninformed populace. It could backfire on the Democrats, though- I wouldn't actually be surprised if Trump sees a slight bump in favourability once he's acquitted, because uninformed people treat politics like sports. And he will be acquitted.

But my main point is that the only way you're getting these grifters out of Washington is to go to the polls in November. And the best way to convince people to go to the polls in November is to give them an agenda that has tangible positive effects on their lives.


Impeachment has no tangible effect on anyone's day to day life. Stick to policy when you debate and you will win the voters because Trump's policies do not tangibly improve the average American's day to day life. Trump is only leaving if he loses the election this year.
User avatar
lilfishi22
Forum Mod - Suns
Forum Mod - Suns
Posts: 23,583
And1: 11,553
Joined: Oct 16, 2007
Location: Australia

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#215 » by lilfishi22 » Mon Jan 27, 2020 1:57 am

Agree with sunskerr

Impeachment is a ways off time with the Senate majority. Nothing will come off it and Trump will get the pleasure of doubling down on the - I did nothing wrong mantra

Dems are wasting time
alamin330 wrote:This draft reminds me of the 2003 draft.
Lebron - Zion, Barrett like Melo, wade like Culver, garland like tj ford, hunter like bosh, white like Barbosa, Clarke like David West. I think this draft is actually going to be deeper though
User avatar
ATTL
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 15,850
And1: 7,168
Joined: Aug 24, 2003
Location: Moms basement
   

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#216 » by ATTL » Tue Jan 28, 2020 2:02 am

Coronavirus spreading to Phoenix. I don't trust the chinese government news on how dangerous it is.

Anyone doomsday prepping just in case?
User avatar
lilfishi22
Forum Mod - Suns
Forum Mod - Suns
Posts: 23,583
And1: 11,553
Joined: Oct 16, 2007
Location: Australia

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#217 » by lilfishi22 » Tue Jan 28, 2020 2:20 am

I don't trust the chinese reporting on the numbers either but I think if you're healthy and you do your due diligence (wash hands often, wear a mask), I think you should be OK. It's really the elderly, the very young and those existing illnesses/conditions that are most at risk.

FWIW it's less dangerous than SARS, MERS and Bird Flu from what I've seen
alamin330 wrote:This draft reminds me of the 2003 draft.
Lebron - Zion, Barrett like Melo, wade like Culver, garland like tj ford, hunter like bosh, white like Barbosa, Clarke like David West. I think this draft is actually going to be deeper though
User avatar
suns12345
Pro Prospect
Posts: 995
And1: 461
Joined: Jul 28, 2008
 

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#218 » by suns12345 » Tue Jan 28, 2020 4:26 am

lilfishi22 wrote:I don't trust the chinese reporting on the numbers either but I think if you're healthy and you do your due diligence (wash hands often, wear a mask), I think you should be OK. It's really the elderly, the very young and those existing illnesses/conditions that are most at risk.

FWIW it's less dangerous than SARS, MERS and Bird Flu from what I've seen


This is what i've heard too in Aus. Basically only should be worried if you have a compromised immune system - which isn't too different from the normal flu really. Plenty of people die from that every year.

Also people reporting things like corona being as bad as the Spanish flu etc. is a bit misleading. It may have a similar mortality rate, but the way diseases are managed with sick people going into isolation etc. is very different to the spanish flu where infected people had significant contact with others which exacerbated the spread immensely.
RunDogGun
RealGM
Posts: 13,044
And1: 2,315
Joined: Jun 27, 2009
Location: Beyond the Sun
       

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#219 » by RunDogGun » Tue Jan 28, 2020 2:01 pm

lilfishi22 wrote:Agree with sunskerr

Impeachment is a ways off time with the Senate majority. Nothing will come off it and Trump will get the pleasure of doubling down on the - I did nothing wrong mantra

Dems are wasting time

It may be futile, but it had to be done. If the legislative branch didn't do their job of oversight over the executive branch, and in this case the president has committed multiple crimes while in office, then we lose a foundational part of our government. Checks and balances keep us from becoming a dictatorship or monarchy, which our founders spoke at great lengths about. Not to mention that this particular crime was designed to influence an upcoming election.

If a president is allowed to commit crimes, withhold evidence of that crime from the American people, then he should be removed from office. It is scary watching a senate majority go along with the coverup. Hopefully some will grow a spine and ask for relevant witnesses and documents. The people have a right to know what people who work for them are doing.
RunDogGun
RealGM
Posts: 13,044
And1: 2,315
Joined: Jun 27, 2009
Location: Beyond the Sun
       

Re: OT - Current Affairs/Events 

Post#220 » by RunDogGun » Tue Jan 28, 2020 2:04 pm

lilfishi22 wrote:I don't trust the chinese reporting on the numbers either but I think if you're healthy and you do your due diligence (wash hands often, wear a mask), I think you should be OK. It's really the elderly, the very young and those existing illnesses/conditions that are most at risk.

FWIW it's less dangerous than SARS, MERS and Bird Flu from what I've seen

It is tough to trust any country when it comes to truthful reporting on things like this. I think of the Japanese nuclear plant explosion, and how they downplayed the whole mess. I am betting there are still lasting effects on our oceans from that.

Return to Phoenix Suns