cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja
@Mr._Clark is the use of incompetent lawyers who don't seem to even be able to follow normal trial protocols, somehow an legal out for appeals or some other mechanism?
Not sure their incompetent, maybe being paid REALLY WELL to do what Trump is telling them to do. That's my take. Some of the crap these lawyers for Trump are coming up with, sounds like something that comes out of Trumps mouth. A good recent article on this subject.
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
Not sure their incompetent, maybe being paid REALLY WELL to do what Trump is telling them to do. That's my take. Some of the crap these lawyers for Trump are coming up with, sounds like something that comes out of Trumps mouth. A good recent article on this subject.
I don't see how anyone can believe what is coming out of the mouths of lawyers is anything but Trump.
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja
I don't see how anyone can believe what is coming out of the mouths of lawyers is anything but Trump.
Its' like Trump is pulling their strings like a puppeteer until the string breaks and the lawyer quits.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
Yep, because lets say we are in the Ukraine thread talking about the war and all the sudden I have to, out of the blue, explain to simpletons that we aren't talking about Portugal?
Continuing to deflect tells me that you simply cannot tell us what is so profound about the statement "voting works". Taken at face value, the expression could be interpreted as "an election is held and someone is elected to be president". Well, bravo....*slow claps*...how enlightening is that?

Some of the founding fathers were afraid that voting would work too well, and came up with the electoral college in order to put several thumbs on the election scale.
The Electoral College’s Racist Origins | Brennan Center for Justice

While the Voting Rights Act helped remove some of those thumbs, we now have efforts to get some thumbs back on the scale.
Republican efforts to restrict voting following the 2020 presidential election - Wikipedia
The Many Problems with the GOP-Backed Voting Bill | Brennan Center for Justice

We'll never know if voting worked in the 2000 election, as the campaigns seemed to be more interested in maneuvering the recounts in their favour than respecting the will of the people. 2000 United States presidential election recount in Florida - Wikipedia

If you think that checks and balances preventing the overturn of the 2020 election is the proof in the pudding that "voting works", well you can fall down your basement stairs and not break a bone. I wouldn't rely on that precedent to declare that you would never break a bone from falling down your basement stairs.

If Trump wins his 14th Amendment court cases, is on all of the state ballots, and is re-elected, do you think the current efforts - by him and his sycophants - to compromise democracy in the US will fade away? If anything, they will pick up stem. What do you think the failure to indict him during his first term in office, along with his recent declaration that presidents should be immune from criminal prosecution, will result in? That crocodile brain of his, consisting of nothing but amygdala, will immediately start making plans for retribution.
Trump claims denial of presidential immunity would open 'Pandora's Box' | Fortune
OLC policy: The DOJ policy that Mueller keeps citing for not charging the president with a crime - Vox
Trump wants revenge—and so does his base - The Atlantic

I'm not suggesting that Trump be denied his day in court, vis à vis the 14th amendment. But, I am concerned that the constitution may be no impediment to USSC in declaring him eligible to run in November. His clear disdain for the constitution and view of the rule of law as merely an impediment to his own desires should disqualify him. If you think nothing short of a criminal conviction is required to disqualify him from running, what if he actually did "stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody"? I'm sure he would be charged, but if he wasn't convicted before November 5th, should he be allowed to run? Yes, that's a slippery slope argument, but where does one draw the line?
 
jinjuku

jinjuku

Moderator
Continuing to deflect tells me that you simply cannot tell us what is so profound about the statement "voting works". Taken at face value, the expression could be interpreted as "an election is held and someone is elected to be president". Well, bravo....*slow claps*...how enlightening is that?
If you are that obtuse there's not a fix out there for you buddy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
My statement is pretty obvious, I, along with many others don't want either of those two 'pecker heads'. So, if you Dems can't come up with something better than Biden(shouldn't really be too difficult) and Trump is the Pub nominee(I won't be voting for him obviously in the primary) then it's third party/write in vote time for me.
I really don't understand the animosity towards Biden.
Why Joe Biden isn’t getting any credit for the economy - Vox
Here's what Biden and Democrats have gotten done over the last 2 years : NPR
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
The one on Faux where the guest says, President Trump was right about the Biden's a number of years back.

Me: See that was extortion. Trump was withholding Ukrainian to get dirt on Joe. I doubt his intent was to be "a good Samaritan." Rather I think he felt Joe was his biggest obstacle to the '20 election, and is it turned out, it was.

Faux: Cut to commercial. :p
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
The Media Keeps Trying to “Understand” Trump Voters Because They Don’t Want to Accept the Truth About Them (thebulwark.com)

This. This is why the phrase "voting works" - in isolation, without context - is meaningless:
Over the weekend I got a note from a reader, J.S., who went even darker than I’m normally willing to go. His point, which I hadn’t really thought of before, is that “the guardrails” didn’t actually work in 2020—the only reason Trump didn’t overturn the results of the election is because guys with guns stopped their violent attempt.

Here’s J.S.:

When it came to the election in 2020, we had to beat him at the polls. But that wasn’t enough. The election officials had to do the right thing, but that wasn’t enough. The judges had to do the right thing, but that wasn’t enough. Congress and the vice president had to do the right thing and it still came down to the Capitol Police resisting an armed mob.
Every guardrail had to hold and it still had to be backed up by a willingness to resist with physical force.
I’m not suggesting anything like ditching the rule of law and skipping straight to force.
Just that we face an adversary for whom statements and propositions only have to be personally advantageous and not true or logically consistent and that his supporters have accepted and blessed this tactic and that no legal or political process has any legitimacy to them except as it is useful against his enemies and that the only thing they respect is force.
At the end of the day, there probably isn’t anything clever or counterintuitive to do. There is just getting more votes, getting the processes to work and backing it up with the power of the state.
Ugh. When you look at it through this lens you realize that “the guardrails” actually only constrain the forces of democracy.

To wit: The courts ruled against Trump in 2020 and after that, he attempted his insurrection.

But what if the courts had found in Trump’s favor? Let’s just pretend for a moment that the Supreme Court had taken an insane stand and, say, ruled in favor of the Texas lawsuit, which had then invalidated a bunch of other states’ votes, and thrown the election to House.

What would have happened then? Well, Donald Trump would have stayed president. Because “the guardrails” only limit the side that adheres to the rule of law.

Like J.S. says, there’s nothing to be done about this—the belief in the sanctity of the rule of law is what makes one side the good guys and the other side the bad guys. This is why the people who are seeking to remove Trump from the ballot via the application of the Fourteenth Amendment will accept a ruling from the SCOTUS that goes against them while the forces of illiberalism merely promise violence and chaos if they don’t get the verdict they want.

But it does mean that we should not be sanguine about what’s going to happen in November. No matter how many “guardrails” Trump and the Republican party bump up against, they are unlikely to take no for an answer until the power of the state is invoked to uphold the final guardrail.

So gird yourselves for a prolonged struggle.
So, yeah, voting works. Right up to the point where it doesn't.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
So, yeah, voting works. Right up to the point where it doesn't.
Voting works in the sense that it produces a result (someone taking office).

Of course, the person who takes office is sometimes indicted for Conspiracy, Wire Fraud, False Statements, Falsification of Records, Aggravated Identity Theft, and Credit Card Fraud, charged with ethics violations, and expelled from office.


 
jinjuku

jinjuku

Moderator
The Media Keeps Trying to “Understand” Trump Voters Because They Don’t Want to Accept the Truth About Them (thebulwark.com)

This. This is why the phrase "voting works" - in isolation, without context - is meaningless:


So, yeah, voting works. Right up to the point where it doesn't.
Voting worked and the legal system of checks and balances worked also. Just like it's supposed too.

There are lawsuits EVERY SINGLE ELECTION. Remember Gore? Voting worked then, and there was a ton of court proceedings. What we didn't have with that is a bunch of assholes storming the castle. And many of those assholes are staring @ bars now.

Now I'm going to go start a thread about how horrible Star Wars franchise is managed just so I can have you say you thought I was talking about the Matrix franchise.
 
Last edited:
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
Putting Trump back in office is putting a wanna-be dictator back in office. He'll try the same sh?t as he did before in trying to consolidate and hold onto power. I also don't believe the position of president of the US should be exempted from criminal prosecution while in office. Changing that one law would prevent monkeys like Trump from trying to seize power.
 
jinjuku

jinjuku

Moderator
Putting Trump back in office is putting a wanna-be dictator back in office. He'll try the same sh?t as he did before in trying to consolidate and hold onto power. I also don't believe the position of president of the US should be exempted from criminal prosecution while in office. Changing that one law would prevent monkeys like Trump from trying to seize power.
The retribution he feels he's entitled too. Yeash.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
Wh
Voting worked and the legal system of checks and balances worked also. Just like it's supposed too.

There are lawsuits EVERY SINGLE ELECTION. Remember Gore? Voting worked then, and there was a ton of court proceedings. What we didn't have with that is a bunch of assholes storming the castle. And many of those assholes are staring @ bars now.

Now I'm going to go start a thread about how horrible Star Wars franchise is managed just so I can have you say you thought I was talking about the Matrix franchise.
Whatever, pal. You had your chance to recover a shred of credibility. Blockity-bye-bye.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Not sure their incompetent, maybe being paid REALLY WELL to do what Trump is telling them to do. That's my take. Some of the crap these lawyers for Trump are coming up with, sounds like something that comes out of Trumps mouth. A good recent article on this subject.
I don't see how anyone can believe what is coming out of the mouths of lawyers is anything but Trump.
Oh I know drumphy is at the root (maybe the Roy Cohn influence, too)....but then Alina would rather be pretty than smart ;)
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Spartan
Voting works in the sense that it produces a result (someone taking office).

Of course, the person who takes office is sometimes indicted for Conspiracy, Wire Fraud, False Statements, Falsification of Records, Aggravated Identity Theft, and Credit Card Fraud, charged with ethics violations, and expelled from office.
Speaking of ethics violation, does bribery count ? ;)

 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top