Confused: Trump/Biden/Ukraine (1 Viewer)

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
30,048
My friends in Seattle, who are quite liberal, are finally alarmed. Apparently, shoplifters are to be allowed to just loot stores without being stopped.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator, Former MVP, Retired SysAdmin
Staff member
Local time
Today, 17:35
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
18,311
Time to decide whether working for a living actually has meaning. That kind of attitude cuts profit margins two ways. First, increased "spillage" - the generic term for business losses through non-purchase events; second, increased insurance rates for business losses.

Perhaps a lawsuit against the city to force them to enforce laws?
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
30,048
Trump is trying to withhold federal funding from sanctuary cities and private collages that restrict free speech. Of course, the laws may never get out of the courts.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
2,379
Trump is trying to withhold federal funding from sanctuary cities and private collages that restrict free speech. Of course, the laws may never get out of the courts.
Raises some sore points.
  1. States/Cities that want federal help are openly circumventing federal laws. The federal government should be able to withhold federal funds when those funds are used by the States/Cities to blatantly oppose the federal government.
  2. It is the responsibility of Congress (US House of Representatives) to authorize the President to withhold federal funds given certain situations. Executive Orders have been inappropriately used in this regard. Congress has unfortunately lacked the courage to authorize the President to withhold federal funds.
  3. The courts and the judicial system are overturning laws based on political viewpoints. California, at one time, passed a law that marriage was between a man and a woman. Yet this law was overturned by the court system. A clerk (Rowan County, Kentucky) refused to issue marriage licenses for same-sex marriages and was condemned for "violating" the law, yet the Attorney General of the State of North Carolina refused to enforce a law claiming it was unconstitutional. When justice depends on your personal beliefs, the result is that there is no justice.
  4. Certain "problems", such as the current student loan "crisis" and the prior housing "crisis", are government created problems used as a deceptive excuse to implement government solutions.
 
Last edited:

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
30,048
When Trump had both houses for the first two years, they were filled with never-Trumpers and they wasted a lot of time opposing him. Paul Ryan was especially obstructive and Mitch McConnell wasn't much better. McConnell has come around some but not enough. I hope he loses his seat in November. I think Trump's actually got enough support finally so that if the Republicans retake the House and keep the Senate (preferably without Mitch), they might actually do something to put conditions on federal money.

It is so refreshing to see an elected official actually work to implement the policies he ran on that I don't even care that I don't agree with all his plans.

I'm hoping that the Dems have so overplayed their hand that November will be a huge upset. The American people are nothing if not fair and this impeachment, which has been in the planning as a contingency since the summer of 2016 when the first illegal FISA warrant based on the Steel Dossier was issued has to rankle with anyone who is getting accurate news. How can we be planning on impeaching a president who has not yet even been elected??? "Accurate" is the operative word and doesn't exist any more in the mainstream media. All we hear from them is opinion. I make it a point of watching CNN whenever Trump gives a speech and I am always flabbergasted. Could the talking heads spouting opinion rather than fact have actually watched the same speech that I watched? Instead of talking about what Trump said, they talk about their interpretation of what he said and so people who didn't listen to the speech are convinced that Trump said something totally different. Trump may not be likable the way Obama was but he is certainly not the devil incarnate and to ascribe the most evil meaning possible to everything he says or does is just plain wrong and grossly unfair. In the past we only saw these grotesque headlines in the supermarket rags. For example if a paparazzi took a picture of Queen Elizabeth hugging a woman, the headline would be IS THE QUEEN A LESBIAN? Now they do the same thing to Trump but it is top of the fold on the New York Times.
 

ColinEssex

Old registered user
Local time
Today, 23:35
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
8,340
I think being English, I find most events in America confusing.

It was reported on the BBC that if he was impeached, it won't make the slightest difference. He can still stand and be elected for another term. I (quite wrongly) thought if he was impeached, he's out the door - end of. In other words, what's the point of it all?

Col
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
30,048
Sounds like the BBC people don't do their research either. They just repeat the Democrat talking points and the Democrats are trying to frighten the people by telling outright lies. Our Constitution is only 34 pages long including all the amendments. It's only 17 as originally written!!! They would have had to only read to the middle of page 3 to get the actual law. I'm pretty sure if you want to read it yourself, you'll find it on line. The quote below is from Article I, Section 3.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States;

Seems pretty clear to me. I don't understand the confusion. If the presidency is not an Office of honor, Trust or Profit then I guess they're correct. Or maybe they didn't keep reading past "removal from Office".

The Senate will vote on Wednesday. There will not be a 2/3 majority vote to impeach and so Trump will be acquitted. That will not stop the Democrats or the press for a single second. They've already started with "if there were no witnesses, it wasn't fair". (I already commented earlier on the 17 witnesses they called in the house and why they didn't subpoena others.) They knew when they brought the bogus charges in the House, that the Senate would never convict so why did they spend all this political capital and waste months doing nothing else? Their goal is to affect the next election and so smear Trump that independents won't vote for him. They've spent the last three years accusing Trump of meddling in the 2016 election and yet it was Hillary Clinton who bought the opposition research (Steel Dossier) that was fed to the FBI that set in motion the initial FISA warrant to investigate members of the Trump campaign. I guess conducting a bogus impeachment on made up charges and going on cable TV day after day ad nauseum to lie about Trump isn't election tampering. To paraphrase President Bill Clinton, "I guess it depends on what your definition of the word is, is". The Democrats completely lost their minds when Trump was elected.

The Dems are also pushing to abolish the Electoral College. For those who don't know what that is, I'll try to explain. The first surprise is that the US isn't a democracy. It is a republic and in a republic, the voters elect electors and the electors elect the president. Each state is allotted a number of electors based on the number of residents they have as well as the number of representatives they have in the House and the Senate. This has the effect of smoothing out the very high concentrations of people in the big city congressional districts across the population of the entire state. To see how this worked, go online and look at a map of congressional districts voting in 2016. The Democrat districts are blue and the Republican districts are red. All the blue is concentrated in the big cities on both coasts but the rest of the country is red. This shows that liberals congregate in big cities but the rest of the country is pretty moderate and these days, the Republications are the voice of reason (moderation) rather than the Democrats. This was added to the constitution to appease five lower population states who felt that they would simply be overwhelmed by the big cities of the coast and they refused to join the union without the provision.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator, Former MVP, Retired SysAdmin
Staff member
Local time
Today, 17:35
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
18,311
ColinEssex said:
In other words, what's the point of it all?

Sometimes when I see the Democrats and their insane, almost rabid activities to oust a duly elected President, I have to ask that same question, Col. They come very close to foaming at the mouth. It is almost frightening to read their rhetoric because I have to wonder if they are off their anti-psychotic medications. It is disheartening to see SO much hatred.
 

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Local time
Today, 23:35
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
3,819
@Pat Hartman I agree about the BBC - they heavily skew the perspective towards the Democrats point of view. I don't think it is about a lack of research though. It seems intentional.

I remember reading somewhere that the vast majority of people working at the BBC are left-leaning. Perhaps it is in the nature of the type of work. Certain occupations may attract specific political viewpoints. Then they become an echo-chamber, where if you break from the consensus, you are ostracised (or don't get promoted).
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
30,048
The left wing took over education in the 70's and I'm sorry to report that I didn't notice and so I didn't do anything to stop it. Our children are being educated to think that Communism and Socialism are good and positive forms of government and that Capitalism is evil. I have twin granddaughters in college and we have regular sanity checks. They are being told by professors that free speech is wrong. We need "safe spaces" and protection from ideas we disagree with. Of course, everything the left disagrees with automatically becomes "hate" speech. I would never pressure them to stand up and argue that the constant smearing of President Trump is essentially an attempted coup d'etat but if they don't argue for free speech, then they will surely loose it as the Canadians already have. The point of our first amendment is to protect speech we hate rather than speech we agree with. When you let someone else judge what "hate" speech is, you have abdicated your right to think.

The left wing also took over the media and their reporting is skewed largely because their professors no longer teach them that a journalist's job is to report the facts rather than their own opinion. Who, what, where, and when. I don't want to know what they think. If I want to know what other people are thinking, I'll read the OpEd page. On the front page, I want the facts.

Trump is so personally offensive to many people, especially woman, that the Democrats really had an easy beat in 2020 if they hadn't simply lost their minds. America isn't ready for Socialism no matter how nice it sounds and how "good" it would be for the poor. Some of us (only 53%) still pay income tax and we actually understand that nothing is free. Why would any one with any sense think that forgiving college debt is a good thing? People who worked and saved and paid their own way are punished in favor of the folks who bought fancy cars and the latest flat screen TVs and iPhones. College is too expensive because our government threw money at it without actually figuring out what problem they were trying to solve. So colleges took the money and built spas and lazy rivers and cafes. They didn't spend the money on better education. They spent it on trivial stuff and administration. So candidates that stand up there vying for who can give away the most free stuff are simply not electable. Why would anyone with any sense think that offering free medical care to people in the country illegally is a good idea. We're taxing working people and giving stuff to freeloaders.

Did you watch the State of the Union speech last night? A few seconds after Trump finished, Nancy Pelosi stood their behind him and tore her copy of the speech into pieces. This woman is second in line for the presidency (after the Vice President). To show such disrespect to the office of president is beyond the pale. If I were a member of the House, I would call for her impeachment!
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
2,379
If I were a member of the House, I would call for her impeachment!
Members of Congress cannot be impeached. Impeachment is reserved for "civil officers". Members of Congress can be removed from office through "Expulsion". We can hope that Pelosi loses at the ballot box this November; but since Pelosi represents the San Francisco area there would not be much hope that if she loses that her replacement would be any better.

PS: Should the Republicans gain control of the House this November, they could possibly expel Pelosi. May be difficult: "Voting to expel requires the concurrence of two-thirds of the members".
 
Last edited:

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
30,048
I meant to say censure. It looks like the Republicans are working on a bill, not that it would ever pass. Some states have laws that allow them to "recall" their Senators (I'm not sure about Representatives). Utah is currently working on passing a law that allows them to do it. They're very pro Trump and don't like Romney's total lack of support. They've been working on this since last April.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
30,048
I'm pretty sure that he is banking on the electorate having forgotten this bit of perfidy when he is up for reelection in 4 years.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator, Former MVP, Retired SysAdmin
Staff member
Local time
Today, 17:35
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
18,311
I see one of two things coming this way.

Option A: The Democrats gained enough traction to be able to garner the moderate voter, who actually exists. I am a voter who seeks compromise on many issues, which makes me a moderate more or less.

Option B: The Democrats implode over the insanity triggered by a disastrous Iowa Caucus showing, nominate a candidate that ALIENATES the moderates, and not only does DJT get re-elected but many House Democrats lose their seats for that insane impeachment trial that was clearly a political moment and not a legal one.

I don't see a middle ground here. I believe 2020 will either nearly destroy or strongly invigorate the Democratic party in the USA. My only question is if option B happens, they start up their impeachment rhetoric the moment DJT enters office.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 18:35
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
30,048
One of the things I love most about Trump is his view of money. He looks at "government" money as his own and feels the need to husband it. I had an assignment with the State of Tennessee some years ago to do a purchasing system. One of the things the state did (and it looks like every state and the Feds do also) is toward the end of the fiscal year, if there was money left unspent, they would "encumber" it so that it looked like it was spent by placing bogus orders that could be cancelled. That way they could always justify budget increases plus they had a slush fund. Trump announced a couple of days ago that he was going to stop this practice. Yeah!!! Now if we could only go to zero-based budgeting rather than last year Plus.

I was having lunch with a liberal (but rational) friend yesterday and we were talking about Trump. She started the conversation by remarking on how awful Pelosi's tantrum at the State of the Union was and how disrespectful it was to the President (that's how we know she's rational). So since she opened the door, I was trying to get her to see how biased the media is and how every time Trump opens his mouth the talking heads interpret his remarks in the most negative and hateful way possible. The conversation remained civil and I think she actually saw some of my points. She was a faster walking away from the table than I was and the man sitting at the table next to us thanked me for trying. So, there are more Trump fans out there than we know about because they just stay quiet. Me, I've taken to talking to strangers about positive things Trump does. No one has taken a punch at me yet.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator, Former MVP, Retired SysAdmin
Staff member
Local time
Today, 17:35
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
18,311
Pat, for what it is worth, the federal government encumbers year-end money too. The same fear applied in Navy circles as you report from Tennessee. If you don't spend it, you get a budget cut next year. One year I got a memory upgrade for my mainframes because of that approach. On a virtual demand-paging system, a memory upgrade does wonders for performance, so everyone asked what I had done to make it so fast. The answer, of course, was "threw money at the problem." It was amazing what you could get at the end of the fiscal year, specifically in the last quarter (which for the feds is July-September since fiscal years start October 1st).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom