Rudy

[AccessBlaster]

I was just being snarky, my apologies, but I am not as liberal as you would assume. I used to be a Republican, but I started having my doubts when I watched Carol Rove, and Newty, have an agenda leaning toward one party rule. There was a time when the Right and Left got along, as demonstrated by what was called the Ev and Jerry show, Ill let you look that up. Around the time of the Clinton administration is when things started going of the rails with we vs them. It was Rove, Newt, and Dick Army. As I remeber they were the first to take up the cudgel against "The Other SIde"

I am out for a while. Don't like silos.

Have a nice Xmas

I'm a recovering democrat who is now a registered independent. We do have things in common, I don't like Carl Rove, Newt, or most of the republican apparatus. And I am not afraid to say I am no fanboy of the repubs either.

But when it comes to things like border security "your boy" Joe ranks pretty low and that should alarm everyone, but it doesn't penetrate the partisan wall the left hides behind.

Anyway, have a great Christmas!

 

[Pat Hartman]

And I have never been nor will I ever be a Republican. In my younger years, I thought of myself as a Democrat but I think that is typical of children unaware of how the world works. The Dems always seem so idealistic and they love to think of themselves as "moral". But, once I got out into the real world and realized that government money was MY money, I realized I wasn't a Democrat and that their programs were actually not "moral" in any real sense. My leanings are much more Libertarian which is closer than either of the current political parties to the beliefs of our founders. So, the uni-party members are all feckless pieces of dog poo working for their donors and not for the people who voted for them. That's why Trump is so widely hated by the political class. He made them all look bad while he tried to fulfill his campaign promises. Think of his speeches as stream of consciousness. Unlike most of us who have strong filters, whatever comes into Trump's mind seems to come out his mouth and not necessarily as a well organized thought and usually to his detriment. You may not agree with all his ideas but you should get a sense that unlike an actual politician who spends hours in front of a mirror practicing lying to you, Trump tells you want is on his mind. EGAD! A politician who doesn't lie to you (security issues don't count here), has good ideas, and actually tries to implement them. What is this world coming to?

Merry Christmas to all.

 

[Isaac]

Don't like silos.

Silos area beautiful iconic representation of the former small-farm America. My parents have one that still stands tall against every harsh weather of northern Wisconsin, many great memories there as a child

 

[Isaac]

I realized I wasn't a Democrat and that their programs were actually not "moral" in any real sense

Stealing other people's money, and actually having the practice of doing that is nothing moral whatsoever.
Giving money is moral, but not quite as much when you've stolen it first.

I'm a Republican, and have only grown stronger in that regard throughout the years as it has become increasingly popular to say "I hate all sides" (easier to get along at parties that way). Republicans are so much closer to the truth than everyone else I am satisfied enough with their goals - but I agree they are just goals, and need to be actually reached now and again

 

[Pat Hartman]

I agree. I would be quite happy with what the Republicans promise but they deliver the Democrat's promises, not the ones they made on the campaign trail. Therein lies the problem.

There should be a dozen Republican states out there trying the exact same tactic to get Biden off the ballot. They just need to use his oath of office instead of the 14th amendment. I don't actually expect them to succeed, nor do I want them to, but the public has to see how very wrong this tactic is. Even turncoats like Ron DeSantis and Chris Christie are speaking out. That says something about the depth of the Democrat's depravity.

 

[jpl458]

Silos area beautiful iconic representation of the former small-farm America. My parents have one that still stands tall against every harsh weather of northern Wisconsin, many great memories there as a child

I grew up in rural Michign, and though there was not that much agriculture, there was the occasional, stately silo. I remember them well. The silos I don't have much feeling for are the political silos that exist today.

 

[Pat Hartman]

The silos I don't have much feeling for are the political silos that exist today.

You are quite capable of leaving the silo of lies if you choose to. Leave your hatred of Trump aside. Think about two current events without regard to party. think about how they affect Democracy. When the Democrats refer to "our" Democracy, the two items below are what they mean. They think the general public is too stupid to pick the president that they want (can control) so they have set a course of action to do it for them. They were very successful in 2020 by making illegal laws in violation of the Constitution to enable them to dramatically increase the number of mail-in ballots where cheating is much easier to employ than with in person voting. But, there will be too many watchers this time to get away with the same tricks.

1. Should the political party in power be using the legal system in an attempt to keep their most likely opposition off the ballot? Should they be filing lawsuits like the one in Colorado where FOUR people get to decide who the next presidential candidate is rather than the 4 million + registered voters?

2. Should the DNC cancel the Democrat primary because they know that Joe couldn't win in an honest election. How do the 10's of millions of registered Democrats feel about the DNC removing their ability to choose their candidate for president? Much as I dislike most of RFK's policies, he has a far better chance of beating Trump because he can pull in the independents by pretending to be a moderate. The DNC move to cancel the primary has caused RNC to enter the race as an independent. That won't end well for Biden.

 

[jpl458]

Pat, I do not live in a silo. I don't get my news from MSNBC or Fox. And quit telling me I hate Trump. I don't hate him, but I would never vote for him.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I don't hate him

Then why do you want to see him persecuted?

I do not live in a silo

You said we all live in political silos. Did that mean -except for you? You are the only rational person out there. One who can carefully weigh the views and see through to the truth?

I asked two specific questions which of course, you elected to ignore. That's OK. They're pretty hard questions.

 

[jpl458]

Then why do you want to see him persecuted?

You said we all live in political silos. Did that mean -except for you? You are the only rational person out there. One who can carefully weigh the views and see through to the truth?

I asked two specific questions which of course, you elected to ignore. That's OK. They're pretty hard questions.

First, he is being prosecuted, not persecuted, for acts that grand juries found were criminal. Second, no I don't live in a silo., I don't my get news and opinions from the sources mentioned above.

Lastly, if the former President is granted immunity because he was President, then wouldn't that immunity pass to any sitting President? Simple question. Yes or no.

 

[Isaac]

the former President is granted immunity because he was President, then wouldn't that immunity pass to any sitting President? Simple question. Yes or no.

No. Because every legal case is a unique set of facts to which a statutory and case law is applied, making every case a bit different

 

[Pat Hartman]

First, he is being prosecuted, not persecuted,

If no other person would be charged for similar "crimes" or non-crimes, then it is persecution.
And you still can't answer my two questions

 

[Pat Hartman]

Lastly, if the former President is granted immunity because he was President, then wouldn't that immunity pass to any sitting President? Simple question. Yes or no.

The immunity applies to acts committed as part of his executing his duty as the President. It isn't immunity from anything else. But generally a sitting President would not be charged with a crime because it is too easy to misuse the justice system as we are seeing now. If a sitting President were thought to have committed a crime outside of his job, either Congress would have to impeach him and kick him out of office or the prosecution would have to wait until the end of his term.

 

[jpl458]

No. Because every legal case is a unique set of facts to which a statutory and case law is applied, making every case a bit different

Wouldn't it set a leagle precedent? The former President claims that he is immune because he was President. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander, in less than leagle terms. But our laws and the edjudication of those laws is, a lot of time set by precident.

 

[Pat Hartman]

With Biden, his crimes started before he became President but at least one is ongoing. However, he has also committed impeachable offences so he should be impeached AND when he is out of office, prosecuted for his payola scams and money laundering business as well as the secret documents he stole while he was a Senator.

 

[jpl458]

With Biden, his crimes started before he became President but at least one is ongoing. However, he has also committed impeachable offences so he should be impeached AND when he is out of office, prosecuted for his payola scams and money laundering business as well as the secret documents he stole while he was a Senator.

Pat, that is not the question. Does the immunity pass on via precedent:

Precedent refers to a court decision that is considered as authority for deciding subsequent cases involving identical or similar facts, or similar legal issues. Precedent is incorporated into the doctrine of stare decisis and requires courts to apply the law in the same manner to cases with the same facts.

 

[Jon]

Does the immunity pass on via precedent

Only if it is for official duties, which the Trump team are claiming. You are arguing for something the Trump team are not seeking. They are not seeking immunity for something outside of official duties.

Influence peddling and extortion by Biden is not an official duty.

 

[jpl458]

Only if it is for official duties, which the Trump team are claiming. You are arguing for something the Trump team are not seeking. They are not seeking immunity for something outside of official duties.

Influence peddling and extortion by Biden is not an official duty.

Read this.

Trump claims Constitution gives him immunity − here’s why judges and the Supreme Court may not agree

The Constitution makes clear that a president who was impeached and convicted can still be prosecuted − but what about one who is acquitted in two impeachment trials?

theconversation.com

 

[Jon]

Read this.

The article states:

As a scholar of constitutional law, I know that both questions will have to be resolved, either by the Supreme Court or the appeals court – or both – before Trump’s trial can proceed.

In other words, these are not resolved issues, regardless of the opinion of the person writing the article. Legal boundaries are often only clarified through litigation.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Pat, that is not the question. Does the immunity pass on via precedent:

There is nothing in the Constitution that gives any elected official immunity for anything. If Trump is granted immunity for something he said or did in the conduct of his duty as President, it would be used as precedent in other criminal cases.

Precedent is incorporated into the doctrine of stare decisis and requires courts to apply the law in the same manner to cases with the same facts.

Unless they don't like the person, in which case they can do whatever they want.