.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
EvenSteven
-
Posts
229 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by EvenSteven
-
-
54 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:
Do you know what an "article of faith" is? Can I get an Amen?
Articles of faith are beliefs without proof, which seems to apply to your thinking but not mine. So you still haven't answered the question.
-
33 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:
The gospel according to Steve.
What's religious about it?
-
22 hours ago, lannarebirth said:
I wouldn't call it a Civil War.
It's a top-down class war waged on Americans by the Republicans who do nothing but lie about their proposals whether it's tax reform, the economy or health care. And this isn’t just ordinary class warfare; it’s class warfare aimed at perpetuating inequality into the next generation. It is their creed and it has been ongoing for a long time.
-
Mueller has uncovered material that links the Trump crime syndicate to laundering dirty Russian money through their property holdings in Panama. Mauricio Ceballos, a former prosecutor in Panama who investigated Trump’s business associates for financial crimes, called the Trump Ocean Club “a vehicle for money laundering.”
-
On 11/16/2017 at 11:17 AM, lannarebirth said:
Yes, nostalgic for Nixon! For all his faults, and they were many, no president since (in fact, all combined) has made as many important initiatives into law as Nixon and his predecessors.
https://listverse.com/2013/11/08/10-reasons-richard-nixon-was-secretly-an-amazing-president/
Vietnam!
-
7 hours ago, Skywalker69 said:
If you haven't already noticed, Trump is treating this presidency like a reality tv show. Totally unfit for the job.
-
1 hour ago, Andaman Al said:
The problem is we don't really want the firing of Sessions............yet!
We need Sessions to stay in place even though he is a shmuck. if they replace Sessions the person that comes in will be told that their first job is to fire Mueller. Now it may not hold ground but all holy hell will be let lose and yet again we will have Trump running his reality show trying to do nothing other than improve ratings (he probably has all the episodes mapped out where Donald Jr does the perp walk before being pardoned by Daddy!).
Trump is not getting what he wants from Sessions, which is to fire Mueller and shut down the investigation or at least focus on HRC, Obama, or anything else that could potentially come up to draw attention away from his own campaign investigation.
They are grasping at straws now. Yesterday it was the DNC paying for Russian information on Trump and Obama wire tapping Trump's office and today it's Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation. Tomorrow, it will be something else. It's been a continuation of a GOP campaign of creating as much noise and confusion as possible, so that the public will tune it out and call a truce with "they're all corrupt".
-
Or the firing of Sessions?
-
Here we go again as Trump is trying to use the Justice Department to investigate his political rivals and distract from the investigation into his presidential campaign. I have no problem with investigations but the longstanding allegations have been unproven. If this doesn't border on a form of obstruction of justice, what does?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/us/politics/justice-department-uranium-one-special-counsel.html
-
2 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:
Better or worse than describing the a large percentage of the voting public as "the deplorables"?, an election losing strategy if ever there was one!!! Now that WAS ridiculous.
We're off topic again, but let me say that the term "deplorables" was directed at those Trump supporters who showed contempt for the rule of law, spewing nothing but a rage of hate and the most foul vitriol imaginable toward Hillary. I don't think she went far enough in labeling them as such. After all, being accused of running a child sex ring and having it peddled by right wing propaganda mills is not deplorable. It's blasphemous and criminal.
Btw, you can have your deplorable votes. I wouldn't want their support in any way. It didn't matter in November of 2016 and it won't matter in November of 2018.
-
1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:
Right, and given that no presidential candidate has ever claimed to be an avowed atheist or even agnostic as far as I know, why single out one for vitriolic criticism of their religion of choice over another? Answer: because it serves a political agenda and has nothing at all to do with the candidate themself. It is ironic though that it was the party of diversity and inclusiveness that chose to act in this manner.
Another straw man. You missed the point and tried to make hay with it. Some beliefs are more absurd than others and that is what Adaman Al is pointing out. And you don't know what vitriol means.
-
5 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:
The absurdity of a petition call for Trump's impeachment is obviously the domain of the ignorant, uneducated, and the just plain stupid.
How informed, educated and smart is it to think that Trump is fit to govern? The majority of Americans don't think so. Enact the 25th on the 45th.
-
A mental health issue and not a gun problem? Ok, then let's start handing out guns to the mentally ill. That shouldn't create problems, right? Better yet, let's give them fully automatic weapons!
-
1 hour ago, Kim1950 said:
CNN, FOX, WAPO, NYT, or whoever, The Facts Don't Matter.
Yes they do. And I'm referring to the facts, not spin or propaganda. The investigation is complex, far reaching and time consuming, and the far right is doing everything they can to obstruct it and shut it down. When the investigation is concluded we're not sure, but I trust that we will get to the bottom of this or we'll have a banana republic. Have patience.
-
Mitch McConnell stated he is not offering any protection to Mueller and his team on MSNBC today. This could set up another constitutional crisis, if Trump decides to fire Mueller.
http://www.msnbc.com/hugh-hewitt/watch/one-on-one-with-sen-mitch-mcconnell-1088557123578
-
1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:
You don't seem to know what a Straw Man argument is. I know you like to insult people by asking them "how far did you go in school". Out of curiosity, did your own studies advance far enough to learn what a petard is?
The fact that you haven't answered the question and instead offered ad hominems - and not the first time either - confirms who lost the argument. Maybe you should take some of your own advice and not argue through your own bruised ego. Next.
-
1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:
But by your definition the intervening period between the unconstitutional order and the subsequent overturning of the order by a court is a constitutional crisis. It is not.
Straw man. You have falsely misrepresented what I've said by saying "every time a president signs an executive order that subsequently gets overturned by a court a constitutional crisis will have arisen." Where did I say that an executive order necessarily challenges the Constitution? I didn't. Executive orders can challenge the Constitution, but who said they are necessarily in themselves a violation of the Constitution? When they do challenge the Constitution though, they become a crisis.
Trump's travel ban was a good example of an order that violated the Constitution and it was a crisis during the intervening period, namely, up until the courts relieved the crisis. And many people had to suffer as a result, but that is another matter and one in which the WH violated the Constitution again.
-
1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:
By your definition , every time a president signs an executive order that subsequently gets overturned by a court a constitutional crisis will have arisen. That's not a crisis, that's the constitution doing what it was designed to do. Ask any ninth grader.
A executive order overturned by a judge is the work of the judicial branch, acting in accordance with the Constitution, hence no Constitutional crisis.
-
1 hour ago, amvet said:
Constitutional crises arise out of the failure, or strong risk of failure, of a constitution to perform its central functions.
A Constitutional crisis is a breach in the Constitution or a violation in the duty of upholding the Constitution. By law, the president has a duty to uphold the Constitution when he is sworn into office. He has not. Trump over-stepped his powers on at least five occasions that challenges the Constitution, as countless legal experts have pointed out, and the Congress will not act on it. These include Trump's firing of Yates and Comey both of whom while in the duty of upholding the Constitution, Trump's smearing of a judge, Trump's profiting from the office of the WH and his travel ban. All of these are in violation of the duty to uphold the Constitution. -
5 minutes ago, amvet said:
Who has the ability to prove me right or wrong? Is there some legal moderator that determines impeachment or not?
If you can't see the Constitutional crisis Trump has created by firing Comey, as countless legal experts have pointed out, then that is your problem.
-
6 minutes ago, amvet said:
No you don't understand impeachment. The legal bar to impeach depends on which party is in power. There is no where near enough to impeach as long as the Republicans are in power. Shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Do you understand what the founding fathers were getting at? Treason, bribery and stuff like that.
Your flipping from the issue of the grounds for impeachment, which you've been proven wrong, to the issue of the politics of enacting impeachment proceedings which we all know. Nice try. Next.
-
21 minutes ago, amvet said:
He can fire Comey for any reason he wants to.
False. The Trump campaign is under investigation and Trump is part of the campaign. The president can not obstruct justice, for that is an indictable offense. And he has created a constitutional crisis in the process with a Congress that will not impeach him for it.
23 minutes ago, amvet said:Check the official reason.
Huh? Official reason? Please explain what this legally means and provide what it is that you are trying to say.
26 minutes ago, amvet said:He has never lied under oath as President hence no impeachment.
Non sequitur. Haven't you heard of the 25th Amendment? It's tailored for such an unfit rogue as Trump.
Btw, Trump refuses to speak under oath. That speaks volumes.
-
5 hours ago, CaptHaddock said:
what steps might Trump take to hang on to power? My list to watch for is as follows:
1. Fire Sessions or instigate his resignation, appoint an acting AG who would fire Mueller or restrict his investigation to the point where Mueller resigns.
2. Pressure Sessions to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate HC or the DNC.
3. Pardon immediately Manafort, Gates, Papadopoulos, himself, his family, and anyone else for any federal crimes they might have committed.
4. Provoke North Korea to fire on a US military ship or plane, the traditional American way to start a war.
5. In response to an attack of some kind against US civilians or widespread protest, suspend habeas corpus, declare martial law, and suspend investigations as "aiding the enemy."
6. Suspend elections because of widespread voting fraud until reforms can be enacted.
7. Permanently exclude from the WH news media unfriendly to Trump.
These are all quite possible. There is no doubt that Trump is a dictator and tyrant and the only thing stopping him is the constitution, the possibility of losing control of the Senate in 2018 and of course the fall out from that.
But don't put it past him to create a situation where he can suspend the constitution and rule as he wants. Even though millions will fill the streets of the US, Trump will call out the National Guard on the people as other dictators like Putin and Erdogan have done. And all the right wing propaganda mills like FauxNews and social media trolls will cover his back and media outlets not supportive of the dictator will be shut down. Dictators are extremely dangerous and need to be dealt with asap.
-
12 hours ago, 348GTS said:
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. I would suggest becoming more informed if you wish to discuss this matter. Until that day arrives, I will not waste my time engaging with you. Anyway I'll just leave this reminder here for you as to how effective and meaningful polls are....
FYI, that is not a poll. That is a calculation of probability. How far did you go in school again?
Do you think Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?
in World News
Posted · Edited by EvenSteven
Collins dictionary? Suitable for high school perhaps. Let's use a source that is a little more comprehensive and academically credible - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith - and one that fits the context of your comment: "firm belief in something for which there is no proof". Now will you stop evading the question and answer it?