One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
I don't want Trump removed from office, whether his trial is fair or not
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Jan 25, 2020 10:26:57   #
Cacasdad
 
debeda wrote:
So sorry your TDS is acting up. You should up your meds


Please excuse my ignorance, but I’m not familiar with the acronym TDS?
Thank you for your concern about my daily cocktail, please do be assured I have that pretty well under control.

As for my disdain for the amount of stupid in America today, that cannot be apologized for because it is purely the stupid of willful ignorance of facts/truth of all those that support the third most vile human of existence;
#1 King David, never quit his repulsive behavior, which cost his grandchildren their legacy.
#2 the whys or how’s are nunya.
#3 djt, the Living embodiment of all things sociopathic!

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 10:29:46   #
youngwilliam
 
Cacasdad wrote:
Please excuse my ignorance, but I’m not familiar with the acronym TDS?
Thank you for your concern about my daily cocktail, please do be assured I have that pretty well under control.

As for my disdain for the amount of stupid in America today, that cannot be apologized for because it is purely the stupid of willful ignorance of facts/truth of all those that support the third most vile human of existence;
#1 King David, never quit his repulsive behavior, which cost his grandchildren their legacy.
#2 the whys or how’s are nunya.
#3 djt, the Living embodiment of all things sociopathic!
Please excuse my ignorance, but I’m not familiar w... (show quote)


Caca is a psychiatrist now.

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 10:42:02   #
debeda
 
youngwilliam wrote:
Caca is a psychiatrist now.



| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 11:06:04   #
son of witless
 
rumitoid wrote:
Like the lawyer at trial saying to the accused "Did you stop beating your wife: answer yes or no."


Please splain to me in detail exactly how President Trump's phone call was illegal and an Impeachable offense. Again in detail, but do not write a novel. Do not bring other arguments, just the phone call. I quadruple dog dare you.

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 11:43:16   #
rumitoid
 
Cacasdad wrote:
Please excuse my ignorance, but I’m not familiar with the acronym TDS?
Thank you for your concern about my daily cocktail, please do be assured I have that pretty well under control.

As for my disdain for the amount of stupid in America today, that cannot be apologized for because it is purely the stupid of willful ignorance of facts/truth of all those that support the third most vile human of existence;
#1 King David, never quit his repulsive behavior, which cost his grandchildren their legacy.
#2 the whys or how’s are nunya.
#3 djt, the Living embodiment of all things sociopathic!
Please excuse my ignorance, but I’m not familiar w... (show quote)


Like it, curious.

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 11:48:00   #
rumitoid
 
son of witless wrote:
Please splain to me in detail exactly how President Trump's phone call was illegal and an Impeachable offense. Again in detail, but do not write a novel. Do not bring other arguments, just the phone call. I quadruple dog dare you.


First, it is against the law of Congressional distribution of funds to withhold them for any reason. Second, it appears to violate campaign laws to bribe a foreign government to find dirt on a political rival. Third, then the attempt to conceal evidence and witnesses on those two points.

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 12:08:45   #
Cacasdad
 
youngwilliam wrote:
Caca is a psychiatrist now.


NO, Caca is a hair stylist, a very good hair stylist that I am proud to call my daughter.

No, I’m smarter about the human condition than most psychiatrists;)

As well, I’m not afraid of, or to acknowledge that I have foibles, and take great pride in myself for seeking help in learning deal with them positively.

Do keep coming at me, but it is only the same stupid as you that won’t see how you give yourself over obligingly to/for ridicule!

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 12:27:18   #
son of witless
 
rumitoid wrote:
First, it is against the law of Congressional distribution of funds to withhold them for any reason. Second, it appears to violate campaign laws to bribe a foreign government to find dirt on a political rival. Third, then the attempt to conceal evidence and witnesses on those two points.


That was detailed, concise, and short, so I thank you. I think you and I can have fun bashing each others brains out or in on your second and third points, and we will later, but I believe before we do that we need to discuss your First Point. If you will please allow me to lay out my thoughts, because I think you are partly right in a very broad sense, but you are wrong in this particular case.

Congress appropriated the funds for Ukraine. Okay so far. Now I submit that President Trump's delaying of the funds to Ukraine does not violate anything. He did in the end spend them. I submit the following as evidence of Proof, Precedence, etc.

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-2/35-impoundment-of-appropriated-funds.html

" In his Third Annual Message to Congress, President Jefferson established the first faint outline of what years later became a major controversy. Reporting that $50,000 in funds which Congress had appropriated for fifteen gunboats on the Mississippi remained unexpended, the President stated that a “favorable and peaceful turn of affairs on the Mississippi rendered an immediate execution of the law unnecessary. . . .” But he was not refusing to expend the money, only delaying action to obtain improved gunboats; a year later, he told Congress that the money was being spent and gunboats were being obtained.711 "

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 13:18:26   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
son of witless wrote:
That was detailed, concise, and short, so I thank you. I think you and I can have fun bashing each others brains out or in on your second and third points, and we will later, but I believe before we do that we need to discuss your First Point. If you will please allow me to lay out my thoughts, because I think you are partly right in a very broad sense, but you are wrong in this particular case.

Congress appropriated the funds for Ukraine. Okay so far. Now I submit that President Trump's delaying of the funds to Ukraine does not violate anything. He did in the end spend them. I submit the following as evidence of Proof, Precedence, etc.

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-2/35-impoundment-of-appropriated-funds.html

" In his Third Annual Message to Congress, President Jefferson established the first faint outline of what years later became a major controversy. Reporting that $50,000 in funds which Congress had appropriated for fifteen gunboats on the Mississippi remained unexpended, the President stated that a “favorable and peaceful turn of affairs on the Mississippi rendered an immediate execution of the law unnecessary. . . .” But he was not refusing to expend the money, only delaying action to obtain improved gunboats; a year later, he told Congress that the money was being spent and gunboats were being obtained.711 "
That was detailed, concise, and short, so I thank ... (show quote)



Temporary suspending the funds approved by Congress is allowed under the impoundment clause.. Its permanently refusing funds approved that the President will find himself before the Supreme Court for their consideration of the issue..Trump suspended funding for Pakistan for not adhering to terrorist actions or something like that and was not challenged on it..

The president's ability to indefinitely reject congressionally approved spending was thus removed later as a result of your case cited. Congress holds the purse strings and the President can reject or approve.. If he rejects they have to work through it before finding is giving..

Do you know four of the managers appointed on this impeachment panel by Pels voted against funding for Ukraine??

Seven "House Managers" to present the impeachment articles against President Trump. Part of the accusations are that he withheld aid from Ukraine. Four of the seven managers voted AGAINST authorizing the aid in question.
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2020/01/24/771546/?utm_source=rsmorningbriefing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=87a4a1f2dae11109ced443942bc1

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 13:28:05   #
rumitoid
 
son of witless wrote:
That was detailed, concise, and short, so I thank you. I think you and I can have fun bashing each others brains out or in on your second and third points, and we will later, but I believe before we do that we need to discuss your First Point. If you will please allow me to lay out my thoughts, because I think you are partly right in a very broad sense, but you are wrong in this particular case.

Congress appropriated the funds for Ukraine. Okay so far. Now I submit that President Trump's delaying of the funds to Ukraine does not violate anything. He did in the end spend them. I submit the following as evidence of Proof, Precedence, etc.

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-2/35-impoundment-of-appropriated-funds.html

" In his Third Annual Message to Congress, President Jefferson established the first faint outline of what years later became a major controversy. Reporting that $50,000 in funds which Congress had appropriated for fifteen gunboats on the Mississippi remained unexpended, the President stated that a “favorable and peaceful turn of affairs on the Mississippi rendered an immediate execution of the law unnecessary. . . .” But he was not refusing to expend the money, only delaying action to obtain improved gunboats; a year later, he told Congress that the money was being spent and gunboats were being obtained.711 "
That was detailed, concise, and short, so I thank ... (show quote)


Thank you for a respectable debate: was there expected quid pro quo in Jefferson's delay to intimate or attack a political rival or just a reasonable delay, due to certain incompetence; it seems the latter. A distinctively different case.

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 13:34:18   #
rumitoid
 
lindajoy wrote:
Temporary suspending the funds approved by Congress is allowed under the impoundment clause.. Its permanently refusing funds approved that the President will find himself before the Supreme Court for their consideration of the issue..Trump suspended funding for Pakistan for not adhering to terrorist actions or something like that and was not challenged on it..

The president's ability to indefinitely reject congressionally approved spending was thus removed later as a result of your case cited. Congress holds the purse strings and the President can reject or approve.. If he rejects they have to work through it before finding is giving..

Do you know four of the managers appointed on this impeachment panel by Pels voted against funding for Ukraine??

Seven "House Managers" to present the impeachment articles against President Trump. Part of the accusations are that he withheld aid from Ukraine. Four of the seven managers voted AGAINST authorizing the aid in question.
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2020/01/24/771546/?utm_source=rsmorningbriefing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=87a4a1f2dae11109ced443942bc1
Temporary suspending the funds approved by Congres... (show quote)


Lindajoy, intention matters. Legitimate or personal matters are different under the law. It appears the delay of funds was personal, for political gain and not because there was a legitimate reason for the nation to withhold them. He wanted a leading political rival to be disparaged to help his campaign. He made that abundantly clear in his synopsis of the call to the Ukraine.

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 13:50:24   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
rumitoid wrote:
Lindajoy, intention matters. Legitimate or personal matters are different under the law. It appears the delay of funds was personal, for political gain and not because there was a legitimate reason for the nation to withhold them. He wanted a leading political rival to be disparaged to help his campaign. He made that abundantly clear in his synopsis of the call to the Ukraine.


Intentions do matter.. And that entire telephone conversation does not confirm a personal want as much as a targeted “ not good for the country in her tactics etc..arguing he was tryinh to oust a negative player To him does not rise to the level of anything tho, rumi... Politics at Its worst or finest, done all day everyday~~ Removing non players the name of the game... Trump a non player and look what he has endured for three years now~~

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 13:54:01   #
jack sequim wa Loc: Redding, CA
 
lindajoy wrote:
Intentions do matter.. And that entire telephone conversation does not confirm a personal want as much as a targeted “ not good for the country in her tactics etc..arguing he was tryinh to oust a negative player To him does not rise to the level of anything tho, rumi... Politics at Its worst or finest, done all day everyday~~ Removing non players the name of the game... Trump a non player and look what he has endured for three years now~~





Remove Trump's Name from the transcript

Then insert President Obama

Again read the transcript

What does it say?


This should be a requirement for all leftist debating the impeachment.

Jack

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 14:07:43   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
jack sequim wa wrote:
Remove Trump's Name from the transcript

Then insert President Obama

Again read the transcript

What does it say?


This should be a requirement for all leftist debating the impeachment.

Jack


Hello Jack,
Nice to see you... If BO, his name would never be there to begin with.. Although I do recall some 22 senate members wanted to initiate impeachment they couldn’t garner the support of others....

Agree on the requirement for all to read, its comprehension that gets most of them!!

| Reply
Jan 25, 2020 14:14:14   #
debeda
 
jack sequim wa wrote:
Remove Trump's Name from the transcript

Then insert President Obama

Again read the transcript

What does it say?


This should be a requirement for all leftist debating the impeachment.

Jack



| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2020 IDF International Technologies, Inc.