General Discussion

Fiendish Thingy

(19,023 posts)

58. So easy to leave one liner retorts

Reply to xocetaceans (Reply #42)

Thu Dec 26, 2024, 02:11 PM

Dec 26

No critical thinking required.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

91 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Drumpf isn't barred from office for *INSURRECTION* our pretense at LAW is over with. [View all] UTUSN Dec 26 OP

Make it so, America BoRaGard Dec 26 #1

Laws and The Constitution simply don't apply to him bif Dec 26 #2

Laws and consequences are for the Poors NotHardly Dec 26 #35

Pity our Attorney General didn't do anything about it for four years. sop Dec 26 #3

Pick your preferred AG- Schiff? Kirschner? Weissman? Yates? Fiendish Thingy Dec 26 #7

This message was self-deleted by its author sop Dec 26 #8

That take on the issue is ridiculous on its face. n/t xocetaceans Dec 26 #39

Explain your reasoning. Fiendish Thingy Dec 26 #57

K & R malaise Dec 26 #4

All well and good, except Republicans control congress. Fiendish Thingy Dec 26 #5

If they vote 2/3 to let it go, fine: At least we went through the motions. UTUSN Dec 26 #10

It would take a majority to pass a disqualification resolution. Fiendish Thingy Dec 26 #14

Another ridiculous take that shows that the article is fundamentally misunderstood. n/t xocetaceans Dec 26 #42

So easy to leave one liner retorts Fiendish Thingy Dec 26 #58

The problem is that Vance would slide into the spot. Trump is just a puppet. Vance is aligned with the Vinca Dec 26 #6

Chips fall where chips may. The focus is on insurrection. UTUSN Dec 26 #12

True. n/t xocetaceans Dec 26 #43

I don't know it as bad as Vance is. He's more like a normal human being. Trump is a huge problem here. Walleye Dec 26 #26

"normal" can include being so icky as to make him allergic to being associated with. UTUSN Dec 26 #48

Yes, but I don't think he has the magnitude of insanity to be capable of ruining the whole country in one term Walleye Dec 26 #50

Maybe the plan is to get him elected and then disqualify him Buckeyeblue Dec 26 #59

This would only have been helpful at the ballot stage (as in MadameButterfly Dec 26 #9

No, the ballot stage was crapped on by the SCofUS. UTUSN Dec 26 #11

I'm aware of that MadameButterfly Dec 26 #13

Would stop "it"/what now? They did the ballot part, not the insurrection part. UTUSN Dec 26 #16

Colorado tried to keep Trump off the ballot because of the insurrection. MadameButterfly Dec 26 #18

My last clarity here is: They said couldn't keep it from running or from being on the ballot. Reason for it don't matter UTUSN Dec 26 #19

I thought the US Supreme Court - UNANIMOUSLY - rejected the whole "You can declare someone an insurrectionist without Midwestern Democrat Dec 26 #15

I'm no Legal eagle. The authors in the article go through (all) of the opposing arguments. UTUSN Dec 26 #17

Did every single Confederate (or any) go through a trial specifically about insurrection? UTUSN Dec 26 #20

No Southern_gent Dec 26 #21

So, they "removed the disabilities" for THEM. Not blanket for anybody/everybody else. UTUSN Dec 26 #24

Congress never Southern_gent Dec 26 #36

I'm no scholar but I think what's in the Constitution is what it is. UTUSN Dec 26 #49

From the article: Polybius Dec 26 #22

The focus is on insurrection, not partisan distractions. I think they are just disposing of a tangent there. UTUSN Dec 26 #23

You have a point Polybius Dec 26 #34

She wouldn't iemanja Dec 26 #40

This Southern_gent Dec 26 #60

*** Adam SCHIFF, Liz CHEENEE, Marc ELIAS - am looking at *you*! ********* UTUSN Dec 26 #25

Is there anything that says... Think. Again. Dec 26 #27

The Trail of wreckage starts with Nixon not being charged with treason for his back room dealing with North Vietnam to k yourout Dec 26 #28

The polls were the ultimate court. Unfortunately, trump won. Silent Type Dec 26 #29

The issue is insurrection, period. Not ballots, polls, voting results, trials, etc. UTUSN Dec 26 #41

It'll be a long 4 years if we are going to claim insurrection should prevent trump from taking office. It won't work and Silent Type Dec 26 #54

It's not a 4 yrs' issue. The shelf life is Jan 20. It's not about jockeying for elections' advantage. UTUSN Dec 26 #62

who determines whether an insurrection took place? cadoman Dec 27 #90

Republicans and Congress are too busy rubbing their hands together over the thought of the outright bribes he will Walleye Dec 26 #30

Lets face it, the US is a lawless shithole country. nt yaesu Dec 26 #31

Some elected officials were refused to be seated in the Reconstruction Era bucolic_frolic Dec 26 #32

It's not going to happen Renew Deal Dec 26 #33

Going through the motions would be something. Later to be called profile-courage. UTUSN Dec 26 #44

A forgetable anectdote Renew Deal Dec 26 #70

If you really think about it, there should be overwhelming bipartisan support under the circumstances. Frank D. Lincoln Dec 26 #55

He should have been impeached and convicted after the insurrection Renew Deal Dec 26 #71

We must make this into an unforgettable national memory. Kid Berwyn Dec 26 #37

This is a year too late iemanja Dec 26 #38

No, did not rule on insurrection. Chips fall where chips may. UTUSN Dec 26 #45

So you are happy to throw out the will of the people iemanja Dec 26 #47

Not trolling me. The issue of insurrection is its own thing, not being enlisted by me for my voting expediency. UTUSN Dec 26 #53

The trolling is that something can be done about it iemanja Dec 26 #65

That's not even a definition of trolling, which is not the topic anyway. UTUSN Dec 26 #68

The topic isn't stopping Trump from taking office? iemanja Dec 26 #74

No, it's about insurrection. And trolling is different from flaming. UTUSN Dec 26 #76

Insurrection iemanja Dec 27 #79

"can't handle disagreement" doesn't equate with authentic engagement. S'long. UTUSN Dec 27 #81

Kettle, pot. iemanja Dec 27 #82

C'mon, let's bid each other a nice g'bye. I'll start (again) : G'bye! UTUSN Dec 27 #85

I thought we had already. iemanja Dec 27 #86

You don't let it be. UTUSN Dec 27 #87

LOL iemanja Dec 27 #88

I'd absolutely being willing to throw out the will of 49% of idiots standingtall Dec 26 #64

50% iemanja Dec 26 #66

Elected reps are not bound to uphold the will of the people or popular opinion bucolic_frolic Dec 26 #51

"Make a stand" hadEnuf Dec 26 #46

It's as if Jefferson Davis was elected president in 1868. cer7711 Dec 26 #52

People might as well move on. garland won't do a damn thing. And tRUMP being charged w/ an insurrection? SWBTATTReg Dec 26 #56

K&R Native Dec 26 #61

Garland dropped the ball! Xoan Dec 26 #63

we've been over this 1000x WarGamer Dec 26 #67

If you would cite *one* court decision saying adjudication is necessary, UTUSN Dec 26 #69

so you're advocating... WarGamer Dec 26 #72

The only thing I am advocating is in the OP. If you're not going to cite the finding you claim, UTUSN Dec 26 #73

Trump could not pass even the most basic background check Skittles Dec 26 #75

Been over. orangecrush Dec 26 #77

Can't argue with a mysterious post.ON EDIT answering orangecrush here to not kick thread: UTUSN Dec 26 #78

Pretense at law. orangecrush Dec 27 #89

He wasn't barred from running and he's not going to be barred from office Meowmee Dec 27 #80

Doesn't mean he shouldn't be. But you're correct about that. UTUSN Dec 27 #83

I didn't say it meant that, of course he should've been barred and he should be barred now Meowmee Dec 27 #84

Well, obviously it was always legal for a criminal to run for President, and then hold that office, we just never knew msfiddlestix Dec 27 #91