"We cannot allow case against Trump to be decided at the ballot box"

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • dogtag
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2009
    • 14985

    #1

    "We cannot allow case against Trump to be decided at the ballot box"

    Or words to that effect from the bug-eyed Schiff.
    Does that mean that we should allow him to choose
    our Presidents ?
    I guess. But, he's a pathological liar so how can we
    believe anything he says ?

    House Judiciary Chairman Adam Schiff said that President Trump’s alleged misconduct can’t be proven at the ballot box but only through his impeachment.
  • blackhawknj
    Senior Member
    • Aug 2011
    • 3754

    #2
    If he and his sort had their way we would have a system similar to East Germany, with a nominally multi-party system but with all power in the hands of the Politburo of the ruling party. Which would be self perpetuating.

    Comment

    • lyman
      Administrator - OFC
      • Aug 2009
      • 11296

      #3
      ^ doubt it,

      however, if such a system was possible, the other side would be just as guilty of using, or trying to use it

      Comment

      • m1ashooter
        Senior Member
        • May 2011
        • 3220

        #4
        I find his statement very concerning!
        To Error Is Human To Forgive Is Not SAC Policy

        Comment

        • dryheat
          Senior Member
          • Sep 2009
          • 10587

          #5
          So, fair elections are not possible. From what I have heard here,dead people vote, which I don't think is fair and I think is a cliche. But now, foreign countries can pull our strings depending on what they want to have happen.
          The balance of power has unalterably shifted(which sounds bad according to Schiff). So, according to Schiff some shifting is taking place(can't help it). Maybe that's good. It's more balanced. Maybe in a rough way, but politics can be rough and sometimes roughness is called for.
          Would it have been the end of life as we know it if the balance had stayed the same? It might have been a rougher road further down.
          Point being; balance is being restored(I'm hoping)and I can't wait for all this t.v. time to be relinquished back to The Dick Van Dyke show reruns.
          If I should die before I wake...great,a little more sleep.

          Comment

          • togor
            Banned
            • Nov 2009
            • 17610

            #6
            “For precisely this reason, the president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won"
            I would have put it differently, but I understand the point he is making, which is that the advantages of incumbency ought to have some sort of limit on them.

            Comment

            • Vern Humphrey
              Administrator - OFC
              • Aug 2009
              • 15875

              #7
              Originally posted by dryheat
              So, fair elections are not possible. From what I have heard here,dead people vote, which I don't think is fair and I think is a cliche. But now, foreign countries can pull our strings depending on what they want to have happen.
              The balance of power has unalterably shifted(which sounds bad according to Schiff). So, according to Schiff some shifting is taking place(can't help it). Maybe that's good. It's more balanced. Maybe in a rough way, but politics can be rough and sometimes roughness is called for.
              Would it have been the end of life as we know it if the balance had stayed the same? It might have been a rougher road further down.
              Point being; balance is being restored(I'm hoping)and I can't wait for all this t.v. time to be relinquished back to The Dick Van Dyke show reruns.
              Schiff would make a good replacement for Hitler.

              Comment

              • dogtag
                Senior Member
                • Sep 2009
                • 14985

                #8
                Originally posted by togor
                I would have put it differently, but I understand the point he is making, which is that the advantages of incumbency ought to have some sort of limit on them.
                Oh, I thought they did. Two term limit ?

                Comment

                • togor
                  Banned
                  • Nov 2009
                  • 17610

                  #9
                  Originally posted by dogtag
                  Oh, I thought they did. Two term limit ?
                  There is that, but also: we elect a President, not el Presidente, right? We want the person in the job to faithfully execute the laws not write their own through favorable DOJ-OLC white papers.
                  Last edited by togor; 01-23-2020, 12:02.

                  Comment

                  • barretcreek
                    Senior Member
                    • Sep 2013
                    • 6065

                    #10
                    Heads on Pikes, I say.

                    Comment

                    • Vern Humphrey
                      Administrator - OFC
                      • Aug 2009
                      • 15875

                      #11
                      Originally posted by dogtag
                      Oh, I thought they did. Two term limit ?
                      Wouldn't it be nice if members of Congress had the same limit?

                      Comment

                      • lyman
                        Administrator - OFC
                        • Aug 2009
                        • 11296

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Vern Humphrey
                        Wouldn't it be nice if members of Congress had the same limit?
                        yes it would

                        Comment

                        • dogtag
                          Senior Member
                          • Sep 2009
                          • 14985

                          #13
                          Originally posted by togor
                          There is that, but also: we elect a President, not el Presidente, right? We want the person in the job to faithfully execute the laws not write their own through favorable DOJ-OLC white papers.
                          El Presidente means The President. The foreign language doesn't make the title evil.

                          Comment

                          • Vern Humphrey
                            Administrator - OFC
                            • Aug 2009
                            • 15875

                            #14
                            Originally posted by dogtag
                            El Presidente means The President. The foreign language doesn't make the title evil.
                            But that's all he has. He has no facts to bolster his prejudice, just name-calling.

                            Comment

                            • lyman
                              Administrator - OFC
                              • Aug 2009
                              • 11296

                              #15
                              Originally posted by dogtag
                              El Presidente means The President. The foreign language doesn't make the title evil.
                              you and your logic!!


                              don't go getting him all triggered now

                              Comment

                              Working...