R.I.P. Republican Party

Teetime wrote:

dusty7 wrote:Don't act like Trump is the only president to abuse their pardon power.  I'm sure the media will use these last presidential acts as another way to smear the Trump presidency but many presidents have abused this power. Clinton pardoned his brother who was arrested a few weeks later, he also pardoned Patty Hearst, both of these people were not pardoned for undue justice but rather their social status.  Trump did pardon an 64-year-old African-American grandmother who was serving a life sentence for non-violent drug offenses when Obama overlooked her account when pardoning or commuting sentences for over 2,000 pardons/commutations for drug offenses. Obama also commuted the sentence for traitor Chelsea Manning and terrorist Lopez Rivera.

Whataboutism to the nth degree.

The self serving-pardons signed by Trump eclipse the self-serving pardons by the previous 15 Presidents added together.

Sorry to rain on your unicorn and rainbow poop parade but it is a power the president has had since 1791 and he exercised his power. All presidents have made questionable pardons and I am sure Biden will as well.  You may not agree with Trump's pardons but if we use the Constitution as our guide, he has the power listed right there in Article II.  I supposedCongress could open up another investigation and see if there is any wrong doing with issuing the pardons, but their time is probably better spent actually doing something that matters.

I guess a better question is should the president still have the power to pardon?  All presidents have used the power, some (probably most or all) have abused the power, and more will abuse it in the future, so why even have it?

dusty7 wrote:Sorry to rain on your unicorn and rainbow poop parade but it is a power the president has had since 1791 and exercised his power. You may not agree with his pardons but if we use the Constitution as our guide, he has the power listed right there in Article II.  I guess a better question is should the president still have the power to pardon?  All presidents have used the power, some (probably most or all) have abused the power, and more will abuse it in the future, so why even have it?

I agree. Let's have a Constitutional Convention.

It will be limited in scope to the pardon power and the Electoral College.

Teetime wrote:

dusty7 wrote:Sorry to rain on your unicorn and rainbow poop parade but it is a power the president has had since 1791 and exercised his power. You may not agree with his pardons but if we use the Constitution as our guide, he has the power listed right there in Article II.  I guess a better question is should the president still have the power to pardon?  All presidents have used the power, some (probably most or all) have abused the power, and more will abuse it in the future, so why even have it?

I agree. Let's have a Constitutional Convention.

It will be limited in scope to the pardon power and the Electoral College.

I agree that the Constitution needs modified to simplify how we elect our President. Popular vote, like pretty much the rest of the planet does. It won’t happen though. Two thirds of the states would have to vote for it to ratify this Constitutional change. A lot of these smaller population, conservative leaning states will never go fir it, the current system works to their advantage.

Teetime wrote:Hey, speaking of the "cancel culture"....someone, somewhere was speaking of that....

FOX news had a political analyst named Chris Stirewalt that was pretty right down the middle. He got canned this week because of the viewer blowback when he defended FOX's call that Biden had indeed won Arizona on election night (or shortly thereafter).

He was defending the network's CORRECT call of the election.

Viewers couldn't stomach being told the truth. He had to go.

Was it listed that he was "let go" due to specifically the viewer blowback? I already assume the answer to that is "no". We all know that people get let go for reasons not listed or never listed.

If that in fact is the reason he was let go (for being honest) I am certain that one of the other virtuous networks will immediately pick him up. They are always looking for right down the middle kind of reporting to help their network communicate unbiased news.

dusty7 wrote:

Teetime wrote:

dusty7 wrote:Don't act like Trump is the only president to abuse their pardon power.  I'm sure the media will use these last presidential acts as another way to smear the Trump presidency but many presidents have abused this power. Clinton pardoned his brother who was arrested a few weeks later, he also pardoned Patty Hearst, both of these people were not pardoned for undue justice but rather their social status.  Trump did pardon an 64-year-old African-American grandmother who was serving a life sentence for non-violent drug offenses when Obama overlooked her account when pardoning or commuting sentences for over 2,000 pardons/commutations for drug offenses. Obama also commuted the sentence for traitor Chelsea Manning and terrorist Lopez Rivera.

Whataboutism to the nth degree.

The self serving-pardons signed by Trump eclipse the self-serving pardons by the previous 15 Presidents added together.

Sorry to rain on your unicorn and rainbow poop parade but it is a power the president has had since 1791 and he exercised his power. All presidents have made questionable pardons and I am sure Biden will as well.  You may not agree with Trump's pardons but if we use the Constitution as our guide, he has the power listed right there in Article II.  I supposedCongress could open up another investigation and see if there is any wrong doing with issuing the pardons, but their time is probably better spent actually doing something that matters.

I guess a better question is should the president still have the power to pardon?  All presidents have used the power, some (probably most or all) have abused the power, and more will abuse it in the future, so why even have it?

I am going to go out on a limb and say that Biden will not abuse his Pardoning Power.

I honestly do not believe he will be able to complete his term as president. This saddens me for a few reasons. #1 I think he will not finish his term because of his health issues. He just seems to struggle much more than others his age. I was happy to see him do so well today during his speech and inauguration. I hope this is continued, but with how hard the job as president is, I fear it will only accelerate his appearing dementia. (Not his stuttering issue) #2 His Vice Pres is power hungry and will be very eager to step in at the slightest hint of waiver by the President. She has a far left leaning base she must appease and I don't think Biden is nearly as far left as his voters hoped. I think a large portion that voted for him are simply "never Trumpers" #3 He is our president and we need a strong leader in place to prevent America from getting taken advantage of both from a military standpoint as well as economically. Biden owes way too many people to not have to acquiesce to his donors both foreign and domestic.

I really hope he can unite the country and complete any reasonable programs for the greater good.

If he does get to the end of his term, I will be happy for him to get the opportunity to pardon Hunter. Cause that slimeball is gonna need it. (I added the last part so I could earn the red mark from some snowflake that comes with almost every post)

general maximus wrote:

Teetime wrote:Hey, speaking of the "cancel culture"....someone, somewhere was speaking of that....

FOX news had a political analyst named Chris Stirewalt that was pretty right down the middle. He got canned this week because of the viewer blowback when he defended FOX's call that Biden had indeed won Arizona on election night (or shortly thereafter).

He was defending the network's CORRECT call of the election.

Viewers couldn't stomach being told the truth. He had to go.

Was it listed that he was "let go" due to specifically the viewer blowback?   I already assume the answer to that is "no".  We all know that people get let go for reasons not listed or never listed.  

If that in fact is the reason he was let go (for being honest)   I am certain that one of the other virtuous networks will immediately pick him up.  They are always looking for right down the middle kind of reporting to help their network communicate unbiased news.  

he was one of many laid off by fox. left out that part. wonder what the motivation is

Hey, Fox is a private company. They can do whatever they wish to with their company.

Isn't that what we're using to defend Twitter's banning of conservatives?

weird - go to antifadotcom
it takes you to whitehousedotgov

any web guys on here to explain that?

Head Idiot wrote:Hey, Fox is a private company. They can do whatever they wish to with their company.

Isn't that what we're using to defend Twitter's banning of conservatives?

Pretty sure your buddy Tee brought up the Fox guy getting canned not as any sort of complaint against Fox but more as an interesting commentary of somebody getting canned from Fox for apparently running afoul of Fox viewers for reporting the truth about the election.

But, yeah, Fox is absolutely well within their rights as a private company to fire whoever they want for pretty much whatever they want as long as they don't violate discrimination related employment laws.

Regarding Twitter, are they banning ALL conservatives or just those who violate the terms of use agreement that they agreed to when they signed up?

Here's a thought for ya...as litigious as Trump is, why isn't he seeking a TRO reversing the ban or suing Twitter if he thought he stood half a chance of getting back on the platform that he uses more than any other to communicate with his followers? Hell, he stood practically zero chance of winning any of the several dozen election lawsuits he filed and that didn't stop him from going to court. Why isn't he suing Twitter into another galaxy?

Head Idiot wrote:Hey, Fox is a private company. They can do whatever they wish to with their company.

Isn't that what we're using to defend Twitter's banning of conservatives?

It absolutely is.

So we can stop all the “cancel culture” whining now?

Teetime wrote:

Head Idiot wrote:Hey, Fox is a private company. They can do whatever they wish to with their company.

Isn't that what we're using to defend Twitter's banning of conservatives?

It absolutely is.

So we can stop all the “cancel culture” whining now?

As soon as people stop moving to "cancel" every single thing that offends them. On each side.

ramblinman wrote:

Head Idiot wrote:Hey, Fox is a private company. They can do whatever they wish to with their company.

Isn't that what we're using to defend Twitter's banning of conservatives?

Pretty sure your buddy Tee brought up the Fox guy getting canned not as any sort of complaint against Fox but more as an interesting commentary of somebody getting canned from Fox for apparently running afoul of Fox viewers for reporting the truth about the election.

But, yeah, Fox is absolutely well within their rights as a private company to fire whoever they want for pretty much whatever they want as long as they don't violate discrimination related employment laws.

Regarding Twitter, are they banning ALL conservatives or just those who violate the terms of use agreement that they agreed to when they signed up?  

Here's a thought for ya...as litigious as Trump is, why isn't he seeking a TRO reversing the ban or suing Twitter if he thought he stood half a chance of getting back on the platform that he uses more than any other to communicate with his followers?  Hell, he stood practically zero chance of winning any of the several dozen election lawsuits he filed and that didn't stop him from going to court.  Why isn't he suing Twitter into another galaxy?

I don't know who they're banning as I banned myself a year ago.

Thing is, they're only banning conservatives for violating terms. If you're a Nation of Islam member you can claim white people are the devil and they should be iradicated and not a damn thing happens. Or you can claim the President's son should be locked in a cage with pedophiles and nothing happens. There is no consistency at all.

Trump leaves office with a low approval rating of 34% in the final Gallup poll, second lowest ever to Nixon. His approval among Republicans was 82%. If he comes back in 2024 he will just get beat again. The demographics in this country doesn’t work well for the GOP. They mainly consist of white people so unless they change it’s only going to get tougher to win Nation wide elections. This country definitely needs 1-2 more political parties..I don’t know if we’ll see it any time soon though.

OSUBucks wrote:Trump leaves office with a low approval rating of 34% in the final Gallup poll, second lowest ever to Nixon. His approval among Republicans was 82%. If he comes back in 2024 he will just get beat again. The demographics in this country doesn’t work well for the GOP. They mainly consist of white people so unless they change it’s only going to get tougher to win Nation wide elections. This country definitely needs 1-2 more political parties..I don’t know if we’ll see it any time soon though.

I think the Dems can rest easy that he is not going to run. There is no way the GOP would nominate him. As I have said before, he is getting exactly what he wanted, he wanted out.

The GOP will continue to control the rural areas and the Dems the urban areas. Nothing will change and there will be constant bickering over nonsensical bullshit for 4 more years.

There was a lot of optimism today, as there typically is on inauguration day, but the optimism won't last long. We are in for a ride and I really think the first major issue (other than what we already have) will involve a foreign country and it won't be pretty.

Right, he filed all those lawsuits and demanded those recounts because he wanted out. Makes perfect sense.

OSUBucks wrote:Right, he filed all those lawsuits and demanded those recounts because he wanted out. Makes perfect sense.

Yep, a job he never wanted but was too prideful to appear weak to his base. Sabotaged his own reelection but maintained support from his base. He had nothing to lose and nothing to gain from the recounts.
Look back at interviews with his first campaign workers, many say he was surprised he won and was scared to death to be president.

Wait...I thought this was all supposed to stop.

Portland rioters damage ICE building; police declare 'unlawful assembly'

https://www.foxnews.com/us/anti-biden-antifa-portland-police

dusty7 wrote:Wait...I thought this was all supposed to stop.

Said nobody.

dusty7 wrote:Well here in a few hours all of Americas problems will disappear and we will be riding Unicorns and pooping rainbows.  

Not according to good old reliable CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/21/world/biden-foreign-policy-to-do-list-intl/index.html

ramblinman wrote:

dusty7 wrote:Well here in a few hours all of Americas problems will disappear and we will be riding Unicorns and pooping rainbows.  

Not according to good old reliable CNN:  https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/21/world/biden-foreign-policy-to-do-list-intl/index.html

And running opposite of CNN's propaganda- during the last 4 years we have had no major military conflicts in the world, more auS troops are at home than in any other time in the past 20 years, there has been relative peace in the Middle East, and a slew of Middle East peace treaties.

The supposed foreign policy crises that were supposed to bring us to the brink of WW3 under Trump never happened. And all those things they're laying at Biden's feet supposedly from Trump's mismanagement? They all existed- arguably more extremely- in 2016.

One of my favorite ironies of current Democrat policies-

Domestically- America is a morally corrupt empire founded by elitist/racist/mysoginist white men filled with racist bigots who have made a mess of the world and ruined the planet.

Internationally- the world is a better place with the US leading the way as a beacon of Democracy and hope for a planet in disarray. We must take the lead on EVERYTHING or else there will be calamity.

ramblinman wrote:

dusty7 wrote:Wait...I thought this was all supposed to stop.

Said nobody.

Lot's of people said that Trump's words were the source of the violence and hatred in America. Now he has no position of power and no voice to communicate with the people and this is still happening. These are left-wingers committing domestic terrorism but every state increased security at their Capitol buildings yesterday over fear of right-wingers. I have not heard of anything happening other than what has happened in Portland and Seattle.

OSUBucks wrote:
Yeah it was an Illinois Congresswoman yesterday who crossed a line that should never be crossed, which is bringing up Hitler's name to make an argument.

See, the key is- don't mention Hitler's name (or in this legislator's quote- Stalin) , just enact legislation that uses his ideals-

http://steve463.com/2021/01/06/culturally-responsive-teaching-putting-activism-before-learning/

Head Idiot wrote:One of my favorite ironies of current Democrat policies-

Domestically- America is a morally corrupt empire founded by elitist/racist/mysoginist white men filled with racist bigots who have made a mess of the world and ruined the planet.

You are very inventive. I have never heard a Democrat say that or seen a policy statement that said that.

Teetime wrote:

Head Idiot wrote:One of my favorite ironies of current Democrat policies-

Domestically- America is a morally corrupt empire founded by elitist/racist/mysoginist white men filled with racist bigots who have made a mess of the world and ruined the planet.

You are very inventive. I have never heard a Democrat say that or seen a policy statement that said that.

You really don't listen to your people do you?