Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Also edited to add:
You are building a very solid overreaction post here. I'll bet MSNBC us coming up with even better stuff at the moment, but at the very least you deserve an honorable mention.
Are presidents above the law?
- Thread starter The Thriller
- Start date
You are building a very solid overreaction post here. I'll bet MSNBC us coming up with even better stuff at the moment, but at the very least you deserve an honorable mention.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Yeah pretty much. They were pretty standard Mitt Romney supporting Republicans not that long ago, and I think they are far from alone in their transformation into something much weirder.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Kindly **** off if this is what you are bringing to the discussion. Just as Rome wasn't built in a day it, it didn't fall in one either. Erosion of institutions and democratic norms take place a little bit at a time. All it takes is complacency.
Americans who claim to believe in the constitution and rule of law, not man, should be raising holy hell right now. I have little doubt where the oft invoked founding fathers would stand on this and would rather be guilty of over reacting to the specter of constitutional crisis, than wake up one day years from now and wonder what the hell happened.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
To me it sounds crazily similar (although taken to a new level) to the reaction that conservatives had to the Obama and Clinton presidencies. Back then it was the right wingers who saw every new action as a constitutional crisis. I believe that the overreaction of the left is helping Trump much more than it is hurting him at this point.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
There's a rather obvious difference this time around and I'm sure if you think really hard about it you might figure it out.
Red
Well-Known Member
I do believe our democratic institutions will survive this bs. Donald Trump will not get away with placing himself above and outside the rule of law. But it is true that he can find support for his authoritarian tendencies among his followers, particularly among white Americans who are fearful of marginalized elements of American society. And Trump understands this. It's why he has been hard line enough on immigration to enact a policy that separates young children from their parents if caught entering the United States illegally, even if those parents are seeking asylum. It's why he has no problem placing those children in cages in detention facilities. It's behind all his racial dog whistles, and the uber nationalism he evokes in insisting football players stand for the album. It's telling that, in place of honoring the Eagles at the White House, he wants to hold a "special ceremony" that will include "singing loudly" the national anthem.
This nationalistic emphasis has been in the playbook of would be authoritarian rulers forever. It's no different with this authoritarian. Apart from its legal strategy, spelling out that he is above and outside the rule of law will find support among intolerant white people, who when fearful that democracy will benefit marginalized people, will abandon their commitment to democracy. Timely that this study was released just now, coincident with Trump's most overt declaration of authoritarian rule:
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...tolerance-support-authoritarianism-ncna877886
This is why citizens need be vigilant, the very possibility that we can wake up one day and find our democratic institutions have been incrementally eroded to the point where the president has emerged above the law, in direct violation of the Constitution and separation of powers. Can't happen here? Sorry, but democracy dies in darkness. Authoritarians always claim the press is the enemy of the people. The "fake media" as Trump calls them. This is creeping authoritarianism trying to establish itself in our nation. This is why the media is vigilant, and why a free press is necessary, and why citizens must be equally vigilant.
It's surreal that his lawyers send Mueller a memo that admits Trump dictated his son's initial misleading statement about the purpose of the meeting with Russians in Trump tower. How can Mueller, with that admission, not want to know what Trump really knew about that meeting, and when he knew it? Mueller cannot not want to question Trump on those very questions. Hence Trump lawyers argue that it is impossible for a president to obstruct justice, and hence Trump argues that he can even pardon himself. These are arguments rooted in desperation. They reflect just how fearful Trump's lawyers are of Mueller actually issuing a grand jury suponena for Trump to take the stand and answer these questions hanging over Trump.
I believe Mueller has the goods on a man who just cannot stop acting guilty. Some of us are awake. Some of us are not sleepwalking through that portion of history that is ours to live. Some of us are vigilant citizens.
Well, his son, son-in-law, and campaign manager met with Russians directly linked to Putin, in order to get information on HRC, in order to win the US presidential election. So I guess you can still call it an "accusation." For now.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
The obvious thing is that the liberals are on the other side of the equation. I agree that Trump is a pig, but in many ways that is merely a response to the Dems. They crucified Bush for being a simpleton, even though he was an intelligent guy with clear but simple values. They beat McCain by rendering his hero status meaningless. They clobbered Romney because he was too much of a high-road guy to get down in the mud and wrestle. So along comes Trump. The guy is a slob who thrives on insults and chaos. But he gets **** done, and despite the many early reservations on the right (I still don't believe he's driven by any core principles other than his desire to win) he has governed in a mostly conservative way.
The whole Trump thing is so crazy that I can't put words to it, but one of the most bizarre parts of all is that he is deriving increasing power from the way that his political enemies become unhinged. If the opposition would stick to the facts then Trump might well hang himself in the eyes of his biggest supporters, but if the left is in total whackadoodle mode trying to take him down they will end up in the situation they are currently facing where a lot of people frequently find themselves supporting Trump despite themselves.
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
I have a very good friend who was the only democrat I knew growing up in conservative UTC. He voted for Trump.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Nah, the difference is that Trump is actually guilty of the things we on the left are raising a ruckus about. During the Obama years entire news cycles were dominated by things like the president eating Arugula and liking Dijon mustard, and *gasp* wearing a tan suit. Nowadays is a nonstop cavalcade of criminal indictments sexual harassment scandal and corruption. Plus, you know, Obama never said he could Pardon himself.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Funny stuff. It's amazing how blind you are to the similarities, and it's telling that you can't bring yourself to say what Trump actually said about a pardon. I can understand why, though. It's simply not as juicy as what you want to pretend that he said.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Just to clarify, if Trump had shot James Comey in the Oval Office for not getting on his hands and knees to worship him, the only way to bring Trump to justice would be to rely on the Republican controlled Congress to impeach him, correct? Otherwise, he couldn't be prosecuted for the crime and be brought to justice, right?
This is what's scary to me:
a) Trump appears to be protected by a magical presidential shield. The only way to break this shield is to impeach and indict. But if Republicans are too partisan to hold their own to justice, then what recourse do we have?
b) If he's impeached but is allowed to pardon himself of the crimes, then he loses out on the presidency but he cannot be brought to justice because of the pardon.
What Trump and his Republican allies in Congress are creating is a Constitutional Crisis. One that will (not could) but most definitely will lead to certain dictatorship.
If the President cannot be brought to justice unless he's impeached... If the president cannot even be subpoenaed... Then how can he be brought to justice? And even if the wheels of justice get moving, if he can merely pardon himself or his co-consirators, then how can justice work?
My biggest fear is currently playing out:
1. Republicans are circling the wagons. Both politically and through their propaganda machine (Fox News).
2. Wild claims are being made by his team to already float the ideas of a dictatorship (president is above the law).
3. Trump is pardoning people left and right which prevents Mueller from using potential witnesses to enact justice. If you are a co-conspirator, why work with Mueller and cut a deal if you know that if you stay loyal to Trump he will pardon you anyway? Manaford, Gates, Page, Flynn, etc have zero incentive to work with Mueller as long as Trump can pardon them.
Then what?
Last edited:
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
I heard Trump shot JFK and his forefathers assassinated Lincoln. Reagan was lucky to live Trumps terror.
That can be a double-edged sword. My understanding is that if you are pardoned for action A, you can no longer refuse to testify about action A (self-incrimination does not apply); refusal would be a contempt of court violation(?) and lying would be perjury. So, once pardoned, your self-interest is to tell the truth, no matter whom it hurts.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
H
He literally tweeted 'I have absolute right to pardon myself,' that he followed it up with 'but why would I use it' hardly inspires confidence. Please do point me to where Obama claimed he has similar 'rights.'
Getting Traded
Banned
Wikileaks had the goods on Hillary before the DNC convention but the media refused to report it. And then the Dems blamed the Russians, and then they blamed Trump consorting with the Russians -- the truth is the Dems brought on their own demise by their blatant corruption and the corruption of HRC, who was in control of the DNC. This is not to say that Trump is any better, but he certainly is not the reason Clinton lost.
The only way to bring him to justice WHILE HE IS IN OFFICE would be that, yes. But of course even if Congress refused to impeach for that (which, even given my pretty low opinion of Congress, I have a hard time believing), he could still be prosecuted for the murder after he gets replaced by the next president.
There's no way he can pardon himself of crimes. Just not happening, would never survive Supreme Court challenge.
Again, as I said in my initial post, he certainly can be subpoenaed. That one has already been tested by the Supreme Court, on two occasions if I recall correctly. And as I said then, and reiterated in this post, I think there's no possible way he is allowed to pardon himself. [/QUOTE]
I don't think the Republic is as shaky as you fear, even though we both share the same low opinion of Trump.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure. This type of law isn't very clear to me.
I do suspect that Trump's incessant pardoning is a message to those whom Mueller is pressuring to flip. Why else would Trump be (abusing) pardon power?
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
This is one of the best posts of the entire thread.
Have you ever read the book by Erich Fromm, "Escape from Freedom"?
Basically, he writes about what you just posted. Every era features new freedoms, new economic opportunities, and a displaced group of people either socially or economically. He goes back to the end of the middle ages and how capitalism sprouted throughout western Europe. Breaking from the catholic dogma and feudal system found new freedom and opportunities either socially or economically. Many swam some sank. Those who sank, often found became scared and cynical at the new freedoms presented and desired "an escape." The escape was found in authoritarian religions and/or governments. This cycle repeated during the industrial revolution too.
Where Erich really digs deep is in the Weimar Republic and how it met its demise with the rise of Nazism. Hitler and the Nazi ideology gave security and identity to those displaced in Germany and weary of the roller coaster of the Weimar Republic. Instead of "dealing with" democracy, enough displaced people in German society threw it away in favor of one man who could "fix everything." Enough people placed security as a higher priority than freedom and it led to dictatorship. The book was published in 1942 so it has an interesting perspective since the Nazi regime was still in power at its publishing.
I see the very same thing playing out right now in America. Most Trumpers aren't benefiting from his presidency. His tax cut was a complete joke. As shown last year, Trumpers would be the biggest losers if Obamacare had been repealed and Trumpcare passed. But they don't give a ****. All Trumpers care about is the feeling of "safety" and being able to troll liberals. "Who cares if the tax cut doesn't help me as long as I can stick it to the liberals, women, and brown people!"
I'm really not sure how we recover from this if we aren't permitted to get rid of Trump. He needs to be impeached, indicted, and thrown into prison. Along with his criminal cartel. They all need to go.