• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Any bets?

Antiwar said:
One part of the 2A which is in one section of the US Constitution says, "... the right to bear arms shall not be infringed" yet there are and always have been infringements.

The Constitution doesn't do anything but set there decaying
Click to expand...
Pathetic deflection attempt noted, and dismissed. As is your ridiculous comment on the Constitution.
 
Antiwar said:
Have you noticed how Trump's behaviors have drastically changed? Do you think that's because he changed? "They" have him controlled. He's been in some kind of custody since 1/6/21. The only thing that doesn't make sense is that he was flown to see the incomplete wall that Mexico didn't pay for.
Click to expand...
.... ▫️What? ..... What do you mean "some kind of custody?
 
craig said:
But are pardon powers suspended while President has been impeached but not yet found guilty?
Click to expand...
As written, it appears that the coauthors are saying that Congress has to take action to strip away the president’s power to pardon those who took part in the crimes he incited.

Further, and of interest, they also assert that the court’s would have the authority to choose to recognize, or ignore, such pardons granted insurrection participants.

If Congress does have that authority, they should already have acted on it, IMO, which makes me wonder why they haven’t.
 
poweRob said:
I prefer trebuchet. Much more dramatic.
Click to expand...

Okay, how about this? We attach her to a catapult attached to a timer, and then we put the catapult on a trebuchet, and then we launch the trebuchet in the general direction of Japan, and then the catapult launches her spinning toward Mars?

I think we're close.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Pathetic deflection attempt noted, and dismissed. As is your ridiculous comment on the Constitution.
Click to expand...
Does Trump still have access to the nuclear football? Even if he does, would others in the chain of command blindly follow an order from the chief to launch nuclear weapons?

Would you take orders from (who you believe to be) the current chief?
 
Antiwar said:
Trump is not free to do as he pleases.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. Trump has the same rights as you or I. Except I haven't lost my privilege to tweet like Donald has. Breaking the rules has consequences. Donald believed he was above those consequences. But, much to his chagrin, now he has found that he was not. Once he has left office, he may also find that he's not above the law....
 
RAMOSS said:
The difference is the his children are involved in the actions that caused him to be impeached.
Click to expand...
Could be. How would his pardon of them be stopped, though?
 
[QUOTE
Antiwar said:
Does Trump still have access to the nuclear football? Even if he does, would others in the chain of command blindly follow an order from the chief to launch nuclear weapons?

Would you take orders from (who you believe to be) the current chief?
Click to expand...
Yes, he does, and no, others in the chain of command wouldn’t/won’t ever blindly follow any order.

Are you familiar with the term “unlawful order”? You should be if you went through boot camp.
 
MaryP said:
Could be. How would his pardon of them be stopped, though?
Click to expand...
because the fact that it has to do with his impeachment would make the pardon invalid
 
RaleBulgarian said:
[QUOTE

Yes, he does, and no, others in the chain of command wouldn’t/won’t ever blindly follow any order.

Are you familiar with the term “unlawful order”? You should be if you went through boot camp.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm familiar with unlawful orders.
---


You seem to think everything is done by the book (or Constitution) and that the president has supreme powers instead of the president being one part of a committee and chain of command.

The current president done ****ed up real good this time. His nose is against the chalkboard. He has no credibility, politically, finally.

As was said by another: Time will tell.
 
Antiwar said:
Yes, I'm familiar with unlawful orders.
---


You seem to think everything is done by the book (or Constitution) and that the president has supreme powers instead of the president being one part of a committee and chain of command.

The current president done ****ed up real good this time. His nose is against the chalkboard. He has no credibility, politically, finally.

As was said by another: Time will tell.
Click to expand...
And you apparently don’t recognize the point in a debate when you’ve already embarrassed yourself sufficiently.
 
calamity said:
We did. That's why impeachment for insurrection was a good thing. He cannot pardon anyone associated with this insurrection.
Click to expand...
There is that. Which begs the question what this thread is all about.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
And you apparently don’t recognize the point in a debate when you’ve already embarrassed yourself sufficiently.
Click to expand...
If this were a debate, then you would be more likely to address some of my questions. I suspect you're in combat mode with me, besides not really being able to see things other than your way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom