President Trump grants pardon to former Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona. [W:1067]

[Verax]

Sorry, I'm fairly distracted. I meant that young people are extremely apathetic in regards to voting.

Bernie's people were anything but apathetic. A lot of them didn't vote for Hillary because they couldn't bring themselves to do it, I don't blame them.

 

[PLizzy]

Whats a MAGA?

MAGA = Make America Great Again.

 

[Parrish]

The only reaction by a Senator that will mean anything to me will be in the form of an official censure.

It's about to move past censure.

 

[ajn678]

Bernie's people were anything but apathetic. A lot of them didn't vote for Hillary because they couldn't bring themselves to do it, I don't blame them.

So they let someone they consider worse into office? Very moral of them. :lamo:lamo

You keep failing.

 

[ajn678]

It's about to move past censure.

More delusion from the loony bin.

 

[Bum]

I don't know why this is coming as a surprise to anyone; In Phoenix, Trump stated ""I'll make a prediction. I think he's going to be just fine".

The writing was already on the wall.

 

[FastPace]

2) His willingness to pardon one of his staunchest supporters infers a willingness to grant other pardons, such as for friends, family and associates connected with the Russia investigation. The controversy of pardoning Arpaio will not dissuade him from granting other controversial pardons.

Although a disgusting move, Arpaio is relatively small potatoes in the grand scheme of things, but the important point is that it gets people used to the exercise of pardoning, and leads the way for possible pardons of Flynn, Manafort, and Kushner.

Good.

It's not enough... every single anti-Russian member of Congress should be hanging by their necks, like Christmas ornaments, under a bridge or from a tree.

He could payroll me to take an aluminum bat to their knee caps as they swing.

 

[Fishking]

Actually, it means exactly that. Sorry.

No, it's a forgiveness of the offense. That's literally what the word pardon means. Look it up.

Again, he was convicted, which is different than admission of guilt.

This isn't a referendum on the President's power to pardon.

Of course it is. You're just poopy because of who did it and the reason, instead of standing on consistent principle. That makes you quite disingenuous.

 

[lurchadams]

President Trump grants pardon to former Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona - ABC News

Since he has shown his willingness to pardon Arpaio, two things should be clear:

1) Acceptance of a pardon is acceptance of guilt. Therefore, Arpaio is guilty of the crime he was convicted of.
2) His willingness to pardon one of his staunchest supporters infers a willingness to grant other pardons, such as for friends, family and associates connected with the Russia investigation. The controversy of pardoning Arpaio will not dissuade him from granting other controversial pardons.

Although a disgusting move, Arpaio is relatively small potatoes in the grand scheme of things, but the important point is that it gets people used to the exercise of pardoning, and leads the way for possible pardons of Flynn, Manafort, and Kushner.

Well, you know... ignorant, racist birthers need to stick together. Another shout out to racists everywhere.

 

[Parrish]

I, 45, do solemnly swear to preserve, defend, and protect the Constitution of the US" except for the 4th Am.

 

[Parrish]

More delusion from the loony bin.

Aren't you sweet!

 

[Cardinal]

It's about to move past censure.

You are setting yourself up for enormous disappointment. How can it move past censure if we're not even at censure? The number of Republicans that have condemned Trump by name is eight.

These Republicans are denouncing Trump by name - CNNPolitics

But what happens if you ask Republicans to make their condemnations official?

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, was joined by Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman of New Jersey and Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington. Nadler said he plans to introduce the resolution to censure and formally condemn Trump on Friday, August 18 during the House’s next in pro forma sessions.

Nadler confirmed on August 18 that he has 79 cosponsors for the censure. No Republican Representative joined them.

Trump Censure Resolution: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

And there is as yet no censure movement in the Senate (that I'm aware of).

When there is an actual Congressional censure of the President, we can revisit the discussion of impeachment.

 

[Kobie]

Good.

It's not enough... every single anti-Russian member of Congress should be hanging by their necks, like Christmas ornaments, under a bridge or from a tree.

He could payroll me to take an aluminum bat to their knee caps as they swing.

da hell?

 

[Verax]

So they let someone they consider worse into office? Very moral of them. :lamo:lamo

You keep failing.

Yeah, if you vote a terrible candidate into office you just gave the party a greenlight to do it again next election. Now the Democrats are under pressure to field a better candidate in 2020. It may not happen but it's better than allowing Hillary and the DNC to get away with what they did or else they would be under zero pressure.

Look at what you guys did. You fielded a candidate infinitely worse than Hillary and you're still blindly supporting them even though they are a worldwide joke. Look how it backfired. He is destroying the Republican party by exposing them and their base as deplorables.

 

[Cardinal]

Again, he was convicted, which is different than admission of guilt.

You're not following any of this. He was convicted AND to accept a pardon is an acceptance of guilt. You need to go study up on this and return back to the discussion when you're informed.

Of course it is.

Nope. Pardons weren't a problem until Trump made it a problem. The problem isn't pardons, it's Trump's approach to using pardons.

 

[Parrish]

Quote Originally Posted by Parrish View Post

It's about to move past censure.
You are setting yourself up for enormous disappointment. How can it move past censure if we're not even at censure? The number of Republicans that have condemned Trump by name is eight.

These Republicans are denouncing Trump by name - CNNPolitics

But what happens if you ask Republicans to make their condemnations official?





And there is as yet no censure movement in the Senate (that I'm aware of).

When there is an actual Congressional censure of the President, we can revisit the discussion of impeachment.

Red Bird, I think it's starting to come to a head. If 45 has 45 votes in the Senate he'd be doing great.

 

[Cardinal]

da hell?

Something about this topic really brought out the crazy in trump supporters. More so than usual.

 

[Fishking]

You're not following any of this. He was convicted AND to accept a pardon is an acceptance of guilt. You need to go study up on this and return back to the discussion when you're informed.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/10/29/1588335/-Pardoning-Hillary-Clinton-Does-Not-Imply-Guilt

Nope. Pardons weren't a problem until Trump made it a problem. The problem isn't pardons, it's Trump's approach to using pardons.

Of course they were, and always have been. Again, only the hypocritical would hold such an obviously unprincipled position.

 

[JasperL]

Trump just settled the matter when it should be settled. Why wait around in limbo till the supreme court seconds
the 9th circuit court decision.

If Trump was confident in CA9 and the USSC overturning the decision, then let the justice system work. Instead he decided to short circuit the justice system to intervene on behalf of a big supporter, turned the pardon into the highlight of a f'ing campaign stop, and in the process giving the middle finger to the judiciary AND your own DOJ and therefore indicating a contempt for the concept that we're a nation of laws, not of men, is a bit.....unseemly for the POTUS?

And seriously, to announce this as Texas is about to get hit with the worst hurricane to hit that state in over 50 years is just another indication of what an incompetent, narcissistic asshole the guy is deep at his core.

 

[Cardinal]

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/10/29/1588335/-Pardoning-Hillary-Clinton-Does-Not-Imply-Guilt

Of course they were, and always have been. Again, only the hypocritical would hold such an obviously unprincipled position.

Burdick v. United States.

"A grand jury was investigating whether any Treasury Department employee was leaking information to the press. George Burdick, city editor of the New York Tribune, took the fifth and refused to reveal the source of his information. He was handed a pardon by President Woodrow Wilson but he refused to accept it or testify. He was fined $500 and jailed until he complied. The Supreme Court ruled that Burdick did not have to testify because he had the right to reject the pardon. Thus, the government did not have the ability to cause him to lose his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination through the maneuver of granting him a pardon. The Court declined to answer the question of whether the pardoning power may be exercised before conviction."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States

The point is that by accepting the pardon he was accepting the guilt, and therefore he was required to testify. The reason he rejected the pardon is so that he didn't have to take on the guilt of the offense, and could therefore continue to claim fifth amendment rights.

Also, dailykos is not a good source for news. You deserve better than that.

 

[lurchadams]

Good. I hope he pisses you off more. Your barely entertaining right now. I suggest more screaming. That will help. Maybe beat your head against a wall or two, and make it mushy. I am sure that will be good to. Wait. Wait... can you jump, like through rings of fire? That would be like totally cool. Its fun watching you lose your mind. Its even more fun watching you talk about impeachment likes its actually a serious thing. The best thing about Trump is when he flips off the left. The sad part is, you had a chance to influence him and get YOUR agenda through. I am so glad you lost your collective minds. I really am. He would have made deals with you so he could have things to sign. Its not like he cares what he signs. But you flipped him off and kicked him around. Now you have a shark that WANTS to eat you, is looking to eat you. He is pissing on your heads and telling you its raining right now and he is gona keep doing it, and I doubt he is going to bore of it. You HAD a friend in the white house, now have a shark that wants to bite you in the ass every single time he can. I am so happy you are so short sighted. So keep losing your mind its good entertainment.

So you don't care that Trump has turned the country into an international laughingstock. You're just a liberal hater and are glad that the American people are upset at what's going on in the White House.

How Un-American of you.

 

[ajn678]

Yeah, if you vote a terrible candidate into office you just gave the party a greenlight to do it again next election. Now the Democrats are under pressure to field a better candidate in 2020. It may not happen but it's better than allowing Hillary and the DNC to get away with what they did or else they would be under zero pressure.

Look at what you guys did. You fielded a candidate infinitely worse than Hillary and you're still blindly supporting them even though they are a worldwide joke. Look how it backfired. He is destroying the Republican party by exposing them and their base as deplorables.

I'm not a "Trumpster" but try again.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Good.

It's not enough... every single anti-Russian member of Congress should be hanging by their necks, like Christmas ornaments, under a bridge or from a tree.

He could payroll me to take an aluminum bat to their knee caps as they swing.

Well aren't you just swell.

 

[Nilly]

Yeah, if you vote a terrible candidate into office you just gave the party a greenlight to do it again next election. Now the Democrats are under pressure to field a better candidate in 2020. It may not happen but it's better than allowing Hillary and the DNC to get away with what they did or else they would be under zero pressure.

Look at what you guys did. You fielded a candidate infinitely worse than Hillary and you're still blindly supporting them even though they are a worldwide joke. Look how it backfired. He is destroying the Republican party by exposing them and their base as deplorables.

All the while, under President Trump, members of various minority religions, gender identities and races suffer. Whilst the primarily white male Bernie base, that had little to fear from a Trump presidency anyway, sit happily in their parents basements.

Good job Bernie bros :thumbs:

 

[JasperL]

Why the anti-gay slur?

If Trump screws the middle class on tax cuts, I'll switch sides to the weenie brigade. Many others will as well.

Of course if Trump gets thru big tax cuts for the middle class, liberals will still whine about it.

Here's how much Trump cares: this week he announced his WH won't even present a tax proposal as a blueprint, which means he's deferring to Ryan and McConnell, both Koch suckers at their core, and will sign whatever POS tax "reform" can get through Congress. Bannon, who reportedly supported an increase in the top rate to 44% to fund those middle class tax cuts, got the "YOU'RE FIRED" treatment, and what's left on economic matters are a bunch of plutocrats and Goldman Sachs alums.

This shouldn't be a surprise. He's completely ignorant of and uninterested in policy or anyone else but DJT, Jr. and I'll assume his immediate family. That's the man he's been for every one of his 71 years, and nothing is going to change him now. And if you didn't know this after the healthcare process, you'll soon learn it with "tax reform." He ran on a pledge to insure everyone, and no cuts to Medicaid, and has been whining for weeks now that McConnell couldn't pass a bill that cut nearly a $trillion from Medicaid and reduced those insured by 20 million or so. He didn't care, not even a little.