• 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!

Trump starting the attack on the last standing Institution that may reveal his corruption

Sand Castle

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
7,137
Reaction score
3,670
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Let's review Trump's corrupt biased gang used to forge the Trump gang cover up:
1. Bill Barr- White wash Meuller report and more

2. Mitch McConnell working hand and glove with Trump for Impeachment cover up. Along with the rest of GOP puppets.

3. Munichin hiding Trump taxes

4. New Intelligence hack appointee to cover for Trump's buddy Putin

5. Fox News Trump propaganda, and then Trump's assault on all other journalists
And now the last independent anyone or anything in this country Trump does not have controll of, the Supreme court. What a ridiculous slippery slope Trump is suggesting below.
Trump reign as the corrupt narcacisst leader must end. Save our democracy, institutions, and bring back honor and devotion to our Constitution.

President Donald Trump launched a new attack on the judicial system on Monday, targeting the highest court in the land by demanding that two liberal Supreme Court justices recuse themselves from any case involving him or his administration.

Trump claimed associate justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg couldn’t be fair to him
 

The Supreme Court can't expose anything, even if there was something to expose. It has zero investigative, or prosecutorial authority.
 
The armed forces are the final bulwark against a tyrant ruler which is why there is the oath to the Constitution as proposed successfully by Washington at the Constitution Convention he presided at.

In respect to Washington the military oath to the Constitution was the first law of the first session of the first congress. The military oath to the Constitution is the first law established in the United States. The oath was expanded subsequently to all federal employees to include all employees of the executive, the legislative, the judiciary; the state National Guard.

Trump has upended 100% historic and cultural civil-military relations in the USA. There's no stopping Putin-Trump & Rowers except the civil society loyal to the Constitution and the military joined in a unified purpose, cause and course of action because the worse Trump makes things the worse Trump gets and the worst by Trump is yet to come. Trump is his own worst enemy and so are his Rowers who egg Trump on.
 

LOL. Well, he's been investigated to death and no corruption has been found, despite the left turning over every rock they could.
 

LOL. You guys are too funny. Now you're calling for a military overthrow of the government? Really?
 

Sounds like you're advocating a military coup, which is NOT what the Founders had in mind.
 
apdst said:
Sounds like you're advocating a military coup, which is NOT what the Founders had in mind.
Click to expand...

Technically they could. If the president would be to order an illegal attack of the US military on US soil then they could
not follow that order and remove the president from office until such time that he could be impeached.

Yes however the military is the last line of defense against a rogue president.
 
Moderate Right said:
LOL. You guys are too funny. Now you're calling for a military overthrow of the government? Really?
Click to expand...

apdst said:
Sounds like you're advocating a military coup, which is NOT what the Founders had in mind.
Click to expand...

Read my post again three times then click your heels so you guys over there can recognize it's about civil-military relations joined in a unification and not one over the other or against the other. The civilian side and the military side united and unified in defense of the Constitution -- most specifically, against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Because while the military itself would never destroy democracy or the Constitution -- not ever -- the military would act together with the equally constituted civilian authority and with the civilian society it serves to restore democracy and to preserve the Constitution by defending it.

Because indeed the oath is to the three branches of our government that are separate and coequal, the balance of powers, the system of checks and balances, the election sovereignty of "We the People" and to protect against any and all foreign interposition that violates USA election sovereignty and USA national sovereignty itself.

The highest obligation of the oath takers Constitutionally, legally and morally is to be oath keepers. This is easy to present, explain and to understand and comprehend. It is so easy, direct and simple a 5th grader gets it.
 

Just like the left. If you can't overthrow the government with phony impeachments and phony scandals then you favor a military coup.
 

I disagree. The armed forces don't have the authority to remove a sitting president. In that scenario, it could only refuse to obey the order. It would be up to the elected representitives to deal with the president.
 
Moderate Right said:
Just like the left. If you can't overthrow the government with phony impeachments and phony scandals then you favor a military coup.
Click to expand...

No matter how you slice that it's still baloney. Putin-Trump & Rowers baloney. There are other words of course for it.

I support and advocate what you read in this post. The post presents Constitution Corner at the United States Military Academy West Point. Kindly read it carefully, intelligently, wisely, because it would serve everyone well to know this and to embed it prominently in one's consciousness.
















Plaque 7
Loyalty to the Constitution



The United States boldly broke with the ancient military custom of swearing loyalty to a leader. Article VI required that American Officers thereafter swear loyalty to our basic law, the Constitution

While many other nations have suffered military coups, the United States never has. Our American Code of Military Obedience requires that, should orders and the law ever conflict, our officers must obey the law. Many other nations have adopted our principle of loyalty to the basic law.

This nation must have military leaders of principle and integrity so strong that their oaths to support and defend the Constitution will unfailingly govern their actions. The purpose of the United States Military Academy is to provide such leaders of character.


Be informed by one who has visited Constitution Corner at USMA that at least 6 other statues are minutes away from Constitution Corner: Douglas MacArthur, Attack on Pearl Harbor, a different marker also honoring Douglas MacArthur; Colonel Thayer; Washington; Ulysses S. Grant; also, Superintendent's Quarters.




Constitution Island on the Hudson River, United States Military Academy, West Point, NY.
 

Still doesn't say anything about the armed forces having the authority to launch a coup. :lamo
 
Moderate Right said:
LOL. Well, he's been investigated to death and no corruption has been found, despite the left turning over every rock they could.
Click to expand...

LOL! Ah, yes, the sweet, fetid stench of denial of reality.

Plenty of corruption has been found. That twump supporters can't accept that emotional won't change that reality one iota.
 

Trump was responding to a claim by Sonya Sotomayor that her colleagues in the SCOTUS were being biased toward Trump when considering cases. Also to a comment made by RBG back during the 2016 election where she was critical of Trump. Sounds to me they are being biased against Trump.
 

Good material for a novel. You should try to get published.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
LOL! Ah, yes, the sweet, fetid stench of denial of reality.

Plenty of corruption has been found. That twump supporters can't accept that emotional won't change that reality one iota.
Click to expand...

So, just to clear this up, you are wanting the military to take over the government in a coup and throw Trump out?
 
apdst said:
Still doesn't say anything about the armed forces having the authority to launch a coup. :lamo
Click to expand...

Read again my posts in scrolling -- #8 in particular -- so you guys over there can recognize it's about civil-military relations joined in a unification and not one over the other or against the other. The civilian side and the military side united and unified in defense of the Constitution -- most specifically, against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Because while the military itself would never destroy democracy or the Constitution -- not ever -- the military would act together with the equally constituted civilian authority and with the civilian society it serves to restore democracy and to preserve the Constitution by defending it.

Is the condensed reminder to you of what I said in the posts in scrolling that don't register with the Putin-Trump Rowers who are busily Making America Russia Instead.
 
DamnYankee said:
Good material for a novel. You should try to get published.
Click to expand...

The poster you addressed can well speak for himself however I'd take the liberty to reply to you by suggesting a couple of novels that are related:

The Pelican Brief by Grisham.
Seven Days in May by Knebel (1962).


Night of Camp David by Knebel (1965)

"What would happen if the president of the U.S.A. went stark-raving mad?" Back by popular demand, The New York Times calls the 1965 bestselling political thriller by the author of Seven Days in May, "A little too plausible for comfort."


There are more already by a variety of authors if anyone might be interested.
 
apdst said:
The Supreme Court can't expose anything, even if there was something to expose. It has zero investigative, or prosecutorial authority.
Click to expand...

Then why does Trump want two supreme court judges to recuse themselves from all cases about him
 

We would not be having this discussion if Mitchy boy and Lindsay recused themselves from the Senate Impeachment trial. Each of them were not only biased but they were being biased about their relationship with Trump and the trial. If recused the votes may have differed and The Truth about Trumps corruption would have been revealed.
 
Last edited:

The Supreme court makes their decisions based on the law and the constitution. Unlike The TRump devotion world everything and everybody doesn't revolve around Donald.
 
Moderate Right said:
LOL. Well, he's been investigated to death and no corruption has been found, despite the left turning over every rock they could.
Click to expand...

No corruption has been found? You mean the Republicans have ignored all of the corruption that's been found.
 
DamnYankee said:
Good material for a novel. You should try to get published.
Click to expand...

Isn't a novel fiction? What I wrote is definetly non-fiction. I would call it a mix between a biography and reality horror about Trump and his Presidency
 
Moderate Right said:
LOL. Well, he's been investigated to death and no corruption has been found, despite the left turning over every rock they could.
Click to expand...

I think you have been a little misinformed.

The obstruction charges on the Mueller report are not an acquittal. They are just waiting for him to leave the whitehouse to land him in jail.

And his acquittal in the impeachment did not mean he was innocent. Just ask the senators:


"Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office."
-Marco Rubio (R-FL)

“It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation. But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate."
-Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…