President Joe Biden

Grace T. said:
The D's have moved from just censuring the House ringleaders challenging the election results to actively seeking their expulsion. They only need a majority to do it, but will weaponize the expulsion process. A. several African American congressmen challenged the 2016 election and are currently serving in Congress...they lacked Senate support so it didn't go anywhere...but for the record this idea of challenging election results in Congress we don't like was originally a D fringe idea. B. it's undemocratic...seeking to overturn the will of the voters in those congressional districts, and C. does anybody doubt in 2022 if the Rs take the House (they only need a handful of votes) and Nancy Pelosi is still around that the Rs won't retaliate by expelling her. The Republic's election system is already creeking close to breaking and now they want to do this. We spent the spring and summer normalizing political violence and it was that normalization (as much as Trump's awful behavior) that made the takeover of the Capitol a possibility. If people feel elections are no longer working and the majority party can expel those of the minority they think have gone over the line, it's a bad combination with the normalization of political violence.
Click to expand...

Like clockwork, Ms. Appeaser is back and whatabout-ing in defense of seditionists.

Claiming this the fault of black people is especially f**ked up. Do you know why they made legitimate objections to the election results in 2016? For the exact same obstructionist, threatening dis-enfranchising racist bs that Grace Karen and her magat friends love so much and tried again this time, only it didn’t work.

Don’t let the Frau Grace of the OC fool you. All she is doing is rationalizing fraud, racism and insurrection because real Americans fight it.
 
espola said:
Dear Ms. Constitutional Lawyer --

Guess where I got this from --

"Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."
Click to expand...

Given how much she detests the 1st Amendment, are you the least bit surprised?
 
NorCalDad said:
I don't think Dems ever intended to use the objection process as a method to overturn an election result. I don't think that was the case with the repubs on 1/6. Most of the times Dems have objected is to highlight voter suppression, which is a real thing -- as opposed to this bogus narrative Trump put together. Anyway, more here:
Click to expand...

You can say the thing then with the Rs since voter fraud is also a thing. There's plenty of recorded cases of suspected dead people voting or felons or noncitizens voting. The issue for Trump was that there's no proof it was in the numbers necessary to make a difference in the elections. The Ds have the same problem with voter suppression in the 2016 elections...there's no proof voter suppression would have changed the outcome. You can't condemn the conduct of one side, without condemning the conduct of the other side, without being nakedly partisan.
 
espola said:
Dear Ms. Constitutional Lawyer --

Guess where I got this from --

"Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."
Click to expand...

You are quite correct. I was an error on the percent (see another example of graciousness which you don't tend to see from extremists on the left). It's a majority for censure.

BTW, I've never claimed to be a Constitutional Lawyer and have said specifically it's not my forte....I know the basics. Doubt we'll see the same graciousness from you.
 
Grace T. said:
You can say the thing then with the Rs since voter fraud is also a thing. There's plenty of recorded cases of suspected dead people voting or felons or noncitizens voting. The issue for Trump was that there's no proof it was in the numbers necessary to make a difference in the elections. The Ds have the same problem with voter suppression in the 2016 elections...there's no proof voter suppression would have changed the outcome. You can't condemn the conduct of one side, without condemning the conduct of the other side, without being nakedly partisan.
Click to expand...

My point is the goal is different. The Dems use it more for posturing -- and highlighting voter suppression. The repubs actually wanted the election results overturned. They're different. Both Biden and Gore when they were VPs handled these situations with grace....as did Pence on 1/6.
 
NorCalDad said:
My point is the goal is different. The Dems use it more for posturing -- and highlighting voter suppression. The repubs actually wanted the election results overturned. They're different. Both Biden and Gore when they were VPs handled these situations with grace....as did Pence on 1/6.
Click to expand...

They knew going in they didn't have the votes (and if they did have the votes or they were reasonably close the mob wouldn't have stormed the Capitol). It was all for show, which is why the President was trying to pressure the Vice-President to act unconstitionally (which would be a far more solid foundation on which to impeach, but it would require the cooperation of Pence).
 
NorCalDad said:
Looks like Trump has an unlikely supporter:

www.cnbc.com

Germany's Merkel hits out at Twitter over 'problematic' Trump ban

German Chancellor Angela Merkel blasted Twitter's decision to ban U.S. President Donald Trump.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
Click to expand...

Yes, unlikely...the fact that the Europeans and Mexicans can see the danger of this should tell us how far gone some on the left are that they can't (and yes, I hold the Trumpkins to the same standard for their thought they could get a court or congress or the VP or a coup to overturn a democratic election). Both sides in the US have gone insane.
 
Grace T. said:
the D's knives out continue. The NY Bar now has begun an inquiry to disbar Rudy Guiliani

The D's have filed impeachment articles (vote Wednesday, earliest they can be taken up by the Senate is the day before the inauguration but Ds still talking about maybe filing after first 100 days) on the grounds on inciting an insurrection (they have the obvious problem there that Trump did not command his people to engage in violence of seize the Capitol, and he told them to go home...which leads to the curious question that (if they cared) how the Ds are going to make this case).
Click to expand...
The D's are overreaching again. They are what they accuse the R's of...ie breaking norms, being dictatorial, taking away rights, etc.

If it were not so sad, I get a kick out of the jungle primary system in CA. The end result is you have races in the general where the voters get to pick between 2 Dems. Stalin is mad he didn't think of creating a system like that were you could either vote for him or vote for him. Great concept.

Restrictions on free speech? Over the past decade or more these come largely from the left...either in actual rules (campuses for instance) or proposals.

The fact that so many on the left applaud pushing conservatives off Twitter, FB, Instagram etc. Terrible precedent and thought process.

When the said conservatives say ok we go to Parler, then they attempt to de-platform Parler. Not good.

Ideas today are mainly discussed/propagated through Social media. The fact that one line of thought can just be shut down is very chilling. Youtube is taking down videos questioning the election results. And yet 10s of thousands of vids can be seen questioning 2016 and the debunked Russian angle. Etc, etc.

What the Congress is trying to do both with another impeachment and talking about kicking out members is rather shall we say authoritarian. Those very same Ds talking about this, have for the past 4 yrs talked about T being illegitimate. Remember the Bernie Bro shooting up the House softball game and targeting Rs? Steve Scalise? Rand Paul getting attacked? By the Ds own standard today, they themselves should be held to account right? But of course they are not. They passively and actively encouraged the summer riots. Today they are now all about law an order? Please.

And it goes on.

Not a good thing.
 
NorCalDad said:
Gore when they were VPs handled these situations with grace...
Click to expand...
Gore didn't handle it with grace in 2000. Far from it.

He wanted to pick and choose what counties in FL to use a certain standard (the one he liked) while leaving the rest of the counties to use a different standard as just one main example.

And even after it was decided he was not gracious in the years after. Nor was the Dem party.
 
I just find this very disturbing. Political thought is starting to be suppressed online.

"Parler, which emerged as a Twitter alternative for conservatives, officially went offline on Monday after Amazon Web Services refused to host the site any longer. Following the Capitol riots on Wednesday, Apple and Google removed Parler from their app stores, claiming the site had refused to take down posts inciting violence. On Saturday, Amazon announced it would follow suit after employees pressured the company to remove Parler.



Parler saved its data and prepared to switch to a different provider, but on Monday, Parler CEO John Matze announced the process would take longer than expected.

“I wanted to send everyone on Parler an update,” Matze posted. “WE will likely be down longer than expected. This is not due to software restrictions—we have our software and everyone’s data ready to go. Rather it’s that Amazon’s, Google’s, and Apple’s statements to the press about dropping our access has caused most of our other vendors to drop their support for us as well.”
 
NorCalDad said:
My point is the goal is different. The Dems use it more for posturing -- and highlighting voter suppression. The repubs actually wanted the election results overturned. They're different. Both Biden and Gore when they were VPs handled these situations with grace....as did Pence on 1/6.
Click to expand...

In 2016, the “black people” Karen Grace claims started this objected for the purpose of opposing racism in the election process. In 2020, ‘publicans objected for the purpose of preserving it after their years of efforts finally stopped working for the whiny losers AND ALSO because they knew that objecting would contribute to efforts to overthrow the government of the United States by their trumpanzee buddies who were storming the Capitol at that very moment. If the black people that Frau Karen Grace blames for the insurrection four years later had an angry mob on the doorstep at the time and Obama had been inciting that mob by claiming ‘publicans had stolen the election, and literally walked them up to the doorsteps, then yes it would be a similar situation. Instead, she’s just making false equivalencies in defense of the immoral, racist, magats that those black house members were opposing both then and now.

The danger of people like Frau Appraser lady is they don’t care about right and wrong. Rather, they hide behind false equivalencies and “process” to tear down the appropriate, lawful and moral use of mechanisms to preserve our democracy by pointing to instances in which the side they are defending it has used those processed improperly and immorally. But that’s what ‘publicans do, what they have always done, and will always do. Until they stop pointing to the appropriate and moral use of legal processes to justify their inappropriate immoral use of those processes, they need to pay. People like Frau Karen will never, ever admit they were wrong. Even her fake apology above minimizes the incredibly important difference between the 2/3 majority requirement, and then she turns around and trashes the people who are actually right gor pointing it out. So magaty passive aggressive. I recognized this in people like her, and co-opted their tactic, a long time ago. ScI have been saying, the only way to rid our country of their cancer is to go down into the muck where they live and stomp them there. Grace Karen will see the effectiveness of this method in short order now that the entire Dem party has learned what I learned many moons ago. While President Biden smiles and takes the high ground in public, he will let the DOJ, the NY AG, the IRS, Congress and everyone else go get these bottom feeders where they are. Happy hunting Pelosi and friends!
 
Desert Hound said:
I just find this very disturbing. Political thought is starting to be suppressed online.

"Parler, which emerged as a Twitter alternative for conservatives, officially went offline on Monday after Amazon Web Services refused to host the site any longer. Following the Capitol riots on Wednesday, Apple and Google removed Parler from their app stores, claiming the site had refused to take down posts inciting violence. On Saturday, Amazon announced it would follow suit after employees pressured the company to remove Parler.



Parler saved its data and prepared to switch to a different provider, but on Monday, Parler CEO John Matze announced the process would take longer than expected.

“I wanted to send everyone on Parler an update,” Matze posted. “WE will likely be down longer than expected. This is not due to software restrictions—we have our software and everyone’s data ready to go. Rather it’s that Amazon’s, Google’s, and Apple’s statements to the press about dropping our access has caused most of our other vendors to drop their support for us as well.”
Click to expand...

Dear Seditionists -

Welcome to the United States of America and its 1st Amendment and free market. If you wanted Parler to have a bigger, stronger presence, it would help if the ideas you value so much weren’t such s**t and actually had value. If you’ve got a problem with it, stop buying swag from Amazon and get a Nokia flip phone. Does Netscape still exist? If so, you can use their search engine instead of Google. Oh, and I hope you aren’t a golf fan, ‘cuz the PGA squeezed all the juice out of the deranged orange.

In short, you can try to s**t on the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights all you want, but good luck with that. What’s your Parler handle anyway? Asking for a friend (at the DOJ). Oh, never mind, they already know it.

Hugs and Kisses,

Nancy Pelosi

cc: Jeff Bezos
 
Grace T. said:
You are quite correct. I was an error on the percent (see another example of graciousness which you don't tend to see from extremists on the left). It's a majority for censure.

BTW, I've never claimed to be a Constitutional Lawyer and have said specifically it's not my forte....I know the basics. Doubt we'll see the same graciousness from you.
Click to expand...

You have just admitted that you don't know the basics.
 
Grace T. said:
the D's knives out continue. The NY Bar now has begun an inquiry to disbar Rudy Guiliani

The D's have filed impeachment articles (vote Wednesday, earliest they can be taken up by the Senate is the day before the inauguration but Ds still talking about maybe filing after first 100 days) on the grounds on inciting an insurrection (they have the obvious problem there that Trump did not command his people to engage in violence of seize the Capitol, and he told them to go home...which leads to the curious question that (if they cared) how the Ds are going to make this case).
Click to expand...

Still advocating for your supposed clients?
 
Grace T. said:
Yes, unlikely...the fact that the Europeans and Mexicans can see the danger of this should tell us how far gone some on the left are that they can't (and yes, I hold the Trumpkins to the same standard for their thought they could get a court or congress or the VP or a coup to overturn a democratic election). Both sides in the US have gone insane.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The idea that crimes have consequences is not an insane thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top