PortaJohn

Choid

Livin' Rent Free in pmclaine's Head
Supporter
PX Member
Minuteman
Feb 13, 2017
1,760
1,344
The many suspects are not dead. Yet.
Cute, but my point is there is no constitutional mechanism for replacing a president after inauguration other than impeachment, and that does not give the kind of relief being sought. The inauguration is the bright line, similar to how we don't prosecute dead suspects, as their death is the bright line.
 

Blutroop

Major Hide Member
PX Member
Minuteman
  • Oct 25, 2018
    2,169
    3,012
    Alaska
    Cute, but my point is there is no constitutional mechanism for replacing a president after inauguration other than impeachment, and that does not give the kind of relief being sought. The inauguration is the bright line, similar to how we don't prosecute dead suspects, as their death is the bright line.
    Do you think we still have our constitutional rights?
     

    theLBC

    Shiftless
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 21, 2019
    6,714
    13,312
     

    Choid

    Livin' Rent Free in pmclaine's Head
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    1,760
    1,344
    Do you think we still have our constitutional rights?
    I think many of them have been greatly diminished, and others are in danger. I think that there has been a history in the government and in the courts of making some rights more favored than others, and in the government, though not necessarily in the courts, the trend is certainly negative in this respect.
     

    thestoicmarcusaurelius

    The Real Tiger King
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 15, 2020
    675
    974
    Alabama Slammer
    Cute, but my point is there is no constitutional mechanism for replacing a president after inauguration other than impeachment, and that does not give the kind of relief being sought. The inauguration is the bright line, similar to how we don't prosecute dead suspects, as their death is the bright line.

    I won't have time until tonight to read the actual complaint in this case and I will "circle back" LOL once I do .....

    but in a well-drafted complaint it would be extremely unusual to not request alternate forms of relief even if removal of office is the central request/goal of the complaint in the lawsuit.

    I can't imagine there were no other forms of relief sought such that all forms of relief sought would be non-justiciable after inauguration ... but here I am and there are all sorts of crazy things in this world that I would think would never happen haha
     

    The King

    Back to the Range
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Sep 17, 2004
    1,402
    1,091
    Well, Thomas in his dissent states that there is no real evidence of fraud, but that his opinion is that lack of evidence of fraud is not enough to make people feel good about the election process. I don't believe that is the correct standard, but I am not going to accuse him of being traitorous, or even wrong. So I think you are assuming something that isn't in evidence. But yes, I think that the constitution certainly does not provide for removing one President for another post inauguration. I do think it provides for looking at election fraud, but the cases were brought were not good ones. That isn't a universal rejection of the concept.Than maybe you should explain the law to Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch........

    My statement was that I thought all of them likely decided in good faith, but that it is the correct decision. So I don't need to explain to Thomas, with whom I agree more than any other on the SC, where he went wrong, there are six others up there who disagreed with him. There are also countless articles, many from conservatives, arguing the same. You seem to see law as "does it agree with me" which is silly.

    I was using his example, not my own, so calm down. My addition to it was simply that we don't try dead suspects.

    I think its long past time for us to ask the government for what we as a people want, and stop apologizing about it.

    The left has wrecked our legal process in every way to meet their goals, and we take the moral high ground. The attitude that we cannot use the system the same way they have against them can, has been, and will be, the cause of our utter destruction.

    I bet the vast majority of last thoughts on the part of people who were waiting for the bullet while kneeling in front of a mass grave was that they wished they had fought harder, not that they felt good about taking the moral high ground.
     

    Choid

    Livin' Rent Free in pmclaine's Head
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    1,760
    1,344
    I think its long past time for us to ask the government for what we as a people want, and stop apologizing about it.

    The left has wrecked our legal process in every way to meet their goals, and we take the moral high ground. The attitude that we cannot use the system the same way they have against them can, has been, and will be, the cause of our utter destruction.

    I bet the vast majority of last thoughts on the part of people who were waiting for the bullet while kneeling in front of a mass grave was that they wished they had fought harder, not that they felt good about taking the moral high ground.
    This is an honest and good response. I don't think it is wrong at all, though that choice between manipulating the mechanism of government and adherence to principles is ultimately a personal one. It is distinct from what I would consider the dumb argument for all of this, which is what you often find from Pmclaine, basically saying if it benefits my position it must be in the constitution. Yours is more that if the tool of the constitution is to be used against us, then we sure as hell better use it against them too. I suspect that this position is the basis for our disagreement, and frankly for my disagreements with most of the people here. I am happy to have friends on both sides of this argument.

    Let me put this out there, though, and I have said it before. One of the difficulties with your position, for me, is that it is fundamentally non-conservative. That is to say, there is nothing in progressivism that prohibits twisting the constitution in order to achieve "progress." That is perfectly keeping with their morality. With mine, which is conservative, there is a deep tension between upholding the constitution and using it for good, even when it may not allow for that. I believe that is the main dilemma here.
     

    thestoicmarcusaurelius

    The Real Tiger King
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 15, 2020
    675
    974
    Alabama Slammer
    Yeah, just thinking about the reasoning in this case for five minutes or less, you can already smell the bullshit wafting through the air.

    This case was a clear opportunity to rule on whether the elections and electors clauses in the US Constitution is violated when a non-legislative government official changes election rules. Like, when a state legislature sets out that the deadline for mail-in votes to be valid is on election day but the judicial branch extends the deadline by three days.

    Just kicking the can down the road trying to not step in shit so they can still go to parties and social functions.
     

    The King

    Back to the Range
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Sep 17, 2004
    1,402
    1,091
    This is an honest and good response. I don't think it is wrong at all, though that choice between manipulating the mechanism of government and adherence to principles is ultimately a personal one. It is distinct from what I would consider the dumb argument for all of this, which is what you often find from Pmclaine, basically saying if it benefits my position it must be in the constitution. Yours is more that if the tool of the constitution is to be used against us, then we sure as hell better use it against them too. I suspect that this position is the basis for our disagreement, and frankly for my disagreements with most of the people here. I am happy to have friends on both sides of this argument.

    Let me put this out there, though, and I have said it before. One of the difficulties with your position, for me, is that it is fundamentally non-conservative. That is to say, there is nothing in progressivism that prohibits twisting the constitution in order to achieve "progress." That is perfectly keeping with their morality. With mine, which is conservative, there is a deep tension between upholding the constitution and using it for good, even when it may not allow for that. I believe that is the main dilemma here.
    I think the core of our argument may revolve around what we see as the next step in all of this. It won't be more Cold War style maneuvering.

    The system that is being erected now is a scaffold with nooses and trap doors. It's not some gentle pressure towards progress.

    It's exactly the same situation we would have found ourselves in if the Russians had made a working missile defense system that was going to get 99.9999999999% of the incoming nukes....and we had nothing.

    The combination of indoctrination in the media, schools, home, social media, advertising, etc etc and the possibility that our election system integrity is compromised...that is the "missile defense" system from my analogy.

    And I'm not talking about the death of our way of life through slow attrition and the evolution of a social narrative...I'm talking about bullets in necks. Men. Women. Children.

    Thats why I think its time to put the screws to the system and start pushing and pulling in ways that are definitely out of their playbook, because if we don't find some way to balance things again all that will be left is violence.

    I would rather be a manipulative dick pulling every lever of power I can get my hands on than King of a burnt out mass grave for 200 million dead Americans.
     

    Choid

    Livin' Rent Free in pmclaine's Head
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    1,760
    1,344
    too bad pence is afraid to show up at cpac. the boos would have been epic.
    Just wondering, but what did he do that deserved boos? He said the truth that our Constitution does not allow the sitting Vice President to choose the next President? Or was it something else?
     

    pmclaine

    Gunny Sergeant
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 6, 2011
    22,207
    33,919
    53
    MA
    Yeah, just thinking about the reasoning in this case for five minutes or less, you can already smell the bullshit wafting through the air.

    This case was a clear opportunity to rule on whether the elections and electors clauses in the US Constitution is violated when a non-legislative government official changes election rules. Like, when a state legislature sets out that the deadline for mail-in votes to be valid is on election day but the judicial branch extends the deadline by three days.

    Just kicking the can down the road trying to not step in shit so they can still go to parties and social functions.


    Imagine how the Dems will scream when a Republican Executive decides to sidestep the legislature and make his own electoral process rules...........
     
    • Like
    Reactions: gigamortis

    thestoicmarcusaurelius

    The Real Tiger King
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 15, 2020
    675
    974
    Alabama Slammer
    Imagine how the Dems will scream when a Republican Executive decides to sidestep the legislature and make his own electoral process rules...........

    Exactly. That’s a very key point.

    I don’t think that the case is moot but even if it is considered to be moot then the next step is whether any exceptions to the mootness doctrine apply.

    One of those exceptions is if the questions presented in the case are capable of repetition. My lizard brain opinion is that extreme mental gymnastics would have to be performed to say that these types of questions would not be capable of repetition and the act of denying the review based on mootness almost certainly guarantees the fact that this type of behavior will be repeated in the future.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: gayguns

    BullGear

    Huckleberry Dillinger
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 29, 2017
    3,997
    7,706
    60
    Hazzard County
    I'm hoping that Biden and Harris do so bad that the down ballot votes will go heavily towards the Repuklicans.

    Do you think the same model for the presidential elections can be sustained for all down ballot races?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Ravenworks

    theLBC

    Shiftless
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 21, 2019
    6,714
    13,312

    Choid

    Livin' Rent Free in pmclaine's Head
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    1,760
    1,344
    You’re not ‘pro-ANTIFA’ you are fucking retarded, like he is.
    Yes, I am sure he is fucking retarded, not just on the wrong side of many issues. That must be it, you galactic genius.