OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 14, 2019 14:25:23 GMT -5
Their effort to keep Trump from being elected failed, So now We find they were trying to push him out!!
|
|
kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,798 
|
Post by kadee79 on Feb 14, 2019 14:37:08 GMT -5
Must be a slow news day, this was in the news some time back.  |
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 14, 2019 14:42:47 GMT -5
CNN report is 4 hours old,, Time must fly for you.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680 
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 14, 2019 14:44:57 GMT -5
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,306
|
Post by swamp on Feb 14, 2019 15:09:57 GMT -5
Why would it be treasonous to speak to the president when you really have concerns about his mental health and capacity to do the job?
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 14, 2019 15:16:18 GMT -5
McCabe made sure that the Russian Investigation would continue,, McCabe was tied to the Steele Dossier early on. |
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 14, 2019 15:19:10 GMT -5
Yea, wearing a wire when having a confidential conversation with the President of the U.S. in a top secret area,, what could possible be wrong there??
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,856
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 14, 2019 16:17:39 GMT -5
Yea, wearing a wire when having a confidential conversation with the President of the U.S. in a top secret area,, what could possible be wrong there?? Wearing a wire when talking to someone who has shown to be untrustworthy and prone to lying?
I'd call that good common sense.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,035
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 14, 2019 21:08:03 GMT -5
and maybe Trump is.
how about this for an idea: how about we let people who know about this stuff figure it out, and stop speculating?
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 14, 2019 22:15:43 GMT -5
and maybe Trump is.
how about this for an idea: how about we let people who know about this stuff figure it out, and stop speculating?
DJ, if We all stop speculating, there will be no posting!  |
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 14, 2019 22:25:49 GMT -5
Consider USC 2384.Seditious Conspiracy:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, …they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Did McCabe and Rosenstein do this?
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Feb 15, 2019 8:02:10 GMT -5
Yea, wearing a wire when having a confidential conversation with the President of the U.S. in a top secret area,, what could possible be wrong there?? I don’t think Trump understands the definition of “confidential information” or top secret for thta matter so what’s the difference if he gets recorded? |
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 15, 2019 10:15:41 GMT -5
Can anyone set me straight on the clause the FBI and Justice Department was going to use twhere the Cabinet would set the removal of the President into motion?
I always thought it had to bcome from the Cabinet members, rather than the Justice department. If it comes from the Justice department or the FBI, is this considered treason?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,306
|
Post by swamp on Feb 15, 2019 10:17:36 GMT -5
Consider USC 2384.Seditious Conspiracy:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, …they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Did McCabe and Rosenstein do this?
No. Trump is not the government. There is a constitutional process to remove an unfit president. If they removed him, Pence would be president. The government is not destroyed. |
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 15, 2019 10:17:54 GMT -5
Why would it be treasonous to speak to the president when you really have concerns about his mental health and capacity to do the job? I am pretty sure the the V.P. and Presidential Cabinet members must be the body that comes up with the thought of Presidential impairment. The Justice department and FBI are not allowed to be the original government agency to broach the subject. |
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,306
|
Post by swamp on Feb 15, 2019 10:19:01 GMT -5
Why would it be treasonous to speak to the president when you really have concerns about his mental health and capacity to do the job? I am pretty sure the the V.P. and Presidential Cabinet members must be the body that comes up with the thought of Presidential impairment. The Justice department and FBI are not allowed to be the original government agency to broach the subject. Why not? The justice dept. is allowed to voice their concerns about the ability of the president to do his job. |
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 15, 2019 10:21:41 GMT -5
I am pretty sure the the V.P. and Presidential Cabinet members must be the body that comes up with the thought of Presidential impairment. The Justice department and FBI are not allowed to be the original government agency to broach the subject. Why not? The justice dept. is allowed to voice their concerns about the ability of the president to do his job. This is why I asked the question in post 14. Do not really know the correct Constitutional procedure on the issue. |
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,196
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Feb 15, 2019 10:21:50 GMT -5
I wouldn't think it is treason for the judicial branch to discuss the efficacy of the presidency. The three branches are supposed to check and balance each other according to the constitution. That means the judicial branch gets to have a voice regarding the presidency as much as the other two do. I'm assuming discussion of using the 25th amendment would need to involve people from all three branches. I have no clue which one would have to get the ball rolling though I'm assuming that'd be Congress. |
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 15, 2019 10:24:57 GMT -5
I wouldn't think it is treason for the judicial branch to discuss the efficacy of the presidency. The three branches are supposed to check and balance each other according to the constitution. I'm assuming discussion of using the 25th amendment would need to involve people from all three branches. I have no clue which one would have to get the ball rolling I'm assuming that'd be Congress. The Judicial branch is actually the Supreme Court. The Department of Justice is separate from the Court. The 25th Amendment has to invoked by the President's Cabinet |
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,306
|
Post by swamp on Feb 15, 2019 10:31:31 GMT -5
Why not? The justice dept. is allowed to voice their concerns about the ability of the president to do his job. This is why I asked the question in post 14. Do not really know the correct Constitutional procedure on the issue. yes, but it doesn't mean other governmental officials can't discuss it. |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,337
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 15, 2019 11:11:23 GMT -5
I wouldn't think it is treason for the judicial branch to discuss the efficacy of the presidency. The three branches are supposed to check and balance each other according to the constitution. I'm assuming discussion of using the 25th amendment would need to involve people from all three branches. I have no clue which one would have to get the ball rolling I'm assuming that'd be Congress. The Judicial branch is actually the Supreme Court. The Department of Justice is separate from the Court. The 25th Amendment has to invoked by the President's Cabinet The attorney general of the Justice Department is also a member of a president's cabinet. McCabe and Rosenstein were employees of the Justice department. From Whitehouse.gov: The Cabinet |
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Feb 15, 2019 12:30:33 GMT -5
I wouldn't think it is treason for the judicial branch to discuss the efficacy of the presidency. The three branches are supposed to check and balance each other according to the constitution. I'm assuming discussion of using the 25th amendment would need to involve people from all three branches. I have no clue which one would have to get the ball rolling I'm assuming that'd be Congress. The Judicial branch is actually the Supreme Court. The Department of Justice is separate from the Court. The 25th Amendment has to invoked by the President's Cabinet The Judicial Branch of our government consists of the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts. The 25th Amendment must be invoked by the Vice President in combination with a majority of cabinet heads or a special body created by congress. |
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 15, 2019 12:38:14 GMT -5
The Judicial branch is actually the Supreme Court. The Department of Justice is separate from the Court. The 25th Amendment has to invoked by the President's Cabinet The Judicial Branch of our government consists of the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts. The 25th Amendment must be invoked by the Vice President in combination with a majority of cabinet heads or a special body created by congress. Which mean Mccabe and Rosenstein may have been out of bounds! McCabe may not have clean hands here, remember his wife was on the Clinton payroll!
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Feb 15, 2019 12:53:14 GMT -5
The Judicial Branch of our government consists of the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts. The 25th Amendment must be invoked by the Vice President in combination with a majority of cabinet heads or a special body created by congress. Which mean Mccabe and Rosenstein may have been out of bounds! McCabe may not have clean hands here, remember his wife was on the Clinton payroll!
That's not for me (nor, you, for that matter) to decide. It's above both our pay-grades, I'm afraid. I will say, I don't judge McCabe based on Mrs. McCabe's actions/affiliations. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,035
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 15, 2019 12:55:49 GMT -5
Which mean Mccabe and Rosenstein may have been out of bounds! McCabe may not have clean hands here, remember his wife was on the Clinton payroll!
That's not for me (nor, you, for that matter) to decide. It's above both our pay-grades, I'm afraid. I will say, I don't judge McCabe based on Mrs. McCabe's actions/affiliations. they certainly appear to have been within rights to have the DISCUSSION.
since they never acted on it, it appears they thought better of the idea.
I am not sure where the "foul" is, here.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Feb 15, 2019 12:57:05 GMT -5
So the law is saying that if the president goes nuts(or already is) only one of the people that kiss his ass all day long can bring up the subject of removal from office.
I think that’s a dumb law! All his cabinet is composed of people that he paid back favors to. They stand to lose that cushy job that they have no idea how to perform if the president is removed. Mostly because the VP will bring in his own crew of favors.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,035
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 15, 2019 12:57:09 GMT -5
Consider USC 2384.Seditious Conspiracy:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, …they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Did McCabe and Rosenstein do this?
by exploring the possibility of using the constitution to ouster the president?
nfw.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Feb 15, 2019 13:03:48 GMT -5
Consider USC 2384.Seditious Conspiracy:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, …they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Did McCabe and Rosenstein do this?
No. |
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 15, 2019 13:04:15 GMT -5
Which mean Mccabe and Rosenstein may have been out of bounds! McCabe may not have clean hands here, remember his wife was on the Clinton payroll!
That's not for me (nor, you, for that matter) to decide. It's above both our pay-grades, I'm afraid. I will say, I don't judge McCabe based on Mrs. McCabe's actions/affiliations. Why not mmhmm, we have plenty of poster here that judge people around Trump only because of their affiliation! |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,337
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 15, 2019 13:04:53 GMT -5
Consider USC 2384.Seditious Conspiracy:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, …they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Did McCabe and Rosenstein do this?
by exploring the possibility of using the constitution to ouster the president?
nfw.
I'm back to being no longer impressed. |
|
