Rosenstein Now Implicated

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 minute ago, Proud Tiger said:

I would feel exactly the same way. I find it very scary for our country when someone like the DOJ, FBI, etc., try to do in a POTUS which has clearly been the case  with Comey, McCabe, Page, Strozk, Orr, etc.

OK, but the 25th Amendment process has to be initiated by the Cabinet and VP.  And you need a majority of Cabinet members to agree before it can even be sent to Capitol Hill.  Now, if the President's hand picked Cabinet sees a major issue, does that not cause concern for you?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

7 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

OK, but the 25th Amendment process has to be initiated by the Cabinet and VP.  And you need a majority of Cabinet members to agree before it can even be sent to Capitol Hill.  Now, if the President's hand picked Cabinet sees a major issue, does that not cause concern for you?

If more than one or two sees it as a major issues and has evidence to prove it then maybe. I would think they would be extremely careful in doing do. I hope it never comes to that for the sake of our country in removing  a POTUS duly elected by the people without overwhelming, non political evidence.

Question back at you... does it not concern you that false/incomplete info was used in obtaining FISA warrants based on what we now know?

 

[SaltyTiger 7,777]

12 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Now, if the President's hand picked Cabinet sees a major issue, does that not cause concern for you?

I can agree that it would be a huge concern if the majority deemed it. The majority probably being excessive in numbers.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

4 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

I can agree that it would be a huge concern if the majority deemed it. The majority probably being excessive in numbers.

Yup.  That's what needs to be understood about the law. The Cabinet needs a majority and then you need vast majorities in Congress before action could be taken.  The evidence would likely be overwhelming if this law were ever used.

[SaltyTiger 7,777]

4 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Yup.  That's what needs to be understood about the law. The Cabinet needs a majority and then you need vast majorities in Congress before action could be taken.  The evidence would likely be overwhelming if this law were ever used.

Is that an authority given to "hand picked" people that needs amending. VP is also "hand picked". Find the subject difficult to talk about if Titan set the "premises" and wants President Trump out of the equation.

Never seen our country so divided on the leadership in DC.

With that said I have always felt that our energies should be focused on family and local issues.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

28 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Is that an authority given to "hand picked" people that needs amending. VP is also "hand picked". Find the subject difficult to talk about if Titan set the "premises" and wants President Trump out of the equation.

Never seen our country so divided on the leadership in DC.

With that said I have always felt that our energies should be focused on family and local issues.

The VP is not hand picked.  The VP is an elected official.  There's no law saying the President and Vice President have to be from the same ticket.

It's not tough to talk about.  Titan flat out said from the start to remove Trump and consider any POTUS.  It's a discussion on the merits of the 25th Amendment.

[TexasTiger 12,828]

Rosenstein was being sarcastic to McCabe about wearing a wire.

[AUDub 11,142]

7 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Rosenstein was being sarcastic to McCabe about wearing a wire.

Don't think it will make a lot of difference. It's a good pretense for the stupid. 

[homersapien 11,357]

14 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Yup.  That's what needs to be understood about the law. The Cabinet needs a majority and then you need vast majorities in Congress before action could be taken.  The evidence would likely be overwhelming if this law were ever used.

Which is exactly why calling Rosenstein's joke an attempted "coup" is so absurd.

 

[jw 4 au 526]

Problem I see is the 25th is clearly for a mentally unfit president, which is a medical condition. Those on the left are clearly trying to argue this could be used simply because the president has polarizing or opposite views from you.  Fact is, Trump said before he was elected he was going to drain the swamp, stated his current views, talked clearly about conservative SCOTUS nominations, etc.; and was a complete braggart a**hole about it the entire primaries and election. THAT is why he was elected. AND that is why inside Washington HATES him, which includes the media. If you don’t like it, you have to wait to vote him out. Not assume he is mentally unfit and call everyone who doesn’t agree with you stupid. To do so you are no different that the one you hate. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

8 minutes ago, jw 4 au said:

Problem I see is the 25th is clearly for a mentally unfit president, which is a medical condition. Those on the left are clearly trying to argue this could be used simply because the president has polarizing or opposite views from you.  Fact is, Trump said before he was elected he was going to drain the swamp, stated his current views, talked clearly about conservative SCOTUS nominations, etc.; and was a complete braggart a**hole about it the entire primaries and election. THAT is why he was elected. AND that is why inside Washington HATES him, which includes the media. If you don’t like it, you have to wait to vote him out. Not assume he is mentally unfit and call everyone who doesn’t agree with you stupid. To do so you are no different that the one you hate. 

Amen brother.

[SaltyTiger 7,777]

21 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Not assume he is mentally unfit and call everyone who doesn’t agree with you stupid. To do so you are no different that the one you hate. 

PT we are supposed to leave Trump out of this thread. Happy Saturday to you.

 

14 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Titan flat out said from the start to remove Trump and consider any POTUS.

 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

5 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

PT we are supposed to leave Trump out of this thread. Happy Saturday to you.

 

 

LOL, I didn't bring up Trump. I quoted a poster who did but agreed with him. Hope you are having a good day too and we BarBQ some piggies this evening. WDE.

[homersapien 11,357]

57 minutes ago, jw 4 au said:

Problem I see is the 25th is clearly for a mentally unfit president, which is a medical condition. Those on the left are clearly trying to argue this could be used simply because the president has polarizing or opposite views from you.  Fact is, Trump said before he was elected he was going to drain the swamp, stated his current views, talked clearly about conservative SCOTUS nominations, etc.; and was a complete braggart a**hole about it the entire primaries and election. THAT is why he was elected. AND that is why inside Washington HATES him, which includes the media. If you don’t like it, you have to wait to vote him out. Not assume he is mentally unfit and call everyone who doesn’t agree with you stupid. To do so you are no different that the one you hate. 

Who exactly on the "left" is seriously arguing the 25th Amendment should be invoked?

Trump may not meet the medical standards of the 25th amendment (shear functionality). (Even Adolf Hitler wouldn't qualify for the 25th by those standards.)

Nevertheless, it is quite clear to many he is temperamentally and psychologically unfit for the office as we see it.  Otherwise we wouldn't be having these discussions.

[jw 4 au 526]

4 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Nevertheless, it is quite clear to many he is temperamentally and psychologically unfit for the office as we see it.  Otherwise we wouldn't be having these discussions.

This is my problem with these type of debates and the media lately. You make this statement as if it is fact. Truth is, probably closer to 50/50, and not “many”.  Then you subvertly compare him to Hitler... because he disagrees with you.  That is just plain awful!  Probably more immoral than than the things you hold against Trump himself. 

Guy was elected by the system and still draws a crowd. I don’t agree with everything he says and does, but he is way more of an open book than the past presidents, who actually ran on transparency which was a lie.  He said he was going to do exactly what he is doing!  We will see in a couple of years I guess. 

[SaltyTiger 7,777]

26 minutes ago, jw 4 au said:

 Probably more immoral than than the things you hold against Trump himself. 

Well said the jw. Leftist reaction to the Trump election is as bad worse than any damage any president could inflict. 

[homersapien 11,357]

21 minutes ago, jw 4 au said:

This is my problem with these type of debates and the media lately. You make this statement as if it is fact. Truth is, probably closer to 50/50, and not “many”.  Then you subvertly compare him to Hitler... because he disagrees with you.  That is just plain awful!  Probably more immoral than than the things you hold against Trump himself. 

Guy was elected by the system and still draws a crowd. I don’t agree with everything he says and does, but he is way more of an open book than the past presidents, who actually ran on transparency which was a lie.  He said he was going to do exactly what he is doing!  We will see in a couple of years I guess. 

BS. 

I was agreeing with you.  Even Hitler would not meet the standards required by the 25th amendment.  Nothing "subvert" about.  Its nothing more than a vivid illustration.  People who falsely invoke "Godwin's Law" are just as guilty as those violating it by making direct comparisons. I am not doing that. I am reinforcing your contention about the 25th, not making a comparison to Trump.

I don't understand your quibble is with "many".  Trump undoubtedly has a core support of fanatical believers - perhaps 30% of the population.  But "many" in the country feel he is temperamentally unsuited for the office, including many Republicans.  That's just fact. 

And with your 50/50 example, are you suggesting the number of people who feel is unqualified for the presidency is 50% of the electorate?  How does that not qualify as "many"?

Finally he was most definitely elected by the system with not even a plurality of the votes.  The system is faulty, but that's a topic for a different thread.

[homersapien 11,357]

4 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Well said the jw. Leftist reaction to the Trump election is as bad worse than any damage any president could inflict. 

Actually, it's more like the reaction to his (inevitable) dysfunctional and damaging presidency.

[homersapien 11,357]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Who exactly on the "left" is seriously arguing the 25th Amendment should be invoked?

 

Still waiting on a response here.

[SaltyTiger 7,777]

21 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Actually, it's more like the reaction to his (inevitable) dysfunctional and damaging presidency.

Hell Brother Homer. It started the day after his election.

[SaltyTiger 7,777]

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Still waiting on a response here.

Hey @jw 4 au. Homer is waiting on you and getting impatient.

[jw 4 au 526]

1 hour ago, SaltyTiger said:

Hey @jw 4 au. Homer is waiting on you and getting impatient.

You’re right, let me jump on it.

Homer, you posted the article, who is the “you” the title is referencing?  Before Rosenstein refutted it, the NYT article seemed to suggest through two “un-named sources” that Comey, McCabe, and Rosenstein either discussed it or joked about it. Quit playing coy and trying to lawyer up on semantics. You knew what I meant. Also, I wish you would quit only looking at things from one angle, your limited perspective; and try to understand why Trump was elected in the first place.  It is certainly not because he is unfit for the presidency (which is what the 25th is about).  In reality, it was because of who Hillary is, and that is truely unfit to be president. But the core you reference wanted him for exactly what he is, and what he is doing, and that is shaking up the norm.  

[SaltyTiger 7,777]

20 minutes ago, jw 4 au said:

You’re right, let me jump on it.

Homer, you posted the article, who is the “you” the title is referencing?  Before Rosenstein refutted it, the NYT article seemed to suggest through two “un-named sources” that Comey, McCabe, and Rosenstein either discussed it or joked about it. Quit playing coy and trying to lawyer up on semantics. You knew what I meant. Also, I wish you would quit only looking at things from one angle, your limited perspective; and try to understand why Trump was elected in the first place.  It is certainly not because he is unfit for the presidency (which is what the 25th is about).  In reality, it was because of who Hillary is, and that is truely unfit to be president. But the core you reference wanted him for exactly what he is, and what he is doing, and that is shaking up the norm.  

Hey @homersapien @jw 4 au has answered your question that you impatiently demanded. Great reply. I gave it thumbs up.

[homersapien 11,357]

14 minutes ago, jw 4 au said:

You’re right, let me jump on it.

Homer, you posted the article, who is the “you” the title is referencing?  

Seriously?    

That was obviously a rhetorical "you" as in "anyone out there who seriously wants to invoke the 25 Amendment".  It was a conversational way of introducing the subject matter - the actual constraints of doing so.  

You, on the other hand, implied that there are many (Democrats?) who are proposing the 25 be invoked.  While I am sure there are isolated and ignorant Democrats and others who think so, your implication there are a lot of Democrats promoting it is false.  Show me otherwise.

In fact, Democrats have been going out of their way not to promote the idea of impeachment, although I am sure that will come.

 

Before Rosenstein refutted it, the NYT article seemed to suggest through two “un-named sources” that Comey, McCabe, and Rosenstein either discussed it or joked about it.

I think that's essentially true.  I think Rosenstein proposed a wire rhetorically in a non-serious way. (Its a common meme I understand).  I am sure he has a thorough understanding of what invoking the 25 amendment would entail and was not proposing it in a serious way.

 

Quit playing coy and trying to lawyer up on semantics. You knew what I meant.

I am not "playing coy". 

You clearly implied there are a lot of Trump opponents who are actively and seriously promoting invoking the 25th.  This caught my attention as I don't think it's true.  If were trying to say something else, now's your chance to clarify. 

 

14 minutes ago, jw 4 au said:

Also, I wish you would quit only looking at things from one angle, your limited perspective; and try to understand why Trump was elected in the first place.  It is certainly not because he is unfit for the presidency (which is what the 25th is about).  In reality, it was because of who Hillary is, and that is truely unfit to be president. But the core you reference wanted him for exactly what he is, and what he is doing, and that is shaking up the norm.  

First, my views aren't determined by limited consideration of other views.  They are determined by considering various views and accepting the ones that seem the most correct and rejecting those I find implausible or irrational.

Secondly, If you really want to explore why Trump was elected, I am game.  There's ben  a lot of opinion and analysis published on that subject, some of it recently. But frankly, we should start another thread to do it.

I don't understand your second sentence (in red) above. It makes no sense to me.

Finally, if you want to argue Trump supporters are getting what they (think) they wanted, I wouldn't disagree.  But that says more about them than the competence of Trump.  I think most of the unequivocal Trump supporters are delusional or ignorant and don't really understand the long term implications of Trump's policies  either personally or nationally.  (And keep in mind there are relatively few unequivocal Trump supporters to start with.)  Again I would enjoy discussing that, but this particular thread is not the place to do it.

And I don't disagree about the polarity and negativity towards Hillary as being a key factor that enabled a Trump victory.  Much of that was hyped over the years with hyperbole and repetition, but I agree that she was most certainly the wrong Democratic candidate for that election.  (Even then, she got more votes than Trump.)

 

[homersapien 11,357]

2 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

Hell Brother Homer. It started the day after his election.

As did the dysfunction.