You know more about the France and the UK than I do, so that sounds plausible to me.
Republicans always expected that the Democrats would kill Biden. Some of that is no doubt me bubbling myself with my fellow paranoids.
Certainly, some of the patterns are weird, and perhaps suggestive.
My thinking this moment is suspect. I've given myself a bit of insomnia over this executive power discussion thing. I'm appalled that Democrats are thinking that this is a productive line of discussion for them, and that they are not obviously incorrect.
I am a wee bit of a Lincoln enthusiast. I have spent my time squeeing over stupid hypothetical executive power exploits.
But it is straightforward that the ruling does not change anything, adn that the dissents are in error.
Trump could have used the widest executive power for stuff, if and only if he was directly using it to suppress an insurrection. Since the Democrats are not alleging that he was suppressing an insurrection, their view that he somehow could have invoked those powers is ignorant, or dishonest.
This is the simple version. This is also the more thorough version, with a deep dive into a bunch of weird stuff that lawyers mostly do not use for ordinary cases. This is also the version with a bunch of more contentious readings of Democrat intentions.
The articles of confederation are context to the constitution, and the constitution is pretty clear. Washington and the Whiskey Rebellion is exactly relevant. Also, Lincoln is probably the extant case law. A true lawyer's perspective could go deeper there, and there really are some maybe questionable elements. But, the courts have not overturned Lincoln's most significant executive order, nor have they nullified the amendments associated with him. That is very suggestive that his basic legal theory of the ACW stands.
Now, obviously, there are a bunch of very different opinions about Lincoln, and we basically agreed to disagree about those for a hundred and fifty years. But, he is the only possible precedent for whether the PotUS can assassinate political opponents using the executive power, and the case law since is pretty clear that the PotUS cannot when there is no insurrection.
There are four possibilities in my eyes here. One is that again, a bunch of people in their eighties spent their early years hating Lincoln, and by default assume that his legal theory is incorrect. Two, that some serious morons are trying to set up a precedent that they plan to use in some other way. Morons, because they clearly haven't done any basic wargaming. Three, they actually know themselves to be guilty of a criminal conspiracy, and it might actually be at the level of an insurrection, and they are trying to verbally force a way out for them. Four, blind idiotic desperation.
Anyway, I don't know anything. I especially don't have any convincing reason to discard my hypothesis that peaceful, non-violent methods, and patience are the key to dealing with this strategic knot.
I'm assuming that the Democrats are using energizing talk, because they think they need it, and that calm boredom and waiting might be exactly what they do not want.
This is not an emotionally satisfying answer, but the world is not obligated to care about my feelings.
France, your last paragraph concerning her; I'd apply to the rest of the West, probably not fixable. The positive as you noted, perhaps things will be less bad west wide and world wide.
I'm guessing that is a typo. Because having grown up in Minot, I don't remember a single protest there since the '69 teacher's strike that attracted even half a dozen people.
Interesting and chilling, these predictions. If Joe were to get another covid-vax 'booster', that would probably do the trick too. Here is Kamala Harris, in her own words during a 2020 campaign rally: 'And once he's [Trump] and we have regained our rightful place at the White House, look out if you supported him and endorsed his actions, because we'll be coming for you next. You will feel the vengeance of a nation. No stone will be left unturned as we seek you out in every corner of this great nation. For it is you who have betrayed us.' https://darkfutura.substack.com/p/fracturing-identity-at-the-altar
Yeah, I dunno.
You know more about the France and the UK than I do, so that sounds plausible to me.
Republicans always expected that the Democrats would kill Biden. Some of that is no doubt me bubbling myself with my fellow paranoids.
Certainly, some of the patterns are weird, and perhaps suggestive.
My thinking this moment is suspect. I've given myself a bit of insomnia over this executive power discussion thing. I'm appalled that Democrats are thinking that this is a productive line of discussion for them, and that they are not obviously incorrect.
I am a wee bit of a Lincoln enthusiast. I have spent my time squeeing over stupid hypothetical executive power exploits.
But it is straightforward that the ruling does not change anything, adn that the dissents are in error.
Trump could have used the widest executive power for stuff, if and only if he was directly using it to suppress an insurrection. Since the Democrats are not alleging that he was suppressing an insurrection, their view that he somehow could have invoked those powers is ignorant, or dishonest.
This is the simple version. This is also the more thorough version, with a deep dive into a bunch of weird stuff that lawyers mostly do not use for ordinary cases. This is also the version with a bunch of more contentious readings of Democrat intentions.
The articles of confederation are context to the constitution, and the constitution is pretty clear. Washington and the Whiskey Rebellion is exactly relevant. Also, Lincoln is probably the extant case law. A true lawyer's perspective could go deeper there, and there really are some maybe questionable elements. But, the courts have not overturned Lincoln's most significant executive order, nor have they nullified the amendments associated with him. That is very suggestive that his basic legal theory of the ACW stands.
Now, obviously, there are a bunch of very different opinions about Lincoln, and we basically agreed to disagree about those for a hundred and fifty years. But, he is the only possible precedent for whether the PotUS can assassinate political opponents using the executive power, and the case law since is pretty clear that the PotUS cannot when there is no insurrection.
There are four possibilities in my eyes here. One is that again, a bunch of people in their eighties spent their early years hating Lincoln, and by default assume that his legal theory is incorrect. Two, that some serious morons are trying to set up a precedent that they plan to use in some other way. Morons, because they clearly haven't done any basic wargaming. Three, they actually know themselves to be guilty of a criminal conspiracy, and it might actually be at the level of an insurrection, and they are trying to verbally force a way out for them. Four, blind idiotic desperation.
Anyway, I don't know anything. I especially don't have any convincing reason to discard my hypothesis that peaceful, non-violent methods, and patience are the key to dealing with this strategic knot.
I'm assuming that the Democrats are using energizing talk, because they think they need it, and that calm boredom and waiting might be exactly what they do not want.
This is not an emotionally satisfying answer, but the world is not obligated to care about my feelings.
France, your last paragraph concerning her; I'd apply to the rest of the West, probably not fixable. The positive as you noted, perhaps things will be less bad west wide and world wide.
& no, Buck Fiden didn't mercy kill himself.
<I>"...a few minot peaceful protests."</i>
I'm guessing that is a typo. Because having grown up in Minot, I don't remember a single protest there since the '69 teacher's strike that attracted even half a dozen people.
er yeah minoR
Interesting and chilling, these predictions. If Joe were to get another covid-vax 'booster', that would probably do the trick too. Here is Kamala Harris, in her own words during a 2020 campaign rally: 'And once he's [Trump] and we have regained our rightful place at the White House, look out if you supported him and endorsed his actions, because we'll be coming for you next. You will feel the vengeance of a nation. No stone will be left unturned as we seek you out in every corner of this great nation. For it is you who have betrayed us.' https://darkfutura.substack.com/p/fracturing-identity-at-the-altar
I forgot it was her that said this. Thanks.