I have heard talk that a Hillary presidency would basically just be an extra term or two for Bill. I don't know how true that would be.

(July 10, 2018 at 3:27 pm)Chad32 Wrote: What is it with people who think those in power should be under less scrutiny than the average joe, instead of more? This is part of why corruption happens. we forget that people in power can be dipshits too, when they're not being watched.

I think it depends on what it is. If you are talking corruption or something related, and can’t wait....then I would agree. It also doesn’t mean that they can’t be investigated.

I remember once reading that when Kurt Gödel was having his hearing for US citizenship, he confided in a judge (and Albert Einstein) that he found a loophole in the Constitution that could potentially allow America to become a dictatorship just like Germany. We don’t know exactly where that loophole is, much less how it could be exploited or how it can be closed, but somehow, I suspect that it might have something to do with whatever Constitutional authority they think makes the President above the law.

(July 10, 2018 at 2:26 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I think it depends on what you are talking about. I had said during the Clinton / Monica thing, that it should have waited until after.   Now if it was something directly related to the Presidency, then that’s another matter.   I think it depends on what it is. Afterwards, you can throw the book at him.   For me, it’s not about trying to protect the person in office, but not taking away from the office for a frivolous suit or charge.

So the scumsucker commits a crime that has to be prosecuted within a certain time limit but since he's in office he get's off.  The 14th Amendment applies.  And if he was able to avoid prosecution then it's stupid to convict the ordinary John and Jane any any crime.

(July 10, 2018 at 5:43 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:

(July 10, 2018 at 3:27 pm)Chad32 Wrote: What is it with people who think those in power should be under less scrutiny than the average joe, instead of more? This is part of why corruption happens. we forget that people in power can be dipshits too, when they're not being watched.

I think it depends on what it is.  If you are talking corruption or something related, and can’t wait....then I would agree.  It also doesn’t mean that they can’t be investigated.

I don't care if it's a fucking speeding ticket. If a president commits a crime, he should be prosecuted exactly the same as any other citizen. Only bad things come from the people agreeing to put an elected official above the law.

I wouldn’t agree that the President is above the law, or should be able to get away with anything. I just remember thinking during the Clinton trials, that it was rediculous. They could throw the book at him afterwards. I think that some are reading into things too much!

Well that is why Trump picked him. Because he is his buddy and knows he will get Trump off. Oh yeah, get him off from the law and sexually I bet.

(July 10, 2018 at 2:26 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I think it depends on what you are talking about. I had said during the Clinton / Monica thing, that it should have waited until after.   Now if it was something directly related to the Presidency, then that’s another matter.   I think it depends on what it is. Afterwards, you can throw the book at him.   For me, it’s not about trying to protect the person in office, but not taking away from the office for a frivolous suit or charge.

Um no, and again, that was peanuts compared to what the orange fuckface is doing right now. I don't care what party holds that office, scrutiny and oversight are a MUST to maintain a free society. If you cant handle the job then you shouldn't run.

There is no compromise on this. This is seriously fucking with the core principles the founders set up.

This isn't a fucking game. We were warned by 50 REPUBLICAN former intel agents of a Trump presidency DURING HIS RUN, and what we are seeing now is dangerous in attacking our allies and praising dictators. Trump is NOT politics as usual, he is not a left or right economic issue now, he is a threat to global and national stability.

His behavior is not something you wait on. He has the power to destroy our alliances, he has the power to start a global nuclear war and he is undermining that stability. He is picking fights with his own intel as well.  No other president of either party has ever behaved in such a destructive manor.

Not what I was talking about Brian.... does everything trigger you into a rant about Trump?

(July 11, 2018 at 9:03 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Not what I was talking about Brian.... does everything trigger you into a rant about Trump?

I could give a fuck less what you want to call my posts. I am not the problem for simply pointing out the real problem.

We have a dangerous asshole shitting all over western values occupying our highest office. If you choose to ignore that real danger, one that 50 REPUBLICAN former intel agents warned us of in 16, that ignorance is your baggage not mine. 

Does it bother you that an atheist can value western ideas? Oh that's right, I am supposed to suck Marx's dick and praise dictators like Putin and Un? Someone is doing that, and it isn't me.

I am not the problem, and no, now is not the time to be polite or silent. Keep staring at my finger while I point at the moon.

Oversight cannot be after the fact. Saying "wait" is stupid and dangerous, it would be like homicide agent saying, "Lets wait until the serial killer racks up dozens."  I do not care what this judge's intent is, it is a bad idea, and especially dangerous knowing who is in office now. 

I am being completely fair in condemning such a horrible idea. I bring up Trump only because he is the current occupant, but that danger of "wait" would still give too much time and power to cause damage even if that president left after 4 years. This applies to our entire future and to the next generation too. 

The founders made it clear that it was important to have the ability to scrutinize power while in power. Saying "wait" undermines that scrutiny.