De facto is not de jure.
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: July 31, 2026, 5:23 pm
Thread Rating:
|
First talks of impeachment.
|
|
RE: First talks of impeachment.
May 20, 2017 at 12:13 am
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2017 at 12:18 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(May 19, 2017 at 7:40 pm)Luckie Wrote:(May 19, 2017 at 6:48 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Legally speaking, that is any time Congress has not declared war on another nation. I'll take "equivocation" for $500, Alex. I clearly specified "legally" in my answer to Crunchy. (May 19, 2017 at 8:57 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: I dunno, just because a de jour declaration of war hasn't occurred, certainly doesn't mean a de facto state of war does not exist. The point was that treason, legally, can only happen in times of war. And because in a court the term "time of war" also has a legal meaning, it's best to pay attention to that sort of thing. You want to convict Trump of treason? You'll need to first show that a state of war exists. Legally speaking, regarding Russia (which was the context of my comment), it does not. Yes, wars happen without declarations. But we're talking law here, not fact. RE: First talks of impeachment.
May 20, 2017 at 1:01 am
(This post was last modified: May 20, 2017 at 1:04 am by Jackalope.)
In that context I completely agree. I was addressing a tangential issue. I wasn't clear on that.
ETA - FWIW I'm well aware of the requirements do treason and I don't think that bar has been crossed, I said so in another post, perhaps in this thread. NBD. (May 19, 2017 at 8:26 pm)Minimalist Wrote: No. We haven't bothered to declare war since 1941. Now we like to call it something else. Chelsea Manning was convicted of treason wasn't she? You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid. Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis. (May 20, 2017 at 4:26 am)downbeatplumb Wrote:(May 19, 2017 at 8:26 pm)Minimalist Wrote: No. We haven't bothered to declare war since 1941. Now we like to call it something else. Nope. Espionage, IIRC. RE: First talks of impeachment.
May 22, 2017 at 11:58 am
(This post was last modified: May 22, 2017 at 11:58 am by dyresand.)
If we were to impeach trump id say impeach pence as well... because he would be worse than trump really.
then next would be getting his cabinet picks out of the way betty devos should be number one on that list really.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>(May 22, 2017 at 11:58 am)dyresand Wrote: If we were to impeach trump id say impeach pence as well... because he would be worse than trump really.
![]() (May 22, 2017 at 12:27 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(May 22, 2017 at 11:58 am)dyresand Wrote: If we were to impeach trump id say impeach pence as well... because he would be worse than trump really. ^ honestly i think he would make a okay president
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe> |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)




![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)