Re: "Speak Out Loudly Against This Evil": Internet Erupts Over Biden Declaring Easter "Trans Day Of Visibility"

On 4/11/24 5:59 PM, trotsky wrote:

On 4/9/24 9:23 AM, FPP wrote:

On 4/5/24 2:13 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:

On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 06:07:25 -0400, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>

And if that's the reason, all of the criticism Biden is receiving is
justified.

>
He's being criticized because the Church chose it as Easter.

>
Which goes back far further than TVD has been around - the formula is
well known and is routinely done 20-30 years in advance and I'm quite
sure you'd have no problem finding the dates through 2050 online in
fairly short order.
>

He's only being criticized for the same reason you guys want to impeach
him.  You make it up as you go along.

>
No he's being criticized for emphasizing something minor and ignoring
something major which is egregiously dumb for a politician
particularly in an election year.
>
I'm not one of those who supports impeachment which I feel has been
invoked far too often in recent years. It's particularly silly to
pursue in an election year when from his point of view preparing the
face the people should be his main priority.
>

>
Nope.  Impeachment is for high crimes like treason and bribery and other misdemeanors.

  That's not accurate.  Impeachment is for "high crimes and misdemeanors." It's deliberately vague because it's completely subjective.  It drives me crazy When I hear Congress people say "the guy committed high crime and misdemeanors" as if there was an actual definition of such.
 https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/what-does-high-crimes-and-misdemeanors-actually-mean/600343/   “High crimes and misdemeanors” is surely the most troublesome, misleading phrase in the U.S. Constitution. Taken at face value, the words seem to say that impeachable conduct is limited to “crimes”—offenses defined by criminal statutes and punishable in criminal courts. That impression is reinforced by the fact that the phrase follows the obviously criminal “treason” and “bribery” in Article II’s list of the kinds of conduct for which the “President, Vice President and all civil officers” may be impeached.
 But this is not, in fact, what the Constitution requires. “High crimes and misdemeanors” is not, and has never been, limited to indictable criminality. Nonetheless, despite centuries of learning on the point, there the phrase sits, begging to be taken at its delusory face value.
 

Trump was impeached because he was committing impeachable offenses , pure and simple.  He was extorting a country to get dirt on a political opponent.
>
He was impeached for leading an insurrection, and trying to overthrow the government.
>
Neither was unwarranted, nor too far.  It's exactly what impeachment was designed for.  For the first time in our history, Trump got members of his own party to vote to remove him in the Senate.
>
That never happened before.  SEVEN voted to convict Trump... another first.  They weren't being partisan - the opposite in fact.
>

 

The Constitution almost literally says what I wrote.
("Impeachment is for high crimes like treason and bribery and other misdemeanors.")  I think I transposed a word or two.
Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
You're not wrong about the rest.  It is left solely up to the House to Impeach, and it can be for almost anything.
But, unlike the Republicans have said and done, it DOES have to be about something.
--
"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC Bible  25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0
Gracie, age 6.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0