Suzuki SV650 Riders Forum banner

361 - 380 of 407 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
See...………...my point exactly, you have made up your mind.
Just what exactly is your point?

I presented a side, you presented a side, & somewhere in the middle is the truth.
Just what have you presented that's factual?

You need to "educate" yourself about refugees and illegal immigrants for one. You're conclusions are opinion based. Stop your hypocritical "educate yourself" crap.
Can you provide sources and more info on refugees & illegal immigrants?
What info can you provide to support what you've been told or learned?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,426 Posts
yawn quoting talking points. They are even written in the format of talking points, to make you try and sound smarter than you actually are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
yawn quoting talking points. They are even written in the format of talking points, to make you try and sound smarter than you actually are.
Talking points or not, criminal activities while in office no less, evidence & witnesses all indicate that laws have been violated while Trump is in office.

Do you think a criminal should be in the White House?

Do you think a criminal should have his family members as part of White House staff?

I didn't make any "sounds", it was an image to view, not a sound to hear.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,127 Posts
yall pay too much attention to this circus... "government" has a lot more to do with WWF/WWE wrestling than actual governing of anything
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
So which of those were listed in the articles of impeachment? I believe the answer is none of them. Apparently the US House disagrees that there is sufficient evidence to support any of those charges.
You still fail to answer my questions from previous post.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
You still fail to answer my questions from previous post.
Sorry, but since this is my first post in this thread, I didn’t realize I was supposed to go through the entire thread and answer all the questions before responding to a post.

The answer to your questions in post 365 are yes if the electorate knew about the crimes and elected the person anyway. If the crimes were committed while in office then it would be up to the House to list them specifically in the articles of impeachment. Then the Senate to remove the President if warranted.

The answer to your second question is why not? The president gets to choose his staff with the advice and consent of the Senate. Would it be better if his family were in high level corporate positions for which they had no experience other than their last name?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,426 Posts
Sorry, but since this is my first post in this thread, I didn’t realize I was supposed to go through the entire thread and answer all the questions before responding to a post.

The answer to your questions in post 365 are yes if the electorate knew about the crimes and elected the person anyway. If the crimes were committed while in office then it would be up to the House to list them specifically in the articles of impeachment. Then the Senate to remove the President if warranted.

The answer to your second question is why not? The president gets to choose his staff with the advice and consent of the Senate. Would it be better if his family were in high level corporate positions for which they had no experience other than their last name?
You're arguing with an unhinged lib, it's just best to let it go while they go about their days fuming over everything they don't like about the world.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
Sorry, but since this is my first post in this thread, I didn’t realize I was supposed to go through the entire thread and answer all the questions before responding to a post.
I only quoted you before asking my questions, that means the questions are posed to you and only you should answer. Maybe if you learn to read you'd realize that.
Doesn't mean that you need to answer all the questions within the thread, but if you feel like it, go right ahead.

The answer to your questions in post 365 are yes if the electorate knew about the crimes and elected the person anyway. If the crimes were committed while in office then it would be up to the House to list them specifically in the articles of impeachment. Then the Senate to remove the President if warranted.
So if your town mayor is only allow his family business to put in bids for public works, city contracts or other works around the town, you'd be okay with that?

The answer to your second question is why not? The president gets to choose his staff with the advice and consent of the Senate. Would it be better if his family were in high level corporate positions for which they had no experience other than their last name?
So if your town mayor is appointing his family members to city council, school board and public works; as long as the mayor is elected into office; that would be okay to you, too?

You're arguing with an unhinged lib, it's just best to let it go while they go about their days fuming over everything they don't like about the world.
How do you know that I'm "an unhinged lib"? have we ever met in person?

Do you need to be an unhinged lib or a conservative to tell that criminals don't belong in government?

Do you let criminals go and stay in your local government office?

Do you like criminals running the world around you?

I don't assume anything of you, likely you wouldn't like anyone to assume anything of you neither.
Don't pretend that you know anything about me, discuss the topic in thread and stop pretend that you know anything about me personally.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,426 Posts
I only quoted you before asking my questions, that means the questions are posed to you and only you should answer. Maybe if you learn to read you'd realize that.
Doesn't mean that you need to answer all the questions within the thread, but if you feel like it, go right ahead.



So if your town mayor is only allow his family business to put in bids for public works, city contracts or other works around the town, you'd be okay with that?



So if your town mayor is appointing his family members to city council, school board and public works; as long as the mayor is elected into office; that would be okay to you, too?



How do you know that I'm "an unhinged lib"? have we ever met in person?

Do you need to be an unhinged lib or a conservative to tell that criminals don't belong in government?

Do you let criminals go and stay in your local government office?

Do you like criminals running the world around you?

I don't assume anything of you, likely you wouldn't like anyone to assume anything of you neither.
Don't pretend that you know anything about me, discuss the topic in thread and stop pretend that you know anything about me personally.

I rest my case...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
I only quoted you before asking my questions, that means the questions are posed to you and only you should answer. Maybe if you learn to read you'd realize that.
Doesn't mean that you need to answer all the questions within the thread, but if you feel like it, go right ahead.
I am lost on this, but whatever. :rolleyes:

So if your town mayor is only allow (sic) his family business to put in bids for public works, city contracts or other works around the town, you'd be okay with that?
No and nowhere have I ever claimed that I would be. If the mayor or his family's business put in a bid on a specific contract, I would expect that he would recuse himself from making the selection on that contract.

So if your town mayor is appointing his family members to city council, school board and public works; as long as the mayor is elected into office; that would be okay to you, too?
No on the public works. The others don't make sense because they are elected positions at least in my city. If the city is big enough to have a mayoral staff appointed by the mayor (chief of staff, press secretary, etc.), then the mayor could certainly appoint his family to that staff and I would have no problem with that. A mayor needs people that they can fully trust in those positions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
I rest my case...
What case?
Rest your case so easily; you deserve to be ruled by criminals.

I am lost on this, but whatever. :rolleyes:
If you're lost, then maybe you should educate yourself to try to understand why you're lost.

No and nowhere have I ever claimed that I would be. If the mayor or his family's business put in a bid on a specific contract, I would expect that he would recuse himself from making the selection on that contract.
It was a simple question, yes or no answer would suffice.

No on the public works. The others don't make sense because they are elected positions at least in my city. If the city is big enough to have a mayoral staff appointed by the mayor (chief of staff, press secretary, etc.), then the mayor could certainly appoint his family to that staff and I would have no problem with that. A mayor needs people that they can fully trust in those positions.
Failure to see the obvious corruption is a clear sign that you also deserve to be ruled by criminals.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,127 Posts
Failure to see the obvious corruption is a clear sign that you also deserve to be ruled by criminals.
why do we need to be ruled by anyone? government is a waste in all forms and at all levels
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
why do we need to be ruled by anyone? government is a waste in all forms and at all levels
Because most people are dumb & lazy, unless things are written down into laws; people will think EVERYTHING is fair game.

Just take toddlers for example, without parents setting boundaries; there should be far less human population on the earth.

Those who have common sense may not "need" to be ruled by anyone for the most part; but do you honestly think common sense is that common in our society?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,127 Posts
those same people don't know/ignore the laws anyway. so no major changes would actually happen. when is the last time government of any level made something actually better?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
President Donald Trump's personal lawyers told the Supreme Court Monday that the House of Representatives and a Manhattan prosecutor should not be able to subpoena the President's longtime accounting firm and banks for his financial records, in a monumental dispute concerning separation of powers and claims of absolute immunity that will be heard by the justices later this term.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
President Donald Trump's personal lawyers told the Supreme Court Monday that the House of Representatives and a Manhattan prosecutor should not be able to subpoena the President's longtime accounting firm and banks for his financial records, in a monumental dispute concerning separation of powers and claims of absolute immunity that will be heard by the justices later this term.
Nothing to hide, right?

Does anyone think "absolute immunity" should apply to any single worker, agency or branch in government?
 
361 - 380 of 407 Posts
Top