Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 101

Thread: Impeachment Related: GAO Determines Trump Violated Impoundment Control Act

  1. #71
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    7,282
    Amen (Given)
    499
    Amen (Received)
    1836
    Quote Originally Posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    [ - looney talk removed - ] You’re attempting to pass off the Obama administration as simply making a mistake, yet, how does one make the same exact mistake, on six different occasions? Are they stupid or doing it on purpose?
    No I'm not. I'm not making any sort of decision about whether they willfully bumped up against the boundaries or incidentally bumped up against the boundaries. What I'm saying it that what they did was within normal and acceptable bounds, and while it technically might have violated the law, it did not do so in a way that constituted abuse of the power of the presidency or in a way that warranted punitive action, in the same way that +4 in a school zone is not a sufficiently egregious violation of the law as to warrant punitive action.

    To use your own speeding example, if someone is going 5 miles over the speed limit the first time, it can be written off as a mistake, but six different time? At what point is it no longer a mistake? Do you seriously not understand this point? Have you seriously never seen anyone playing stupid, to get out of trouble?
    Where I live, no-one is given tickets solely for driving +4 over the speed limit, no matter how many times they do it. +4 is, in fact, likely going to be one of the slower cars on the road.

    There’s no equivalence or cherry picking at all, [ - looney talk removed - ]. One doesn’t do the same wrong thing, six different times, unless something is really wrong with them or they are playing stupid to stay out of trouble.
    Yes they do. Nearly everyone in this country drives somewhere between 1 and 5 mph above the speed limit. Most people on interstates are 3 to 8mph over. It is the custom in this country NOT to drive at or below the speed limit. It is 'wrong' to mildly speed in name only. It is not enforced unless the person is driving recklessly (or that county needs some revenue). I do not know the custom of how this issue is handled or how violations occur as it relates to the OMB etc, but in the examples shown so far in this thread, Obama was not abusing his power, necessary actions just didn't quite fit into the ad hoc boundaries of the law.

    Trump seriously abused this law, and for personal gain, not national interest. Just like a person driving 120MPH in a 35MPH school zone. Obama bumped up against it - more like a fellow wanting to shave an hour of a 12 hour business trip on an interstate driving at +7. It just is not the same thing.
    Last edited by oxmixmudd; 01-17-2020 at 11:09 AM.
    He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

  2. #72
    What's that? lilpixieofterror's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    10,624
    Amen (Given)
    1547
    Amen (Received)
    3475
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    No I'm not. I'm not making any sort of decision about whether they willfully bumped up against the boundaries or incidentally bumped up against the boundaries. What I'm saying it that what they did was within normal and acceptable bounds, and while it technically might have violated the law, it did not do so in a way that constituted abuse of the power of the presidency or in a way that warranted punitive action, in the same way that +4 in a school zone is not a sufficiently egregious violation of the law as to warrant punitive action.
    I see, “it’s totally different because of reasons or something!”

    You’re excuses for democrats, while claiming not to be one, is heartwarming, but how does one violate the same law, on six occasions, and it be an honest mistake every time?

    Where I live, no-one is given tickets solely for driving +4 over the speed limit, no matter how many times they do it. +4 is, in fact, likely going to be one of the slower cars on the road.
    Which doesn’t change what I asked, if you violated the same law, on six different occasions, is it an honest mistake still? You’re doing your best not to answer this point, why?

    Yes they do. Nearly everyone in this country drives somewhere between 1 and 5 mph above the speed limit. Most people on interstates are 3 to 8mph over. It is the custom in this country NOT to drive at or below the speed limit. It is 'wrong' to mildly speed in name only. It is not enforced unless the person is driving recklessly (or that county needs some revenue). I do not know the custom of how this issue is handled or how violations occur as it relates to the OMB etc, but in the examples shown so far in this thread, Obama was not abusing his power, necessary actions just didn't quite fit into the ad hoc boundaries of the law.
    That’s nice, but that doesn’t answer a word I said. How does one violate the same law, on six different times and it be an honest mistake every single time?

    Trump seriously abused this law, and for personal gain, not national interest. Just like a person driving 120MPH in a 35MPH school zone. Obama bumped up against it - more like a fellow wanting to shave an hour of a 12 hour business trip on an interstate driving at +7. It just is not the same thing.
    No he didn’t, but we both know that you believe Trump is the most evil person to ever lived, so it’s pointless to argue with you when TDS has so throughly infested your brain. How does one violate the same law, six different times, and it be an honest mistake every single time?
    "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
    GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

  3. #73
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,020
    Amen (Given)
    159
    Amen (Received)
    764
    If you're going to continue, LPoT, I have to ask that you make a substantial, affirmative case tying into the OP. Incessant and ever-changing questions sprinkled with snark and venom alone are not sufficient.You can do all that but you have to be a meaningful contributor to the topic, too.--Sam
    Quote Originally Posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    I see, “it’s totally different because of reasons or something!”You’re excuses for democrats, while claiming not to be one, is heartwarming, but how does one violate the same law, on six occasions, and it be an honest mistake every time?Which doesn’t change what I asked, if you violated the same law, on six different occasions, is it an honest mistake still? You’re doing your best not to answer this point, why?That’s nice, but that doesn’t answer a word I said. How does one violate the same law, on six different times and it be an honest mistake every single time?No he didn’t, but we both know that you believe Trump is the most evil person to ever lived, so it’s pointless to argue with you when TDS has so throughly infested your brain. How does one violate the same law, six different times, and it be an honest mistake every single time?
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"


  4. #74
    What's that? lilpixieofterror's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    10,624
    Amen (Given)
    1547
    Amen (Received)
    3475
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    If you're going to continue, LPoT, I have to ask that you make a substantial, affirmative case tying into the OP. Incessant and ever-changing questions sprinkled with snark and venom alone are not sufficient.You can do all that but you have to be a meaningful contributor to the topic, too.--Sam
    Jim post loads of snark = perfectly okay!

    I post snark = EVIL!!!!

    Got to love the smell of rank hypocrisy, but I understand why you need to defend your buddy because he doesn’t seem able to explain how six separate violations, of the same law, is merely an innocent mistake nor does he seem able to explain how it is totally different because reasons or something. I understand, you got to protect your buddy. Stick together.
    "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
    GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

  5. #75
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,020
    Amen (Given)
    159
    Amen (Received)
    764
    Quote Originally Posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
    Jim post loads of snark = perfectly okay!

    I post snark = EVIL!!!!

    Got to love the smell of rank hypocrisy, but I understand why you need to defend your buddy because he doesn’t seem able to explain how six separate violations, of the same law, is merely an innocent mistake nor does he seem able to explain how it is totally different because reasons or something. I understand, you got to protect your buddy. Stick together.
    Jim is throwing shade like others and, like others, is doing so in the context of trying to make affirmative and substantive contributions to the topic. In particular, he has provided substantive distinctions that amount to more than "reasons or something" -- you have avoided any sort of substantive rebuttal of those points. You're free to snark but, like others, I'm asking that you do the work of making an affirmative and substantive case for your point and earn the privilege of throwing shade.

    When you're willing to do that, feel free to come back. Until then, I'm asking that you do not continue to drag the thread away from its purpose.

    --Sam
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"


  6. #76
    What's that? lilpixieofterror's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    10,624
    Amen (Given)
    1547
    Amen (Received)
    3475
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    Jim is throwing shade like others and, like others, is doing so in the context of trying to make affirmative and substantive contributions to the topic. In particular, he has provided substantive distinctions that amount to more than "reasons or something" -- you have avoided any sort of substantive rebuttal of those points. You're free to snark but, like others, I'm asking that you do the work of making an affirmative and substantive case for your point and earn the privilege of throwing shade.

    When you're willing to do that, feel free to come back. Until then, I'm asking that you do not continue to drag the thread away from its purpose.

    --Sam
    I see, so you want affirming of what you already believe. My mistake, I thought you actually wanted to discuss things vs a hand wave. I won’t make that mistake again.
    "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
    GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

  7. #77
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    16,017
    Amen (Given)
    1959
    Amen (Received)
    1608
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    And what crime is that? Cite the specific legal statute that was supposedly violated and the evidence that you could take court to prove it.
    The abuse of power crimes for which he is about to go to trial. Or are you not aware that he is going to trial.

  8. #78
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,424
    Amen (Given)
    13032
    Amen (Received)
    27577
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    The abuse of power crimes for which he is about to go to trial. Or are you not aware that he is going to trial.
    You can't just insert the word "crimes" and magically make it a crime, let alone multiple crimes, Jim.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  9. Amen Mountain Man amen'd this post.
  10. #79
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,020
    Amen (Given)
    159
    Amen (Received)
    764
    It is not necessary to cite any violation of criminal code to justify impeachment; that argument has been raised and answered in numerous other threads and a repeat of a repeat serves as a distraction here.

    The GAO has determined that Trump violated the law. That violation is alleged to have occurred as part of an effort by Trump to abuse his power in using official government resources for personal, political ends.

    If folks want to talk about how the GAO wrongly determined the administration's violation, that's meritorious. If people want to to argue about how the violation ties into impeachment, that's meritorious. If people just want to keep arguing "What crimes did the President commit?", we've had that discussion and it's mooted for our purposes here.

    --Sam
    "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"


  11. Amen JimL amen'd this post.
  12. #80
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,424
    Amen (Given)
    13032
    Amen (Received)
    27577
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    It is not necessary to cite any violation of criminal code to justify impeachment;
    Then why keep putting the word "crime" in the accusations? Calling something a "crime" indicates a violation of a CRIMINAL CODE.

    Perhaps you should explain this to JimL.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •