POLITICS President Trump: 100+ Mornings After (Term 1 Complete)

We're going to have to have some rough years once the can can't be kicked anymore.


Hopefully societally we can handle that and get back to more free market forces instead of the cronyism that's been going on for decades

 

I think we'll end at a hybrid system comparable to China. Some free market, some government control.

 

If you're pursuing your legal options, why would it matter to what extent you pursue them? It's the same action regardless of how vigorously you do it. You're pursuing your legal options.

Eventually, you've pursued all your legal options, and a decision is made, either in your favor or not in your favor. That's what happened, and Biden is our President. Where is the threat to democracy? The process ran its course, the winner was named/confirmed, and we move forward.

 

What does the phrase "legal threat" mean? What does the phrase, "threaten to sue" or "threaten with a lawsuit" mean? How does one do so, if they are just you pursuing your legal options? In this essay, Indy will demonstrate that...

 

The legal system is not meant to be overwhelmed with stupidity, even if it can be. That's the main point. An alternate point is that if I file lawsuit after lawsuit, against you, and force you to defend them, even if you come away victorious every defense, I've cost you something; time, money, effort, skill... something. If I've done this for a pointless endeavor, I've harmed you.

When government challenges government, repeatedly, for a pointless thing, government has harmed government. In a democracy, since the people are government, the people are harmed. Regardless of the process running its course.

The threat to democracy comes from a lack of trust in the system. When public trust is eroded, people won't participate. And if people don't participate in democracy, then we are not democratic. We are quasi authoritarian. And you can say "Oh, that's philosophical harm." Yes. Government is philosophical.

And we are not moving forward. Seeing as how we're still talking about why this is an issue, despite the obviousness of the issue.

 

Yes they do, it's one of the first things they tell you in school.

 

They don't, though. There is no judicial requirement, because that would violate the 1st amendment. And there is no ethical requirement, because that would make the concept of free speech unethical.

Journalists often choose to, because it is good business.

 

Well, and they can be sued in certain circumstances.

 

Which is good business sense... to avoid lawsuits.

 

I've not followed this Georgia voting thing too closely, but it appears to be a reaction to the Trump election fraud claims there? Would that at least be a fair starting basis?

 

I think it is more than that:

1) Standard gerrymandering and suppression of the opposition
2) The state is seeing a LOT of people move in and it is turning the state "Blue". And that scares all the rurals to death.
3) fraud thing is probably not truly believed by a majority of those involved, but by god they are going to milk it to make sure the state stays Red as long as possible.

 

You have to be a special kind of petty and insecure to legislate that a person can’t give another person a bottle of water.

 

I imagine that sort of stuff will be more closely watched at certain locales than others. Can't imagine where, though.....

That, or the places which vote the way they would like don't have to worry much about wait times to bother.

 

That is what they claim. I think it is more of a reaction of the election results there. If you have Fulton County showing up in those kinds of numbers, no state wide election is assured to go a particular way. So better make it illegal to give any kind of food or water while in line for 6 hours anymore, and then make sure they continue to have to wait in line for 6 or more hours if voter turnout is high. Better make sure you can't catch a ride to the polls, and then make the poll site miles and miles away in a low income neighborhood.

It's brilliant, in an evil way.

 

Got to love the Sydney Powell defense regarding her stolen election lies.

Sidney Powell's legal defense: 'Reasonable people' wouldn't believe her election fraud claims

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...e-reasonable-people-wouldn-t-believe-n1261809

 

So, Trump supporters and sycophants are not reasonable people. Got it.

This is the most idiotic thing I have ever seen. The ole Alex Jones defense.

 

Matt Gaetz has been under investigation for several months for a possible sexual relationship with a 17 year old girl

 

Why are we hearing about it before it is concluded? That doesn't seem proper for a sitting member of Congress.

 

Apparently Gaetz told Axios