They should ask themselves HOW Hillary was nominated in the first place before complaining about Trump. Those might be some norms and morals that should be looked at.

What norms are being eroded? What morals? The norms and morals we've had by past admins?

Can't get rid of them fast enough...

I'm just pointing out that that was stefang's post.



He stated that all American's morals are destroyed [on account of trump].


That's wrong.

No, I know what you were doing. :)

It's for those "others" - the feigned outrage type, like Stefan. But - the Russians! Wait, obstruction! No, campaign finance! He's gonna start WW3 with Twitter! Hold on, NK is off - wait, it's on - no off - no on - whichever, it's bad whatever he does so it doesn't matter! The embassy! Muh ambassador! Stop, it's pardon panic time! Did he read it? He did, that liar! Wait, maybe he didn't. Maybe a Russian read it to him. Let's not forget Stormy!

If he's impeached he will be removed from office, he can cry to the courts as much as he wants but he wont be in power..

Let me get this straight.

If PRESIDENT OF THE USA TRUMP, committed a crime, you are completely 100% A-ok with it if he gets away with it.

Am I reading you right?

Dreamer, you know you are a dreamer
Well can you put your hands in your head, oh no!
I said dreamer, you're nothing but a dreamer
Well can you put your hands in your head, oh no!

I would imagine he'd try to pardon himself before he was impeached though.

Yes :1orglaugh

He would still be impeached and if he tries to become a tyrant then myself and all true Americans will forcably remove him. Chump however is just a conman pussy.. He will cry a lot and attempt to rouse his dumb nutter followers but they are all old lazy fucks who will get distracted by beer stores or get their asses beat like what happens to the dumb ass skinheads and kkk every time they try bullshit...

Well, my norms and "morals"* are not normal to begin with. LOL Maybe that's why I am a pornographer. :)

*And StefanG said 'morale', not 'morals'. And I agree with him. America's morale overall is at a very low point right now. As for "norms"...what's 'normal' anymore? LOL So maybe you have a point there.

Trump is saying he can pardon himself because he knows he's going to be CRIMINALLY indicted. The pardoning talk has nothing to do with Trump being impeached.

It's been said that Trump has already been criminally indicted by a grand jury, and the indictment is sealed, and will be unsealed after Trump leaves office so he can be legally charged within the statute of limitations.

he meant morals. I'm not so sure America's morale overall is at a very low point right now. I remember people arguing that our low point was during Obama/or Bush/ or Clinton/ or 1968 etc.

You seem to have a zest for life and are doing exactly what you want to be doing, even though you know trump sucks, right? Sounds like a high morale to me, amigo.

We'd need stefang to tell us what he thinks he meant re: his sweeping generalization of Americans.

Posting in advance from the year 2024:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

He's desperate and doing what you'd expect a guilty person to do!!!!!

"As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong? In the meantime, the never ending Witch Hunt, led by 13 very Angry and Conflicted Democrats (& others) continues into the mid-terms!"

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

^^ Facts :1orglaugh

From the Hillary point of view before the election: Interesting reading - especially for those impeachment dreamers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://lawandcrime.com/opinion/if-h...t-be-helpless/

"It is Friday, January 20, 2017 and Hillary Clinton has just been sworn in as the 45th President of the United States after narrowly defeating Donald Trump in November. Republicans managed to hold both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A few weeks after winning the election, however, the Department of Justice handed down a multi-count indictment against Clinton over her handling of classified information and her involvement in an alleged pay for play scandal with the Clinton Foundation during her time as Secretary of State. It is a scenario that several of our commentators, and twitter followers have asked us to analyze.

As I am sure you can imagine, such a situation would cause a political firestorm of epic proportions. But before dismissing this scenario as some sort of wild fantasy, be reminded that we are talking about the Clintons who are no strangers to bizarre scandals (bringing nearly all of them upon themselves). In fact, a delayed announcement would be similar to what happened with David Petraeus in 2012 when DOJ sat on announcing that investigation until three days after the election.

Now, back to January 20, 2017. Could a future President Hillary Clinton pardon herself?

The short answer is she could certainly try, and may very well get away with it. What’s more, there is likely little Congress could do about it — even with a Republican controlled House of Representatives and Senate. Here is why.

The president’s pardon power comes from Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution that provides, “The President … shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

Based on the language of Article II, Section 2, the only limits placed on the power are that pardons may only be issued for federal offenses (not civil or state crimes), and a pardon cannot override the Congress’ impeachment power. Presidents have used this power to issue pardons in a wide range of matters throughout the country’s history. However, no president has ever attempted to pardon himself.

As a result, the legality of the self-pardon remains an open question. There are persuasive arguments on both sides. For the sake of brevity, the two arguments can be boiled down to this: (1) those that argue a self-pardon violates longstanding legal principals that a person should not act as their own judge and that no person is above the law; and (2) those, including Richard Nixon’s attorneys in the aftermath of Watergate, that argue that power to pardon is broad and unlimited, except for the two specific limitations mentioned in the Constitution.

So, assuming Clinton follows the latter approach and issues the self-pardon, where does that leave Congress? Could the House of Representatives start impeachment proceedings based on the criminal indictments?

That answer to that question is a resounding “no.”

Under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution, “The President… shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

The Constitution further provides that impeachment proceedings are to begin in the House of Representatives and if approved by a simple majority vote, the matter proceeds to the Senate for trial. When the president is tried, the Chief Justice presides over the Senate trial. A conviction requires a 2/3-majority vote and the Senate may impose punishment including barring the individual from holding future office. Although, the Senate is required to take an additional vote if it wishes to impose a ban on holding future office.

In Clinton’s case, however, the conduct underlying this hypothetical indictment occurred prior to her taking office. The House of Representatives, as far back as 1873, has determined that a person cannot be impeached based on conduct prior to them holding office. In other words, House precedent says a President Hillary Clinton could not be impeached as president for crimes related to the e-mail server or the Clinton Foundation.

In 1873, the House of Representatives considered impeaching the Vice President for crimes committed before he took office. After considering the matter, the House determined impeachment was only proper for crimes committed while in office.

So, under this precedent, a President Hillary Clinton could pardon herself without the Congress being able to do anything about it."

This topic shows how stupid and gullible Chump cultist are.. They will believe anything he tweets and ignore actual facts, from the US Consitution its self which states cleary, that he can not pardon himself or anyone else related to impeachment.

At this point, its obvious Trump supporters are no diffrent than any other fanatical cult, that believes anything their leader says reguardless of reality.

The facts are the US Consitution = Law
Trump = A Chump

Here's the bigger question for me. Maybe he can legally pardon himself. Let's just say he can. So, if there are charges placed against him with real, provable evidence behind them and Trump pardon's himself to avoid trouble. How will people feel?

If he did that, how could a person justify still supporting him?

I don't agree with most of Stefan's post (I think it's more like 90% of idiots wanting their team to win, no matter which of the 2 main sides, and that 90% having almost zero unbiased thinking - and ftr/fwiw I put you in the camp of *having* unbiased thinking. It's refreshing to read yours, kane's, and a few others' political posts), but he did not say that... your other post taking his quote and equating it to being 'what the euro's think' was also a bit shit-stirry and media/clickbait-like.

And to pre-empt in case you take this as a drive-by... that's not me calling you a shit-stirrer, just remarking that post was a bit shit-stirry. Those with a lack of brains will jump on that much like they have with bladeracist's nonsense with the fake nicks.

Well he said 'morale' so I will go with that until noted otherwise. :)

As for me personally? Fuck yeah I am doing what I want! My morale is always high because I learned a vital Life Lesson a few years back: control how you make a living, choose something you enjoy doing and you're golden. Who the President is really does not affect my life as much as it apparently does other people posting here.

Adapt or die right? If it applies to online porn then it applies to Presidential politics. :)

because we have reached the stage in history where it boils down to voting for the lesser of any particular voter's 2 evils? I couldn't imagine voting for either of the 2 main parties here, I would literally sooner go to prison than vote for manipulative, twisting, hypocritical fucks who lie through their teeth every day of the week (and please don't anyone give me that shit about so-and-so lies more than blahblah... if you're a liar you're a fucking a liar... spinning is lying, cherry-picking stats is lying, being in politics = your whole job is lying).

I get that some people feel their duty is to vote though, and/or don't feel the same way as I do, but to answer your question: because they feel that he is still better than candidate B... and that goes regardless who it is, what party they are, and what political persuasions the voter has. That's how fucked up politics are these days.

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

He will be forcably removed from office as the Consitution tells us to do.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are … endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…. That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men…. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. … Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Declaration of Independence (1776).

I don't know if he can or can't - although, I don't know what difference it makes since he would get impeached anyway if he did that. It's another phony but fun 24 hour news cycle tidbit - file it with the others and wait for tomorrow's.

If it turns out he is committing actual crimes, he will lose the support that keeps him going. The "crimes" put forth on this board do not exist, as much as they'd like to believe they do.

But hey - I am all for fairness. Let's see what they got. :thumbsup

You're right. I do have a shit stirring tone to my posts with anti-Americans. Sometimes I'm overly vague about that and use the word "euros". I do the same with Canadians too, btw, you prolly noticed. I apologize.

My take on it is that there is more finger pointing at USA than less here at GFY and by peoples that don't publicly look inward at their own country's issues.

What's worse, is there is a generalization that Americans don't care and give trump a pass because somehow trump is still POTUS. And they finger point -> why haven't I personally done something about that because they don't agree with trump.

Not only that, but there is a lot going on in the world, everywhere, that would lead to good discussion here. FOr example, we talk about global warming and it is invariably about stupid Americans deniers, but what about canadian climate change liars, we don't see those threads here. We should if climate change is as important as we all act like it is. What about the EU being headed towards a massive crisis, nothing.

It seems to me that many, not most, europeans and canadians overlook those things, being distracted by trump. Is it less?





we all live in nations with positives and negatives.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Pardons are for criminals, so trying to pardon himself means he's confessing to be a criminal

In the United States, the pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment ...

I agree. Expanding, I don't see how our economy could be kicking so much ass if American morale were low. We need morale to work [hard], right? a bustling economy is run on hard work. We all know our economy is very bustling right now. Some could argue that the morale in europe is low based on the math.

maybe I should crunch some #s for a new thread on that:1orglaugh



.

Keep telling yourself that.


"Under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself," the Department of Justice declared in 1974.


The DOJ ruled 44 years ago that the president cannot pardon himself

Not just "hard work" but rock solid consumer and investor confidence in today, tomorrow and in the future.

he'll prolly barricade himself in his bedroom with a bunch of mcdonald's.

exactly. the forecasts are impressive! and before a naysayer drives by, yes, inflation will be a sticky wicket to handle in such an expanding economy. That's just a fact.

Don't leave KFC hanging in the wind out there - POTUS loves him some chicken.

I wonder where these people get these things - low morale? LOL.

Consumer sentiment says what?

yeah a lot of people do it. A lot of us also get maybe a bit overly-defensive, and any criticism is seen as anti-usa, or anti-brit, or anti-whatever else we fee passionate about. Human nature I guess. I'm critical of a lot of things the us does, a lot of things the uk does, a lot of things 'insert-so-and-so_here' do. Ofc you do get the ACTUAL anti-whomever crowd as well, so it's natural at certain points we lash out a bit.

Tbh I'm not even sure why I pulled you up on it, my only excuse is it's been a long day of a fuckton of niggling issues I've had to sort out here there and everywhere, and I'm not in my usual does-it-really-matter mode lol. If it's any consolation I only noticed because it was unusual for you :) #manhug #nohomo

This part:
I think there's a mild mass-hysteria (oxymoron I know) that's being going on a few years now with every cunt trying to get in on how hard done by they are and how 'shit scared' they are (gimme a fucking break lol) because of person x, or outside influence y, or collective-wrong-team z. If Hillary got in it'd be just the same but in reverse, and whoever gets in next it'll be just the same as well.

Strange old times we live in where on a board full of supposed self-employed entrepeneurs, that so many outside things wield so much power over the participants here. Interest I get, fixation is just bizarre to me (hi 2muchmark and co).

Nah, he's just going to continue on using the laser pointer on you cats.

well, I have been on a bit of a tear here making toney threads about CA and EU. :winkwink: :1orglaugh I'll dial it back.

btw, imo you have a lot to add to the discussions, reality based input. :thumbsup

:1orglaugh

who doesn't like fried chicken, this is America! I think I've barricaded myself in a room with a bucket of KFC more than once.

I know I poke a lot of fun at trump and I do declare that he is no dealmaker. To be specific, I think he is not a nuclear deal maker. Who is really? I know trump the business man has put together quite a few huge deals. It's also our duty as Americans to rag on the POTUS, you know that.

I wonder why Clinton didn't have that power and Trump thinks he does.

Clinton wasn't charged with a crime. And he couldn't pardon himself in the impeachment.

Hypothetically, if Trump were charged (which he can't be because it is the DOJ's own set of rules that says they can't indict a sitting President, Mueller himself has said this) the charges would be from incidents that occurred prior to his Presidency... He could pardon himself on those "federal" offenses. If he were impeached he couldn't pardon himself there.. But, they can't impeach him for crimes prior to him taking office... This is all spelled out for you in xclips_Jim's post https://gfy.com/22281494-post56.html