Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[Alan Klein]

Frank, I think you need a nap. It's getting late, past your bedtime.

[TechTalk]

Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Who Altered Email in Russia Case Is Sentenced to Probation
A judge rebuffed a request by prosecutors to impose a prison sentence on Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted doctoring an email used to help authorize a wiretap on a former Trump campaign aide.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/29/us/politics/kevin-clinesmith-probation.html

Page was fired:
Lisa Page bombshell: FBI couldn't prove Trump-Russia collusion before Mueller appointment
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/406881-lisa-page-bombshell-fbi-couldnt-prove-trump-russia-collusion-before-mueller

Strzok and  others pushed the spying process and approvals as did others.

I'm happy that those few that didn't follow rules and protocols were fired or disciplined. None of which makes the investigation into Russian interference and individuals associated with the campaign: a hoax; a conspiracy theory; mass hysteria; phony; illegal; spying on the campaign; or supports the numerous other false talking points that you have so oft parroted and repeated.

[faberryman]

Frank, I think you need a nap. It's getting late, past your bedtime.

Now come the deflections.

[Alan Klein]

I'm happy that those that didn't follow rules and protocols were fired or disciplined. None of which makes the investigation into Russian interference and individuals associated with the campaign: a hoax; a conspiracy theory; mass hysteria; phony; illegal; spying on the campaign; or supports the numerous other false talking points that you have so oft parroted and repeated.

Well this was debated ad nauseam.  We'll just have to disagree about it.

[TechTalk]

The Republican senators may rue the day they didn't vote with the democrats for impeachment.

That's true. They may—and preferably sooner than later.

[TechTalk]

Well this was debated ad nauseam.  We'll just have to disagree about it.

Indeed.

[TechTalk]

They get a biased call that is obviously geared against the President and decided to say screw it, I'm going to reaffirm my support by just playing along.  That is it.

Bogart said it better than I am able and in only a matter of seconds.

https://www.youtube.com/The Stuff that Dreams are made of

[TechTalk]

I don't think our views on the purpose of impeachment are at any basic odds with each other.

We have very different views on the purpose. You have stated that the main purpose of impeachment is removal from office. I reject that idea completely.

You have used your concept of the main purpose as a basis for claiming that only current office holders can be constitutionally impeached. I reject that idea completely as well.

It's just that impeachment in my view applies to current officeholders, not ex-officials who are no longer in office. We have other procedures in our justice system using Federal civilian courts to deal with any crimes the official may have done while in office.

Then why bother with impeachment at all? The answer is... Because criminal or civil prosecution is not—and never has been—a substitute for impeachment. There are good reasons why the Framers included mechanisms for both impeachment and criminal/civil prosecutions in the Constitution—and for why they stipulated that impeachment does not bar additional prosecution in the courts for the same offense by the same individual.

That's because each have separate and distinct purposes and punishments that are not covered by the other. Impeachment can remove an individual from office and disqualify them from future participation in the political process; criminal and civil courts cannot do that. Civil and criminal courts can seize property; levy fines; and remove an individual from society and put them in prison—impeachment cannot do that. Unlike criminal conviction in a court, impeachment and its punishments are not subject to pardon at any time. "[The President] ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." One venue is never a substitute for the other.

While both venues are able to render punishments for certain acts of official misconduct and both may render punishments to the same individual for the same misconduct—they cannot render the same punishments. That's why both exist and why each have entirely separate constitutional provisions, rules, standards, and procedures; and are conducted by different branches of government.

[Robert Roaldi]

Schumer's going to push for two more states - Puerto Rico and Washington DC so they can get four more Democratic Senators.  Then they'll pack the court with 6 more liberal jurists. It's all about power.  No one gives a damn about the public, the constitution, or tradition.

You have brought up this subject up a few times. Has anyone stated this policy during the election or elsewhere or are you speculating?

But my question really is this. If Puerto Rico had a history of voting Republican, would you have a problem with it becoming a state?

[JoeKitchen]

Hogwash with creme rinse.

This just show how much you dont actually pay attention to your side.  AOC is open about being a socialist, and would implement it if she had the chance, as are other members of the squad. 

[JoeKitchen]

The democrats will become undemocratic and tell the Puerto Ricans they're going to become a state and make up some excuse. Right now they don't pay federal income taxes there, only 4% PR tax. So most would like that to continue.  Of course, that ends if they become a state.  They'll have to pay federal taxes like the rest of us suckers.

Damn, no federal taxes.  Is this really true? 

[JoeKitchen]

I thought you, uh, “...tend to take people at their word,” but just when it’s convenient, I guess?

Good point. 

I still stand by my assessment though with that most were just reaffirming their loyalty, even if it made them sound like asses.  It's cult of personality BS that exists on both sides. 

I am seeing it develop with Biden right now too with people insisting his administration is 100% truthful, even though they have been caught in lie after lie already. 

So, it is just as much an issue with the Dems as the Republicans. 

[JoeKitchen]

By the way, how is TX doing? 

[PeterAit]

The democrats will become undemocratic and tell the Puerto Ricans they're going to become a state and make up some excuse. Right now they don't pay federal income taxes there, only 4% PR tax. So most would like that to continue.  Of course, that ends if they become a state.  They'll have to pay federal taxes like the rest of us suckers.

In the 2020 referendum Puerto Ricans voted for statehood 52.3% to 47.6% with a 54.7% turnout.

[digitaldog]

Damn, no federal taxes.  Is this really true?

If you look at who made the simplistic statement, no.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Puerto_Rico

Taxation in Puerto Rico consists of taxes paid to the United States federal government and taxes paid to the Commonwealth government. Payment of taxes to the federal government, both personal and corporate, is done through the IRS, while payment of taxes to the Commonwealth government, whether personal or corporate, is done through the Departamento de Hacienda de Puerto Rico.
Contrary to popular belief,[5] all Puerto Rico residents pay federal taxes, just as mainland Americans do.
Contrary to common misconception,[13] residents of Puerto Rico do pay federal income taxes.

Don't call him a liar, no one here has either. When he posts, do what his wife does with Phone call solicitations.

[Alan Klein]

We have very different views on the purpose. You have stated that the main purpose of impeachment is removal from office. I reject that idea completely.

You have used your concept of the main purpose as a basis for claiming that only current office holders can be constitutionally impeached. I reject that idea completely as well.

Then why bother with impeachment at all? The answer is... Because criminal or civil prosecution is not—and never has been—a substitute for impeachment. There are good reasons why the Framers included mechanisms for both impeachment and criminal/civil prosecutions in the Constitution—and for why they stipulated that impeachment does not bar additional prosecution in the courts for the same offense by the same individual.

That's because each have separate and distinct purposes and punishments that are not covered by the other. Impeachment can remove an individual from office and disqualify them from future participation in the political process; criminal and civil courts cannot do that. Civil and criminal courts can seize property; levy fines; and remove an individual from society and put them in prison—impeachment cannot do that. Unlike criminal conviction in a court, impeachment and its punishments are not subject to pardon at any time. "[The President] ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." One venue is never a substitute for the other.

While both venues are able to render punishments for certain acts of official misconduct and both may render punishments to the same individual for the same misconduct—they cannot render the same punishments. That's why both exist and why each have entirely separate constitutional provisions, rules, standards, and procedures; and are conducted by different branches of government.

You're the first person I've heard argue that removal from office is not the main purpose of impeachment. I guess we'll have to just disagree on this issue as well.

[faberryman]

In the 2020 referendum Puerto Ricans voted for statehood 52.3% to 47.6% with a 54.7% turnout.

A true fact. How refreshing.

[PeterAit]

Damn, no federal taxes.  Is this really true?

It's not true. No income tax but they pay all other federal taxes such as payroll and Medicare.

[faberryman]

By the way, how is TX doing?

TV says millions without power. Tucker Carlson says it is because the windmills are frozen, so now conservatives have lit their hair on fire about the evils of renewable energy. Lighting your hair on fire keeps you warm. It is a bit of a conundrum though. If you light your hair on fire, you can't go near fossil fuels, so conservatives have sort of painted themselves into a corner.

[Alan Klein]

You have brought up this subject up a few times. Has anyone stated this policy during the election or elsewhere or are you speculating?

But my question really is this. If Puerto Rico had a history of voting Republican, would you have a problem with it becoming a state?

It's not speculation.  Democrats are talking about making Washington and PR states.  Google it.

I have no problem if Puerto Ricans vote to become a state.  They have in the past but there wasn't a clear-cut vote.  I suppose with a Democratic-controlled Congress, it will become more "clear-cut" so they can now justify making them a state.  All those Americans who moved there to avoid federal taxes will again have to pay them.  Well, at least they have nice beaches. Warmer than Canada.