I feel like I’d also like a “how to avoid being charged with assault, battery and of course Title 18” as a result of “How To Make A Fist: THE CORRECT WAY”
What we should do is convince Trump that the only way to prove he’s not a fascist is to legalize the punching of fascists.
1 Like
Unfortunately, it’s a good thing for civic society that the punching of people for speech alone is illegal. It’s our civic duty to punch fascists, but also to accept that doing so has potential consequences.
4 Likes
So what you’re saying is that Trump should adopt Putin’s strategy of continuously calling out his detractors as “fascists” in order to distract from his own fascistic tendencies?
1 Like
I have no words. Does this lead to impeachment?
OK, thought it was obvious, guess not, my bad, I was 100% kidding. That is a terrible idea.
Impeachment only happens when a majority of congressmen (republicans (scum)) want it to happen.
Domestic war is something dangerous enough I think even the GOP would oust him. The question is how close to war would he have to go before Impeachment.
1 Like
When you say domestic war. do you mean Americans fighting other Americans?
That would be civil war. By domestic war I mean any war where fighting includes combat within our borders, which I think is reasonable to predict would happen in case of Mexican war.
In preparation for this I should probably read that James K Polk biography I got so many years ago.
I see. I thought civil would be a more appropriate term for what I was thinking of. I was right. I just couldn’t imagine a way that we ended up fighting a war on America itself without both sides being American.
If Trump keeps upping the ante against Mexico, we’ll see it soon enough.
Is it hearsay when the President says it in Public and is recorded?
Noooooooooope. The President has self-authenticated the statement in that case.
Hearsay is basically, “you can’t prove that the person in question actually said/wrote that.”
4 Likes
Depends on context.
If the President is saying something as part of his office and it is directly related to the subject matter, it is not hearsay and admissible. However, saying something in an unofficial capacity and having that brought into court later may not be admissible.
Example: while signing an executive order the President says, “I’m signing this because I want to ruin these people’s lives.” That statement could be used in court.
Example: while talking off the record with friends the President is heard saying, “just wait until next week. I have an executive order to sign that is going to ruin the lives of those people.” Would not be admissible.
You might think they are the same but one is directly linked to an action and the other is not. The order he later signs may be directed at different people. Or it may not even be guided by his earlier feelings at all.
I’m pretty sure it’s obvious from context that we were only considering the first example.
Stop equivocating, Steve!
If the President makes a public statement it is obviously not “off the record”.
The one who brought up this entire discussion of “hearsay” is you, Steve, in reference to Sally Yates, and as far as I can see the reason you did it is to obfuscate the issue and discredit her without actually having to back up your assertion.
Moreover, being inadmissible is clearly not the same thing as being hearsay.
- internal communications within the executive branch are quite clearly not hearsay, but might be inadmissible due to executive privilege.
- something might be considered hearsay and yet still be admissible in court.
4 Likes
That is probably the most confused statement I’ve read all day
I think it means if you can’t punch your way out of something you need to be punching harder.
2 Likes
If that is what it means then I’m all for it. It should be called the One Punch Man Principle or Saitama’s Law.
1 Like
Trump’s previous actions were more or less expected. This one, if it passes, would be a shocker: https://www.thenation.com/article/leaked-draft-of-trumps-religious-freedom-order-reveals-sweeping-plans-to-legalize-discrimination/