dagblog - Comments for "Where is Mike Pompeo? He’s hiding in fear of Donald Trump."

I would like to add a point

artappraiser — Sat, 09 Nov 2019 17:44:20 +0000

In reply to This is an intriguing plan on

I would like to add a point he also makes: if you're going to talk the Founders' wishes, many of them were vehemently against the idea of a two-party system, thought it was the evilest thing that could happen....

This is an intriguing plan on

artappraiser — Sat, 09 Nov 2019 17:41:30 +0000

In reply to Ridiculous. They would be

This is an intriguing plan on what to do long term about the current flaws in our system:

http://dagblog.com/link/let-thousand-parties-bloom-29341

Everything he suggests is constitutional, and after it is achieved one would have a more realistic chance of changing the constitution.

I recommend it to get some outside the box inspiration.

As he notes, this not total pie in the sky, as there is already a start in Rep. Don Buyer's (D) Fair Representation Act. He walks through next steps, which would be increasing the size of the House, proportional voting, which would eventually cause the parties to split into like 2 Dem parties and three GOP ones. Which would cause more candidates not beholden to compromise until after they win. Etc. etc. Whereas before Trump, something like this didn't seem possible, after Trump divisiveness nightmare, and the increasing number of people who identify with neither party, but register as Independents, it seems more so.

Now that we have a racist,

NCD — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 23:29:31 +0000

In reply to OK, there is still no

Now that we have a racist, self aggrandizing president and his mob of rabid bigots, grifters, idiots and Fox News brainwashed disciples shouting "coups, "witch hunts", "restrictions in their freedoms" to hate and the president himself spreading lies, conspiracy theories, attacks on private citizens and proclaiming "the free press is the enemy of the people" .... it's clear the hypocrisy of 1850's is not yet history.

Chief Justice Taney, updated:

"The court rules that the Republican Party is not subject to be held to account, nor are they intended to be included, under the word 'corrupt' in any matter in the press, before a court or in a by definition illegitimate Democrat controlled Congressional investigation. Republicans can therefore claim all of the rights, privileges and more, which the Constitution of the United States provides and secures to them, while rightfully denying the same to Democrats or their fellow travellers."

At this point, it is hard to

moat — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 23:01:09 +0000

In reply to Yep. If only Trump and Barr

At this point, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Barr is a Soros mole who enabled Trump to commit crimes in plain view by telling him he was invisible if he wore the magic rings Barr gave Trump after Barr proved his powers by falling onto the Mueller grenade.
Barr then led the House straight to the Garden of Gethsemane when he shut down the reports from the IG's. *Cue cunning hand rubbing sound*
Soros is probably the one who hired Parnas and Fruman to pump money into GOP campaigns.
Poor Rudy was double tapped from opposite ends of the grassy knoll.
Hey, there is a pretzel cart down there. Anybody want a pretzel?

I don't recall any credible

ocean-kat — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 21:24:55 +0000

In reply to OK, there is still no

I don't recall any credible threat made to electors. Attempting to convince someone to vote a certain way isn't a crime or against the constitution. It's a component of free speech. State laws to prohibit electors free choice at the least go against the FF intent for the electoral college and will likely be found unconstitutional. If you actually cared about the FF intent you would be against those laws. But you're just a partisan hack and only care about what you see as benefiting your side and spinning arguments to defend it. No one here believes you're honest or serious about anything you post.We know it's just agitprop.

OK, there is still no

Anonymous — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 20:28:43 +0000

In reply to Ridiculous. They would be

OK, there is still no constitutional restriction on what you call free choice but it became a problem with political parties and is still an issue. Supposedly wise men who can properly overrule the vote of the state's people are hard to find.

What your cronies tried in '16 was to use forces from inside and outside the states to convince, course or threaten electors to help them to overturn the election which is pure corruption. ,

Seems you're missing the

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 12:23:54 +0000

In reply to Art, I never suspected you

Seems you're missing the Roger Stone trial - Trump wasn't "chosen" at all - his team actively & illegally colluded with the Russians & Wikileaks to leverage stolen emails, along with other illegal measures like their work with the foreign Cambridge Analytica using stolen Facebook data, illegal use of Trump foundation money for his campaign, illegal use of FBI officers to extort Comey to action.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/roger-stone-trial-congre...

Trump's spiritual advisor

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 11:10:54 +0000

In reply to Trump's Favorite Pastor Paula

Trump's spiritual advisor influenced by Lucifer.

https://m.facebook.com/TheOther98/photos/a.115969958413991/3848662345144...

Also worth remembering the FF

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 09:43:02 +0000

In reply to Ridiculous. They would be

Also worth remembering the FF designed it so Senators *represented the States*, and it wasn't until 1913 that the 17th Amendment made them elected by popular vote - taking away a huge amount of states' influence at the national level. Frankly I liked the hierarchy before, and thought it gave a nice split to the rough-hewn poplar House, and the more states-interest/issue-&-politics savvy Senate. But i'm sure there are issues I"ve never properly considered in the background to this shift, more a kneejerk feeling.

Ridiculous. They would be

ocean-kat — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 06:34:49 +0000

In reply to I didn't vote for Trump but I

Ridiculous. They would be horrified. It was never their intent that electoral college members wouldn't have free choice. The electors free choice was the basis of the electoral college. It was a hard fought part of the constitution that went through several iterations before it was settled. The FF would think the meaning and purpose of the electoral college had been subverted when states passed laws requiring electors to vote in certain ways. I've never liked the electoral college and certainly wouldn't advocate a return to what was actually intended. But it's obvious that what we have now is a parody of the electoral college the FF designed. Frankly history is my weakest area of study but you've clearly read no history at all and distort what ever small knowledge to support your partisan view. Even I can see through your pretense. The actual historians on this site must just be laughing at you.