https://x.com/alt_historian/status/1759417056443711640
Believing Weimar Germany was a horrible place is like believing the Treaty of Versailles was overly harsh for Germany.
— The Alternate Historian (@alt_historian) February 19, 2024
It's Nazi propaganda.
Why was the germ simply not enslaved after tho?:
Americoids need not talk. This is eurotrash business:
HOW DOES THIS EFFECT YOU CHUD?:
Other:
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Hes blatantly guilty of soliciting election fraud in ga. Blatanly guilty of fraud for intentionally and knowingly inflating the value of properties in ny.
Hes blatantly guilty of the campaign finance violations. Idk how anyone could even argue against these without very tortured reasoning.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Pick one. Whats your best shot
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Soliciting fraud in Ga.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
All right let's break it down into the details. What was the specific Act I'm assuming the ratzenberger(spelling?) phone call
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yes
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Do you have a problem with the whole phone call or just a specific section of it I assume you're talking about the find me the votes quote?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Generally directing a sos to find you the exact number of votes needed to overturn your loss is, you know, questionable.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
So probably where I'd head with that is Marbury versus Madison I'll be my best argument it preempts pretty much everything else which is a federal Supremacy argument. My inclination is that if Congress felt it was a crime they could impeach and remove him at which point he could be charged for the offense.
To my mind I think it's the only practical solution because you can't have a presidential candidate who could be in legal Jeopardy in 50 states as soon as he's no longer the president.
Note that I'm not arguing for or against your specific point but I'm arguing from a practical standpoint from a democratic Norms standpoint and from a preemption standpoint
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I don't really see how that makes any sense to you lol. Congress has no reason to do anything because political fortunes are largely tied to the president within a party now.
Furthermore the argument senate republicans gave is that they had no reason to act because the civilian legal system could hold him accountable if he had broken the law.
And there's basically no way to impeach a president in modern America because a party will defend them to the absolute ends of the earth, no matter how guilty they might be.
Using your logic what you're basically saying is a president can simply break the law at will and never be held accountable, as congress will never do it in reality, while also trying to argue the legal system cannot hold him accountable.
As long as said president just keeps running for office, he's quite literally above the law. Which is absurd.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context