Jaysyn

I support this Pipe Dream.

Unfortunately, this isn’t a Congress that will vote to limit its own power.

Think for yourself.

“Why is the political party that actively wants to destroy our institutions ok with destroying our institutions?”

That’s your question, reframed.

If you want a real answer, it’s because Roe v. Wade “was” settled law & the Democrats are a “big tent” party with a lot of disparate views that always don’t mesh together. They should be 3 parties working as a collation, but our stupid FPtP election system won’t allow that.

Following that, note which party has made RCV illegal in 5 states.

This falsehood has been a right-wing talking point all the way back since 2013.

When Obama had “Total Control” of Congress

Lies are easy to get away with if they are repeated often enough and given voice by many different people. Repeat a lie often enough and that lie often becomes conventional wisdom. Repeating a lie doesn’t change the lie into the truth, it changes the people hearing the repeated lie. They begin to accept the lie as truth. One huge example: ‘Iraq has WMD.’

…

The truth…then…is this: Democrats had “total control” of the House of Representatives from 2009-2011, 2 full years. Democrats, and therefore, Obama, had “total control” of the Senate from September 24, 2009 until February 4, 2010. A grand total of 4 months.

Did President Obama have “total control” of Congress? Yes, for 4 entire months. And it was during that very small time window that Obamacare was passed in the Senate with 60 all-Democratic votes.

Did President Obama have "total control’ of Congress during his first two years as president? Absolutely not and any assertions to the contrary…as you can plainly see in the above chronology…is a lie.

EDIT:
This is the archive of the original chronology link.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130307230207/http://www.thepragmaticpundit.com:80/2011/12/obama-did-not-control-congress-for-two.html

Reminder: The pirates won the last time they tried this crap.

I understand wanting to pay for the years you’ve already used it, but is there really any reason to use RAR over 7zip since 7zip will uncompress RAR & seems, from personal use, to have better compression for most filetypes.

Math, Game Theory & First Past the Post voting.

A snoring pug.

Why New York state is suing Trump instead of charging him with crimes

James seems to be taking this approach, as opposed to a criminal indictment, because New York law empowers the AG to seek damages caused by fraudulent business behavior as a form of consumer protection. The law doesn’t require the AG to identify a victim or even demonstrate anybody suffered harm. Plus, the burden of proof is lower in civil cases than in criminal ones.

“What makes this statute particularly powerful is that there doesn’t have to be a loss,” Will Thomas, a law professor at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, told Yahoo Finance. “This statute has been used to disgorge profits illegally gained. The government can be allowed to claw back all of those profits. Provable nature is lower, and you don’t have to prove intent or willfulness.”

A civil suit also prevents James from bumping into the criminal case against Trump’s company that the Manhattan district attorney is prosecuting. Those two offices sometimes work together on criminal cases, as they’re doing on the recent indictment of former Trump adviser Steve Bannon. With regard to Trump, however, they seem to be pursuing complementary approaches instead of overlapping ones.

So the answer is: it’s easier to win, it’s easier to punish Trump & they can still file criminal charges after a successful civil case if more crimes are uncovered.

A civil case can end with a criminal indictment however, which is certainly coming at this point.

See my other post in this thread for why it was done this way.

People keep asking this. I guess it’s the new spin the Trump fascists are trying to work.

Why New York state is suing Trump instead of charging him with crimes

James seems to be taking this approach, as opposed to a criminal indictment, because New York law empowers the AG to seek damages caused by fraudulent business behavior as a form of consumer protection. The law doesn’t require the AG to identify a victim or even demonstrate anybody suffered harm. Plus, the burden of proof is lower in civil cases than in criminal ones.

“What makes this statute particularly powerful is that there doesn’t have to be a loss,” Will Thomas, a law professor at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, told Yahoo Finance. “This statute has been used to disgorge profits illegally gained. The government can be allowed to claw back all of those profits. Provable nature is lower, and you don’t have to prove intent or willfulness.”

A civil suit also prevents James from bumping into the criminal case against Trump’s company that the Manhattan district attorney is prosecuting. Those two offices sometimes work together on criminal cases, as they’re doing on the recent indictment of former Trump adviser Steve Bannon. With regard to Trump, however, they seem to be pursuing complementary approaches instead of overlapping ones.

So the answer is: it’s easier to win, it’s easier to punish Trump & they can still file criminal charges after a successful civil case if more crimes are uncovered.

President can’t pardon state cases.

deleted by creator

Different court case. This one is a criminal case.

This is the exact same crime that has already seen Michael Cohen serve a three year sentence for & Trump is a co-conspirator.

Remember Individual One?

You can’t possibly be that stupid.

Fake.

Easy block.

After what they did to GoT, I’ll never watch anything by Benioff & Weiss again.

That is 100% correct.

Also, nearly every witness against Trump in his criminal trials have been members of the GOP longer than Trump has.

The GOP has made RCV illegal in Tennessee, Florida & 3 other states.

One example is his tax returns. It is a tradition for presidents to voluntarily release them. He chose not to. Then democratic controlled congress fought for several years to have them be released for no real reason except to force him.

Oh you poor delusional soul.

Those tax documents, while evidence of criminal acts, were just a small fraction of the literal 900 bankers boxes of fraud evidence against Trump.

People that understand how our system of government works, understand that Congress has the power of investigation.

Why don’t you understand that?

You aren’t fooling anyone.