Jump to content

If Trump is convicted of treason, should the Supreme court members he put in place be removed?...


If Trump is found 'guilty' for Treasoon, should his appoitees to the Supreme Court be removed (and unable to overturn)?  

6 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Scott Mayers said:

"Removal" of the judges to me is not killing them!! It is retracting of their position as judges. And I in particular am arguing this removal based upon the nature of their nomination by a poisoned authority. That is, IF Donald Trump is proven criminal by any standards, I am suggesting the removals given his choice to select them where his capacity to 'select' in the interest of the people is proven to be suspect. The timing of the last one to his realization of losing his Presidency is severely suspect given the domination of the court by his own selection can skew how they might interpret any appeal of his for ANY future convictions. That would make him above the law IN PRINCIPLE! And THAT is what you are supporting. Call it what you will. I assert that you are supporting authoritarianism based upon your support of his Presidency regardless of the fact that his acts are indifferent to acting as a sovereign dictator, like a King. 

I don't support any violent acts against the judges I question. It is not their 'fault' to BE nominated and their coinciding favor to BE political would have to be a separate issue. 

Interesting.

I'll have to say it again Scotty...your TDS is showing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Scott Mayers said:

True. But I'm glad I'm not the Trump-Dick-Sucker here!

LOL...no I suppose you're not. I would imagine you'd rather cozy up between Pelosi's thighs.

None of which changes the fact that its YOU calling for the trashing of the US Constitution and removal of SCOTUS judges, based solely on who nominated them.

But hey...I would entreat you to keep it up. Because in the end...if Trump runs again...he'll win. And then...I'll have the distinct pleasure of watching you jack-asses howl at the moon again...

Like the rational limp noodles y'all are...

Have a warm and fuzzy day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

LOL...no I suppose you're not. I would imagine you'd rather cozy up between Pelosi's thighs.

None of which changes the fact that its YOU calling for the trashing of the US Constitution and removal of SCOTUS judges, based solely on who nominated them.

But hey...I would entreat you to keep it up. Because in the end...if Trump runs again...he'll win. And then...I'll have the distinct pleasure of watching you jack-asses howl at the moon again...

Like the rational limp noodles y'all are...

Have a warm and fuzzy day.

The nominations by him regardless would have been accepted which makes his 'nomination' indifferent to an 'appointment'. I also understand that no one can get a position without nomination. 

Your threats only prompt some to work harder to oppose. Trump's initial election was itself only due to doubt of his likelihood of succeeding. I know this because I was warning people that his apparent circus show should be takien more serious when others were strongly dismissing his likelihood of his success. 

While I too am concerned about those on the Left to be absurdly 'woke', it is still relatively safe to vote for them considering the diverse views of similar extremes that exist there. On the Right, this behavior is both default to their ethics and DOMINANT to those who are more in sync with their own form of 'wokeness' that just lacks the label for BEING the traditional power who concentrated their passing of the torch to ONLY their own kind. 

The Left's 'wokeness' is a reactionary reflection of them using what is normally Right-wing methods (as some of the Left-wing methods have equally been applied by contemporary Rightwingers as well. The dominating power on both sides are those with wealth AND to those most concentrating the passing of inheritance to their own kind. The Left has multiple such cults who simply lack the dominance independently. As such, the conservatives of alternative cults to the traditional fundamentalist are taking the reigns on the Left with only the agreement among them to NOT harm each other while they attack a shared common 'enemy'. They support 'heritage', which is simply an extenstion of regular economic inheritance normally favored by the Right. 

The tactics used by the Right have always been to exploit others using rhetoric, deception, and misdirection where the Left prior to the information age lacked the Internet as a source of exposing the secrets of manipulation used by different political interests of all party ideals. As such, the 'woke' factors are being used BY similar thinkers hoping to exploit the power of reflecting the tactics used against them from the beginning of time. 

The left wing parties for all its flaws prevents the extreme views from STAYING consistent. So much of the extreme wokeness is temporal as everyone normally unnoticed for their issues are being heard for the first time in history. Much of this is also due to technology such as the Internet as well as 'Smart' devices which permit 'feedback' noise that make people deluded into thinking they are more popular than they actially are. 

If we think of the world as being one big ghetto run by gangs. The 'Right' would be supported by the traditional mobs while the 'Left' are run by independently weak gangs who recognize that they can collect their interests to assure that they can compete with the bigger gang. But even though the majority of people everwhere are less affliated with particular gangs, they are cleverly being turned against each other and isolated by those commanding distinct alignments to these gangs. 

The 'democratic' side (and the name of Leftwing parties representative counter to 'republican' authoritarianism) refers to the people being treated EQUAL in power; the Right believes in power to the INHERENT wealth classes as though they are Royalty deserving of EXCEPTIONAL voting power than the one-person-to-one-vote ideal of democracy. They are deluded into interpreting their successes as completely self-earned without recognizing that the most advantageous power for being more wealthy (or selectively more 'beautiful' in artificial standards) is the greater capacity to FAIL more oftern WITHOUT equal consideration of those less fortunate. 

For the poorer and more concentrated racially segregated classes, failure may only be permissible once and make them liable to greater penalties in contrast to those with better standards. As such, those who were forcefully segregated FROM beneficial wealth are aligning with their own 'kind' in the same way the wealthy normally do by passing economic inheritance onto only their own relatives (nepotism). Thus the wokeism itself happening by the Left is the modelling of the "inheritance" rights normally held by conservatives by monetizing culture as equal TO a form of inheritance that where respected enables those who normally lose for failing once to better succeed. 

So you are the limp biscuit here deluded in your interpretation of what is happening today. I can and do fight against those on 'my' side on the same concerns. It is changing in the same way a new letter is added to the LBGTQ+ list of all that are simply 'non-heterosexual' in shared meaning. They keep growing because of another screaming 'me too' which WILL eventually become moot once an H is applied to the end of that list. ["H' is for the complementary heterosexual who will eventually also be the last member making the distinctions no longer concerning.]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

But hey...I would entreat you to keep it up. Because in the end...if Trump runs again...he'll win. And then...I'll have the distinct pleasure of watching you jack-asses howl at the moon again...

:lol:

But yeah...no amount of wishful thinking on the part of the OP is going to make his fantasy happen so why bother with it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scott Mayers said:

The nominations by him regardless would have been accepted which makes his 'nomination' indifferent to an 'appointment'. I also understand that no one can get a position without nomination. 

Your threats only prompt some to work harder to oppose. Trump's initial election was itself only due to doubt of his likelihood of succeeding. I know this because I was warning people that his apparent circus show should be takien more serious when others were strongly dismissing his likelihood of his success. 

While I too am concerned about those on the Left to be absurdly 'woke', it is still relatively safe to vote for them considering the diverse views of similar extremes that exist there. On the Right, this behavior is both default to their ethics and DOMINANT to those who are more in sync with their own form of 'wokeness' that just lacks the label for BEING the traditional power who concentrated their passing of the torch to ONLY their own kind. 

The Left's 'wokeness' is a reactionary reflection of them using what is normally Right-wing methods (as some of the Left-wing methods have equally been applied by contemporary Rightwingers as well. The dominating power on both sides are those with wealth AND to those most concentrating the passing of inheritance to their own kind. The Left has multiple such cults who simply lack the dominance independently. As such, the conservatives of alternative cults to the traditional fundamentalist are taking the reigns on the Left with only the agreement among them to NOT harm each other while they attack a shared common 'enemy'. They support 'heritage', which is simply an extenstion of regular economic inheritance normally favored by the Right. 

The tactics used by the Right have always been to exploit others using rhetoric, deception, and misdirection where the Left prior to the information age lacked the Internet as a source of exposing the secrets of manipulation used by different political interests of all party ideals. As such, the 'woke' factors are being used BY similar thinkers hoping to exploit the power of reflecting the tactics used against them from the beginning of time. 

The left wing parties for all its flaws prevents the extreme views from STAYING consistent. So much of the extreme wokeness is temporal as everyone normally unnoticed for their issues are being heard for the first time in history. Much of this is also due to technology such as the Internet as well as 'Smart' devices which permit 'feedback' noise that make people deluded into thinking they are more popular than they actially are. 

If we think of the world as being one big ghetto run by gangs. The 'Right' would be supported by the traditional mobs while the 'Left' are run by independently weak gangs who recognize that they can collect their interests to assure that they can compete with the bigger gang. But even though the majority of people everwhere are less affliated with particular gangs, they are cleverly being turned against each other and isolated by those commanding distinct alignments to these gangs. 

The 'democratic' side (and the name of Leftwing parties representative counter to 'republican' authoritarianism) refers to the people being treated EQUAL in power; the Right believes in power to the INHERENT wealth classes as though they are Royalty deserving of EXCEPTIONAL voting power than the one-person-to-one-vote ideal of democracy. They are deluded into interpreting their successes as completely self-earned without recognizing that the most advantageous power for being more wealthy (or selectively more 'beautiful' in artificial standards) is the greater capacity to FAIL more oftern WITHOUT equal consideration of those less fortunate. 

For the poorer and more concentrated racially segregated classes, failure may only be permissible once and make them liable to greater penalties in contrast to those with better standards. As such, those who were forcefully segregated FROM beneficial wealth are aligning with their own 'kind' in the same way the wealthy normally do by passing economic inheritance onto only their own relatives (nepotism). Thus the wokeism itself happening by the Left is the modelling of the "inheritance" rights normally held by conservatives by monetizing culture as equal TO a form of inheritance that where respected enables those who normally lose for failing once to better succeed. 

So you are the limp biscuit here deluded in your interpretation of what is happening today. I can and do fight against those on 'my' side on the same concerns. It is changing in the same way a new letter is added to the LBGTQ+ list of all that are simply 'non-heterosexual' in shared meaning. They keep growing because of another screaming 'me too' which WILL eventually become moot once an H is applied to the end of that list. ["H' is for the complementary heterosexual who will eventually also be the last member making the distinctions no longer concerning.]

 

Nice soliloquy. But things have changed. Clinton laid the foundations, bringing China into the WTO with its "preferred status". Bush managed to piss off just about everyone. Obama was setup as the great saviour, but turned out to be a frustratingly weak dud. And then Trump called for a halt to the BS and surprisingly...that message resonated like crazy. People were simply fed up with being treated as pawns in a chess game. Resources to be used and misused. "The basket of deplorables". However there was always the problem of the status quo and the predetermined direction the elites had in mind. He wasn't onboard...if you will...with the whole globalist agenda. Hence...the elite attacked the guy with a veracity never before witnessed in America...or anywhere for that matter.

The biggest problem the left has today, is that in order to "build back better", they have to inflict pain on the entire population of the world. But mostly, it appears, The Western Nations must allow the affluence they'd created, to be siphoned off and polluted. The great re-organization...re-distribution...equity...words used to tug at the hearts of liberal minded folks, in order to convince them that the pain being inflicted was...necessary and their own fault. Its been sickening to stand outside this mud puddle and watch it all unfold. Stalin would be impressed. Its a longer haul...but the end game is the same. Mass poverty for We The People...incredible wealth and power for the elites.

The biggest problem Trump has is not the people...its those elites who see him turning the people against them and will stop at nothing to squash his movement. Even if it means labelling the people as "terrorists".

Today the 2 parties have each done a 180. Now conservatives profess to represent the people and their nation, while the liberals profess to be doing what's best for everyone and what's necessary because...if they don't...

"AHHH! WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!"

They use fear and hatred like a knife and a fork. Its rather a disgusting and mean spirited practice...but its been working. How far will the liberals go? All the way now. We know that because they are still trying to jail Trump for whatever they can concoct. He must be destroyed, or this grand plan will crumble...yet again.

Edited by Nationalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2022 at 1:13 AM, Scott Mayers said:

Given Trump alone selected the justices that turned against the vast majority regardless of the will of the public,

...if he were to be found guilty in a tribunal jury made up of the people (as a vote), should his significant actions that potentially lead to the a conviction of the crime be removed?

That is, since Trump intentionally set up the court to intentionally enable his insurrection NOT be convicted, is not his treason enough to relieve those justices?

 

Obviously, I am for this but though this might be a distinct 'philosophical' thread for those questioning this.. What do you think?

 

 

  What a stupid question.  Trump wasn't a dictator.  He couldn't make anybody a supreme court justice.  All he could do was put forth nominees.  It was others who made the final choice.  So whatever happens to Trump wouldn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,742
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CrazyCanuck89
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • DACHSHUND went up a rank
      Rookie
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      First Post
    • aru earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • User earned a badge
      Posting Machine
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...