Comments by "possumverde" (@possumverde) on "Fox News" channel.

  1. If Trump's supporters insist on treating the impeachment process as if it were a criminal trial (despite the fact that it isn't and therefore many rights that apply in criminal court don't in an impeachment), the whistleblower would still only be required to reveal their identity if their actual report or any testimony they may have given during the inquiry were introduced as evidence in the Senate trial. Until that happens, the whistleblower would not be an "accuser" of the President in a legal sense as it applies to the 6th ammendment. Mr. Paul is correct about there being no law preventing him or anyone else naming the whistleblower (assuming no gag order is issued before that naming.) However, he didn't mention that there could be some significant consequences to doing so. If one were to (out of spite and knowing the media storm/smear campaign that would follow) give the wrong name or the correct name when it turns out that the named was never legally obligated to reveal themselves, one would likely get the bleep sued out of them...and lose. The right to free speach dosen't protect one from legitimate consequences that arise from what one says.
    1
  2. It's all moot anyway since Michigan election law doesn't allow them to rescind their votes now anyway. Whatever Trump paid them, he wasted.
    1
  3. While he's definitely been far more lenient with Trump than most judges would be, calling him corrupt is a bit much.
    1
  4. On some planet maybe. Your weak link is...this is Earth.
    1
  5. Lol
    1
  6. Yep, they destroyed the integrity and legitimacy of our entire government and legal system by forcing their subjective beliefs onto ~48% of the population...bravo...
    1
  7. It's called personal choice. The murderer doesn't have the right to make that choice. A mother does...or should if weren't for the tyranical right doing everything they can to make this country a pseudo-theocracy. When you base laws on subjective beliefs, you undermine the legitimacy of our government and our legal system.
    1
  8. How? The cases would have been tossed for lack of evidence/standing either way. Accepting such weak cases simply to placate people who have no clue what they're talking about however, would have definitely damaged their credibility. They're a court of law, not public opinion.
    1
  9. It's not going to matter. The special master is just a pointless stall tactic and will ultimately have no significant effect on the case... other than perhaps annoy the DoJ enough to not cut former President Trump any slack when it comes to his eventual plea deal.
    1
  10. Nope. It took them about four years but they finally figured out the proper way to handle someone like Trump. You stay out of their way and let them defeat themselves. Worked like a charm.
    1
  11. Said before realizing it's fatal flaw...
    1
  12. President Trump is going to need the military vote this time around if he wants to remain in office and his firing of Vindman combined with his complete mishandling of the Gallagher affair is not a good way to go about earning it. Being a draft dodger doesn't exactly help either...
    1
  13. The DOJ will just remind him that, as long as the individual doesn't set foot on the Justice's property or impede travel to and from said property, the relevant law is unenforceable due to it's vague wording...and likely to violating the first amendment as well. The prohibitions in the law are tied to being "in or near" the property but it doesn't provide a specific distance to define "near." A first year law student could easily get such charges dropped. The only thing that could be successfully prosecuted would be direct threats of violence and so far the protestors seem to know that and are not crossing that line.
    1
  14. The military industrial complex got most of what wasn't actually sent to and used in Ukraine.
    1
  15. Why is the President contacting election officials pressuring them to act on his behalf?
    1
  16. Wouldn't matter anyway. The House could have impeached him after he left office and it would still be legal. Edit: The precedent is the impeachment of William Belknap (a Sectetary of War in the 1870s.) He was both impeached by the House and convicted in the Senate after having already resigned his office.
    1
  17.  CERN is a Halo array  Railguns require an absurd amount of electricity to fire and the round can't be guided in flight. Israel is already losing to attrition when it comes to cost by having to waste ~$40,000 missiles to intercept a ~$1,000 (on average) rockets. The expense of using a railgun(s) would be even greater.
    1
  18.  @turktokati5534  They've also been using $40,000 missiles that are slow to manufacture to intercept $1,000 rockets which can be manufactured quickly. Once they run out of their "iron dome" missiles, the path will be cleared for the more powerful missiles Hamas etc. have in reserve as well as those from Israel's other enemies should they decide to join in with direct launches of their own.
    1
  19. You should read the actual bill before commenting. It's a good way to prevent looking stupid.
    1
  20. It's not actually illegal in and of itself to leak such drafts. Most likely all that the leak will face are professional consequences.
    1
  21. Because coordination between the incoming and outgoing administrations concerning covid 19 will be more beneficial to the American people than intentionally making it difficult out of childish spite.
    1
  22. except for the separation of church and state bit that is
    1
  23. She should be disturbed as should anyone who cares about this country regardless of political affiliation. Sen. McConnell's behavior has been reprehensible in this matter and in other aspects of his duties as well. His contempt for his Constitutional responsibilities is sickening. Regardless of his personal views, his duty is to hold an impartial trial in good faith and vote his conscience once the evidence and testimony have been delivered. Instead he's out mugging for the cameras, announcing a verdict before the trial, and assisting the defendant's attempts to further obstruct a legitimate trial. And all the while, the stack of legislation passed by the House continues to grow and gather dust in his office...If he doesn't want to do his job anymore, he needs to retire. If he won't, then those who hired him need to let him go. I'm sure they can find a Republican candidate who will actually honor the responsibilities of the position to replace him with. At this point, a ham sandwich could probably do a better job...
    1
  24. Every state has done what they did at some point. For expediency, the governor, state court, or some other official depending on the state, will make a change to the election law. If the State Legislature doesn't agree with it they can easily override it. Otherwise, their lack of opposition is considered their approval. In the end, it is the state legislature's decision and the spirit of the law is not broken. Texas has done the same on multiple occasions over the last few elections with no one complaining about it. It's simply Trump's team trying to take a common accepted practice out of context and use it as a technicality to negate lawful votes. Typical ambulance chasing attorney ethics common amongst Trump's oompa loompa legal team.
    1
  25. Get ready to live in your car if Trump is elected. Housing prices are the most important issue and he won't touch that issue with a ten foot pole. After all, he makes or more accurately made, his living via real estate scamming. The very people effing us over are simply following in his footsteps.
    1
  26. Trump gave them anything they asked for (including sensitive nuclear tech) trying to buy their "friendship." The least they could do was stroke his ego a bit.
    1
  27. It isn't far from it. That's not really the issue though. She has written multiple articles in favor of mixing religious belief with the law. One doesn't need to be anti catholic to be concerned about potential violations of the separation of church state.
    1
  28. Despite having the 6th lowest population density, your state is 8th in covid deaths/100k. You account for ~0.37% of the total US covid deaths but only ~0.27% of the total population. In other words, her policies have led your state into having ~37% more than your fair share of covid deaths (at least ~600 potentially unnecessary deaths.) For comparison, Oregon has nearly 70% fewer than their fair share of covid deaths. Worth it?
    1
  29. There's nothing in any of the current gun control bills being considered that would infringe on the rights protected by the 2nd amendment. Militia manchildren are just pissed that they may have to find some other way of compensating for their... shortcomings if assault weapons get banned.
    1
  30. That's the rumor going around. It actually appears as though the block came from Truth Social's end however.
    1
  31. Not really. Israel has a history of only listening to those who tell them what they want to hear. They're so hellbent on achieving their final solution to the Palestinian question, that they're fully prepared to cut their alliances and become a pariah state to do so.
    1
  32. Trump didn't get confused and think he was at one of his rallies on CNN. He did on ABC. Had he behaved the same on CNN, their moderators would have had to wrangle him as well.
    1
  33. He's fired or driven off enough experienced intelligence personel as it is. If he keeps it up, he may find himself in a similar situation as Stalin after his military purges. Besides, President Trump has a habit of picking the absolute worst person for the job when it comes to his appointees so better he leave this well enough alone.
    1
  34. He crashed and burned on this one... What was he thinking?
    1
  35.  @mr_happy999  At least a few hundred (possibly thousand) violations of the Presidential Records Act for starters (if the prosecutor were to charge him for each individual Presidential record he illegally sent to Mar-a-Lago.) There's also a law that prohibits documents marked as classified that have not been officially marked as declassified from being removed or destroyed (which would apply even if one were to believe that he declassified it all.) None of the classified documents in his possession had been so marked so each one could be a separate felony charge. Also, his making law enforcement get a subpoena and then refusing to fully comply with it, sets him up for obstruction charges (among other things.) By the time they're done with their investigation, there will likely be more charges thrown in as well. He really has gotten himself into a serious mess this time and with this being a criminal case, the Senate Republicans won't be able to rescue him like they did with the impeachments.
    1
  36. Indeed, they want someone like Trump who will give them anything they ask for little in return.
    1
  37. Nope. That's actually happened quite a bit in the past in both directions. It's just a sign that one party backed a dipshit for President but still had some decent candidates for Congress.
    1
  38. If they'll pay for the shipping and handling, they can have him. A warning though, he's not fully house broken, doesn't play well with others, and leaves orange stains wherever he goes.
    1
  39.  @cobiemccoy  The impeachment of William Belknap. He was both impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate after he had already resigned his office. Also, there's absolutely nothing in the constitution which prevents ex-officials from being impeached and/or tried if they leave office. The removal from office penalty becomes pointless in such situations but the potential ban from holding future office can still be applied. Impeachment is an administrative punishment tied to and only affecting the person's role (past, present, or future) as an elected/appointed official. It in no way violates a private citizens rights. (EDIT: In cases where the person in no longer in office) It's more along the lines of disbarring a non practicing attorney for past offenses committed when they were practicing. Their role as a private citizen is unaffected. It only becomes relevant should they wish to resume their practice.
    1
  40. If you would actually support a President who would committ such an unconstitutional act, then move your happy a** to Russia where it belongs.
    1
  41. He has more pull than many people think. He's the one holding back the Democrats in Congress from simply forcing the covid bill through with budget reconcilliation (something they could do whenever they want without the need for any Republican votes.) He's at least trying to play nice. He's not going to call off the impeachment though. He wants it kept short because the Senate Republicans have already let it be known that they will once again be breaking their oaths of office by shirking their constitutional duty to be impartial in the trial by promising to acquit Trump even though the trial hasn't even started. There's no point in wasting much time on something that's already rigged to fail. He just wants them to go through the motions so that the Senate Republicans will be forced to let their corruption show and then move on to other matters.
    1
  42. Personally, I prefer the separation of church and state...
    1
  43. If the State of Texas allowed it then they had jurisdiction. The Constitution gives states control over elections.
    1
  44. It's sad to see someone like Dershowitz damage their well earned reputation out of a desperate need to remain relevant long after the world has passed them by...
    1
  45. ​ @cat101fw34 Walz served for more years than necessary to retire. That's enough for me. Besides, running for office is just another way to serve his country. He's put more than enough years into service in one way or another. Far more than people like Trump who spent most of his life scamming others and living high on the hog off the proceeds.
    1
  46. Forcing private businesses to perform services against their will is a very tricky path to go down...In the case of social media, it essentially leads to government controlled media.
    1
  47. Why hire a con artist? They helped get plenty put into power already.
    1
  48. No, that's how our courts work. Affidavits almost always stay sealed until indictments are made.
    1
  49. They do when the court is currently 4/4.
    1
  50. Speak for yourself. SCOTUS is a court of law, not popular opinion. They've done their jobs properly.
    1