GDT: 11/3/20, Election Day, Donald J. Trump vs. Joseph R. Biden

Status
Not open for further replies.
tululush said:
Lol I must have missed the origin of his job, but how do we know what he does? Lol I do find it hilarious that he’s the running joke of this thread now after continuing to call people out and question them over nothing.
Click to expand...

Sturg said that part of his job is managing a team of developers. Enscheff is a developer and the thought that Sturg could be higher on the career ladder triggered him. Enscheff hasn't stopped yelping about it since.
 
Jaw said:
Sturg said that part of his job is managing a team of developers. Enscheff is a developer and the thought that Sturg could be higher on the career ladder triggered him. Enscheff hasn't stopped yelping about it since.
Click to expand...

I really think enscheff needs to stop back talking his potential boss one day haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
msstate7 said:
I really think enscheff needs to stop back talking his potential boss one day haha
Click to expand...

It's a good point. With fuel costs skyrocketing soon and increasing the shipping and delivery costs of everything, the economic outlook is uncertain. You can never tell when the job market will turn sour. Maybe Enscheff should try to find out how Sturg likes his coffee.
 
As someone in the tech field, I'm gonna go ahead and say what we should all be thinking.

Sturg, I make an outstanding cup of coffee. Really great. Some say the greatest.
 
chilling thought:

Walter Shaub
@waltshaub
·
2h
The nation is almost 250 years old. But, this week, military leaders

felt the need to issue reminders to the troops that their job is to

defend the republic and not overthrow it. This is the depth to which

the Republican Party has taken America.
 
My kid told me to be careful when I left to pick up a grocery order last night. She didn't need to say it. Because I'm an adult. Being a child, she didn't realize that.
It was still sweet of her.
 
striker42 said:
Mitch is apparently furious and reports are that while he agrees Trump committed impeachable acts, he's waiting to see the articles that get transmitted to the Senate before taking a side on conviction. However, if he goes against Trump, it will provide cover for other GOP Senators. Apparently there are a lot who are taking their lead from Mitch.

Trump is in real danger of becoming the first President ever convicted in an impeachment trial. I still think the odds favor acquittal but the odds of conviction are much, much higher than last time.
Click to expand...

Surely he will resign before it gets that far.
 
Carp said:
Surely he will resign before it gets that far.
Click to expand...

Most likely the trial doesn't occur until after he's out of office. The point of the trial would be to disqualify him from holding office in the future and not to remove him from office.
 
striker42 said:
Most likely the trial doesn't occur until after he's out of office. The point of the trial would be to disqualify him from holding office in the future and not to remove him from office.
Click to expand...

It's honestly the best case scenario for Mitch. He got to keep Trump to pass his conservative court. He got to hold back the tide of Left Leaning Bills. And He can ban Trump from running again, great.

Of course Trump running again doesn't matter. Don Jr. will likely just run instead.
 
striker42 said:
Most likely the trial doesn't occur until after he's out of office. The point of the trial would be to disqualify him from holding office in the future and not to remove him from office.
Click to expand...

You're the lawyer, but I think what you've outlined would be a meaningless gesture that wouldn't prevent Trump from running again. The clause clearly says "shall be removed" and if Trump isn't in office, he would already have been removed through election. I'm left-of-center, but I cling fairly close to statutory and constitutional text. The case would go to the Supreme Court and I have no idea how they would rule, but given the plain text, I think it would be a leap to bar him. 14th Amendment would probably be the route to prohibiting Trump from running, but that would likely go all the way to the Supreme Court as well.
 
50PoundHead said:
You're the lawyer, but I think what you've outlined would be a meaningless gesture that wouldn't prevent Trump from running again. The clause clearly says "shall be removed" and if Trump isn't in office, he would already have been removed through election. I'm left-of-center, but I cling fairly close to statutory and constitutional text. The case would go to the Supreme Court and I have no idea how they would rule, but given the plain text, I think it would be a leap to bar him. 14th Amendment would probably be the route to prohibiting Trump from running, but that would likely go all the way to the Supreme Court as well.
Click to expand...

Article I, Section 3:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present. Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."

The second part is less well known. It's usually ignored as any president who does something bad enough to be removed from office would likely never be elected again. But disqualification is an enumerated punishment.
 
50PoundHead said:
You're the lawyer, but I think what you've outlined would be a meaningless gesture that wouldn't prevent Trump from running again. The clause clearly says "shall be removed" and if Trump isn't in office, he would already have been removed through election. I'm left-of-center, but I cling fairly close to statutory and constitutional text. The case would go to the Supreme Court and I have no idea how they would rule, but given the plain text, I think it would be a leap to bar him. 14th Amendment would probably be the route to prohibiting Trump from running, but that would likely go all the way to the Supreme Court as well.
Click to expand...

Article I, section 3, clause 7 provides further that “judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.”
 
striker42 said:
Article I, Section 3:

"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present. Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."

The second part is less well known. It's usually ignored as any president who does something bad enough to be removed from office would likely never be elected again. But disqualification is an enumerated punishment.
Click to expand...

But you still have the "removal from office" clause. To me, this is like sentencing someone to death after they've already died. Is there a precedent?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top