lock her up.... he murmured....

[Scooter]

(To be honest, I really do not expect a simple and straightforward answer. I expect either no answer, or some kind of diversion and/or tap dance....)

You've got to know by now that Trump could personally rape wes's wife and daughter with a broken beer bottle and wes would:

(1) find some way of blaming it on a conspiracy by Hillary Clinton, James Comey and/or Robert Mueller,

and/or

(2) string together some meaningless platitudes about how it's all part of some master plan to make America great again.

[Lord Jim]

if you turn every topic into a tirade I see no point in participating.

No wes, here's what I'm doing, (and will continue to do):

Whenever you start one of these Trump Minion Talking Point diversion threads, (like this one, and the one smearing McCain, and the one attacking Rosenstein) you can count on me to do two things:

First, I'm going to call you out on it. (As I did in my first post in this thread)

And second, (time permitting) I am going post in your "look at the guy spitting on the sidewalk" thread something designed to refocus attention back to the giant gorilla climbing up the side of the Empire State Building that your thread is designed to divert attention from...

In this particular thread, I also responded specifically to your attack on the US Constitution, (which you have also chosen not to respond to.) so you really can't accuse me of not responding to what you posted...

I suppose you really can't be faulted for being unable and/or unwilling to defend Trump, (I sure as hell wouldn't want to have to try to do it... ) but when you're tossing out rabbit holes, shiny objects, and all manner of whataboutisms to divert attention from that big smelly ape with the planes flying around his head, expect to be called on it...

And btw, your refusal to answer my question really does provide an answer...

The answer you provide is, "No, I don't believe Trump should be impeached if he defies an order from the Supreme Court, but I know how bad that position looks, and I certainly don't want to have to try to defend it."

[RayThom]

Sessions on Free Speech:

https://search.justice.gov/search?query ... te=justice

[wesw]

to be honest jim, I didn t even read your question.

your never trumper contortions are tiresome.

turn any thread about anything into anything you want.

speak freely old son.....

[Lord Jim]

If you thought those comments were that good, it would have been far more informative to quote or otherwise provide them, than to use the opportunity to complain about the press.

Actually Big RR, to be completely accurate, wes did a lot more than just "complain about the press"...

He attacked the whole concept of a free press and the First Amendment, and then in a weird Orwellian twist even suggested that if the reporters and news organizations that he deemed to be engaging in "yellow journalism" were banned that the First Amendment would somehow be "better served"....

Here again is what he said:

I think that the 1st Amendment would be just fine, and in fact better served, if some of these Yellow Journalists, and their employers, were left by the wayside.....

Apparently in his own head, his OP was all about some comments Session made about free speech on college campuses, though as you point out he did not post a single quote or link to anything about that, in order to start a discussion about it...

What he did post was a contemptuous denunciation of one of our most fundamental and important Constitutional rights, and that's what I chose to focus and comment on in a subsequent post...

[Lord Jim]

to be honest jim, I didn t even read your question.

No problem wes ol' buddy, here it is for you again:

If Donald Trump refused to follow an order from the US Supreme Court, would you consider that to be an impeachable offense?

Very simple, very straightforward, (by my count, only 22 words long) and it only requires a one word answer...

[Sue U]

to be honest jim, I didn t even read your question. Lalalalalalalalalala I can't hear you!!! lalalalalalalalalalala!!!

Corrected for accuracy.

[Lord Jim]

Wes, the one word answer would only require a maximum of three letters, (one choice only requires two) so it should be right in your wheel house...

[MajGenl.Meade]

Wes, the one word answer would only require a maximum of three letters, (one the p.o.s. wrong choice only requires two) so it should be right in your wheel house...

FTFY

[wesw]

I m not playing your game, jim.

nor am I playing yours meade.

you can ask a question anyway you want to ask, the answer is mine to give in the way I see fit.

if the supreme court ordered him to lick nancy Pelosi s butt....... (sorry to be crude, but meade started it...)

hypotheticals are too vague.

if the house of reps sends articles of impeachment to the senate and two thirds of the senate convicts on those articles, I will agrre that an impeachable offense was committed.

that is what our democracy looks like.

[Lord Jim]

Okay wes, so what you're saying is that you have absolutely no personal opinion whatsoever as to what would or would not constitute an Impeachable offense...

Well, at least you're also saying that you would respect the result of the Constitutional process rather support the "civil war" you kept talking about, so I suppose that's something...

[Lord Jim]

Here's an excellent brief and succinct synopsis on freedom of the press and the First Amendment from good ol' Shep Smith...

(This guy talks so much sense, I am just about ready to start the "Shep Smith For President" movement...)

Wes, if you didn't catch the broadcast, I strongly recommend that you watch this...

It's only abut 2 minutes long, but it will give you an excellent primer on freedom of the press and the First Amendment, (subjects that your posts on the topic would seem to indicate you are not particularly well versed in...)

[RayThom]

Here's an excellent brief and succinct synopsis on freedom of the press and the First Amendment from good ol' Shep Smith... (This guy talks so much sense, I am just about ready to start the "Shep Smith For President" movement...)

Wha-what? As the resident cynic I can't help but wonder what ol' Shep is up to. He's on FoxNews for Christ's sake. He must be hitting me below the level of my awareness, and some time soon he's going to yell "April Fools, you liberal bastards."

I'm going to feel like such a tool for falling for it.

[Burning Petard]

I refer to the second post in this thread.

A grand hurrah for FRAZZ. It brings a gentleness fully infused with truth. It reflects parts of Michigan (bicycles rides free of broken glass) and Vernors ginger ale I regret leaving.

snailgate

[Beer Sponge]

LJ, you will never get an answer from wes, he proves repeatedly on this forum that he is a cowardly moron, which also explains his support for, well, another cowardly moron.

[Scooter]

Actually it's become pretty obvious that wes is one of those trolls paid by the Kremlin to infest message boards and comment pages with pro-Russian propaganda.

[MGMcAnick]

Thank you for your definitive answer LJ.

I'd like to hear a large group of Hillary (or anyone else) supporters chant "LOCK HIM UP" and see where it went.

[Scooter]

He'd have the Secret Service swarm the crowd arresting everyone in sight for having uttered threats against the president.

[MGMcAnick]

Probably. I hadn't thought of that.

[Lord Jim]

LJ, you will never get an answer from wes

I have to say that it does seem extremely improbable that wes would have no personal opinion at all about what constitutes an impeachable offense, (which is what he appears to be claiming) beyond simply deferring to the process...

Afterall, this is a guy who expressed a strong opinion about something as mundane as the timing of the Deputy Attorney General announcing new Russiagate charges...

I m not playing your game, jim.

Wes, you make it sound like I'm asking some sort of trick question, or a bizarre, off-the-wall hypothetical...(Like the one you posted regarding the House Minority Leader's posterior...)

My question is neither...

It's certainly not a trick question, and at least in modern times, virtually every President has the Supreme Court at one time or another issue rulings against them, and not one of them, (including Richard Nixon when ordered to turn over the Watergate tapes) has defied such a ruling. So while it's a "hypothetical" (because it hasn't happened to Trump yet) it's a very rational hypothetical regarding something that will almost certainly happen...

As I've said twice now (and as anyone can see from reading it) it's a very simple and straightforward question. And it's also a question that I would think that anyone, (including people who voted for Trump, provided they also respect our Constitutional system and the rule of law...and I know people personally who fall into that category...) would have no problem answering "yes" to without a moment's hesitation...

It ain't rocket surgery...

And yet for some reason for you it appears to be a question that is fraught with difficulty...