"I thought that TIDEP (Twice-Impeached Disgraced Ex-President) had an "Article II" that allowed him to do anything he wanted. Doesn't Biden get that, too? And you can't indict a sitting President (or, according to TIDEP, even investigate him). Trump is not a sitting president.

They should try to impeach Biden for it. That would be a hoot!

#21

Those were the rules at Big Blue until the early 90's. Then it became "business casual". By that time, most customers went casual years earlier (except the bankers).

Two generations back, ALL my relatives were slaves (involuntary immigrants). Slaves produced the majority of GDP for the South. Apparently even back then there were "jobs" White Americans didn't want and labor had to be imported to support the economy. The more things change, the more they stay the same/

It's ironic that this country may eventually fall because of the 1st and 2nd Amendments.

Such a tizzy about what is in all probability nothing.
#6 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Let's ask Reality Winner.

There are lots of folks in prison for attempted murder (among other criminal acts).

Didn't anybody in SF see "Robocop"?

The debt ceiling itself is BS. It was created by Conservatives (R's at the time, I believe) who wanted to make a political point about the other party's spending. It's not in the Constitution and no other modern democracy has one.

It's stupid to argue over whether to pay the bills the Government has already incurred. It is purely political theater.

Do you and your significant other (assuming you have one) argue over whether to pay the bill on the credit card?

It will require dems and repubs working together as it should be.

What a simplistic answer. Perhaps you can tell us what would cause "repubs" to work together with "dems". And whose responsibility would it be to make that happen?

Simple answers to complex problems rarely, if ever, work.

Actually, I was referring to TFG (The Former Guy). My point is that poor defendants don't usually get the benefit of so much hand-wringing over whether the prosecutors can prove "intent". Trump's intent is obvious. How hard can it be to prove? Thus, unequal justice. Why should ordinary citizens have faith that they are being treated equally? Look at all the Sturm und Drang about whether Trump intended to illegally keep government documents. He has admitted as much on national TV. Others have gone to Federal prison for unauthorized possession of one government document. I believe the appointed Special Prosecutor has even prosecuted such a crime before.

What I am saying is that if you have enough money for lawyers you can evade accountability indefinitely. Trump was a criminal for decades before he entered politics, and never faced consequences.

The fact is that when the average person is caught doing crimes there is no quibbling about "intent", they just threaten with a long prison term and get them to plead guilty to a lesser crime.

Trump demonstrates his intent on a daily basis, in public. How is there any question about intent when he says of government documents "they're mine", while possession of them is a crime? If any other person in this country had this much evidence against them, they would have been in prison long ago.

"Equal justice under the Law" my a**

Proving "intentional" is not easy.
#4 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER

And yet we have the most incarcerated people of any country. Proving intent is only "not easy" when it comes to rich/well-connected white men.

Nonsense. Both political parties protect their own.

Tell that to Al Franken.

That's why it has to stop! If he goes unaccountable for all of THIS, any future president can do any damn thing he wants and can't be punished without 2/3 of the Senate voting to remove him (which will NEVER happen).

If he can't be convicted for his many actual crimes (not just political stuff), then the "Rule of Law" and "equal justice under the law" are -------- and this country should stop pretending otherwise.

Hint: everybody except straight, white, middle class and above, "Christian" males already knows this.

Katie is our member of Congress

Lucky you! I love her!

The Congressional investigation is not a criminal investigation. They cannot convict anyone of a crime, therefore "due process" is only an issue if a witness says something incriminating, and then the witnesses have 5th Amendment protection. What they can do is fact finding to determine if legislative action is required (to write new laws) in order to prevent a reoccurrence of Jan 6.

#20 Well said Corky. Part of the problem is that our "Representatives" see themselves as "Leaders".

#24 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

That's because their voters see themselves as "Followers". Democrats, not so much. As they say, "it's like like herding cats"

He's not any more stupid than Sling Blade you morons cheered for in PA.

#8 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

You mean the guy with a bachelor's degree in Finance, an MBA, and a Master of Public Policy (from Harvard!), who worked as a risk-management underwriter for Chubb? That stupid guy?

Why should a citizen's rights depend upon what State one lives in (or may be visiting, or just passing through)? It makes us a balkanized state. Did you guys even understand "One Nation, Indivisible, etc." when you recited it every freakin' morning in school for 13 years (K-12)?

If the right to own a weapon is more important to "individual liberty" than the right to control one's own body, then WTF is the point of "self-government"?

If you vote for us we will codify RvWade!

Did you vote for them? No? Well, there you go.

they have no master other than gaining more power...
they have no morals other than do anything it takes to win...

#4 | POSTED BY EARTHMUSE

"do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law"

That's Christian theology, right?

/S

IMO, they have created too big a tent to accommodate everyone

It's not that the dem tent is too big, it's that the republican tent is too small. The dems tent basically consists of people who are not white, straight, "native-born", "Christian", and "conservative". There are more people in the dem tent than the repub tent. If not for extreme gerrymandering, democrats would be in charge of many more state legislatures and Congressional seats.