• "King Trump". Really ?

    From Jethro_uk@21:1/5 to All on Fri Aug 4 09:01:23 2023
    Not necessarily a legal question, but the idea of the US adopting a
    monarch seems almost quaint.

    You're free to have ours from the UK, if you like. Assuming he can
    withstand the shipping.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From micky@21:1/5 to jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com on Fri Aug 4 11:37:55 2023
    In misc.legal.moderated, on Fri, 4 Aug 2023 09:01:23 -0700 (PDT),
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    Not necessarily a legal question, but the idea of the US adopting a
    monarch seems almost quaint.

    You're free to have ours from the UK, if you like. Assuming he can
    withstand the shipping.

    The judge assigned to the recent case (Jan 6? Election sabotage? ) a
    year or two ago ruled on a motion or something and said Presidents are
    not kings, and Plaintiff is not President, Chutkan wrote of Trump. He
    retains the right to assert that his records are privileged, but the
    incumbent President 'is not constitutionally obliged to honor' that.

    We have had the King of Swing, the Queen of Soul, and the Sultan of
    Swat. And maybe some other royalty.

    --
    I think you can tell, but just to be sure:
    I am not a lawyer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick@21:1/5 to micky on Fri Aug 4 14:06:25 2023
    "micky" wrote in message news:9agqci904s9qb593iiq91hiamicohe4m64@4ax.com...

    In misc.legal.moderated, on Fri, 4 Aug 2023 09:01:23 -0700 (PDT),
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    Not necessarily a legal question, but the idea of the US adopting a
    monarch seems almost quaint.

    You're free to have ours from the UK, if you like. Assuming he can >>withstand the shipping.

    The judge assigned to the recent case (Jan 6? Election sabotage? ) a
    year or two ago ruled on a motion or something and said “Presidents are >not kings, and Plaintiff is not President,” Chutkan wrote of Trump. “He >retains the right to assert that his records are privileged, but the >incumbent President 'is not constitutionally obliged to honor' that.”

    We have had the King of Swing, the Queen of Soul, and the Sultan of
    Swat. And maybe some other royalty.


    Well technically, we were under the ancestor of Jethro's UK KIng a few
    hundred years ago...

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jethro_uk@21:1/5 to All on Sat Aug 5 07:39:01 2023
    My OP was prompted by a teaser from Sky (UK) which was interviewing a
    "regular citizen" who was saying they'd happily accept a King Trump of
    the US.

    Don't tell me an august and respected news organisation renowned for the highest standards of journalism found a lone nut job in the US and
    portrayed them in the UK as "the voice of America" ? What is the world
    coming to ?

    But it does raised the question - prompted by symmetry - if there is any monarchist sentiment in the US ? We have a quite vocal republican
    pressure group in the UK.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stuart O. Bronstein@21:1/5 to jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com on Sat Aug 5 11:35:54 2023
    Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    My OP was prompted by a teaser from Sky (UK) which was
    interviewing a "regular citizen" who was saying they'd happily
    accept a King Trump of the US.

    Don't tell me an august and respected news organisation renowned
    for the highest standards of journalism found a lone nut job in
    the US and portrayed them in the UK as "the voice of America" ?
    What is the world coming to ?

    Unfortunately it's a lot more than one lone nut job. A large part of
    the Republican party think of his as the second coming of Christ.

    But it does raised the question - prompted by symmetry - if there
    is any monarchist sentiment in the US ? We have a quite vocal
    republican pressure group in the UK.

    It's different in the US. They don't a ceremonial king, they want a
    dictator who hates the same people they do. That's what it's all
    about.

    --
    Stu
    http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick@21:1/5 to All on Sat Aug 5 12:23:12 2023
    "Jethro_uk" wrote in message news:uakuou$1d94i$4@dont-email.me...

    My OP was prompted by a teaser from Sky (UK) which was interviewing a >"regular citizen" who was saying they'd happily accept a King Trump of
    the US.

    Don't tell me an august and respected news organisation renowned for the >highest standards of journalism found a lone nut job in the US and
    portrayed them in the UK as "the voice of America" ? What is the world
    coming to ?

    But it does raised the question - prompted by symmetry - if there is any >monarchist sentiment in the US ? We have a quite vocal republican
    pressure group in the UK.

    No, because Americans realize the monarchy in the UK has no real power and
    is mostly ceremonial. Both the US and UK have somewhat similar
    representative democracies where laws are made by a legislative body and carried out by a single person. The difference is that in the US the leader
    is separately elected by the people for a fixed 4-year term, whereas in the
    UK the leader is elected by the legislature and the term is potentially more variable.

    The real question is do people in the US want an autocratic dictatorship
    where the people have no say in the choice of a leader, and I don't see any strong evidence of that. People in the US are sharply divided in the
    specifics of various laws and the definitions and parameters of individual rights, but I think there is general agreement that the leader should be
    chosen through some flavor of election by the people (whether direct popular vote or through election of state electors). I think the percentage of Americans that would actually favor a return to a true monarchy would be
    very small.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roy@21:1/5 to Rick on Sat Aug 5 12:32:14 2023
    On 8/5/2023 12:23 PM, Rick wrote:
    ....

    The real question is do people in the US want an autocratic dictatorship where the people have no say in the choice of a leader, and I don't see
    any strong evidence of that.  People in the US are sharply divided in
    the specifics of various laws and the definitions and parameters of individual rights, but I think there is general agreement that the
    leader should be chosen through some flavor of election by the people (whether direct popular vote or through election of state electors).  I think the percentage of Americans that would actually favor a return to
    a true monarchy would be very small.

    --

    From some of the comments bouncing around, I disagree. Recent topics

    - Lets ignore the supreme court
    - Lets ignore Congress
    - Lets ignore the second amendment
    - Lets rule by executive order

    I am going to go with: Lets ignore the 16th amendment and do away with
    income tax. Bet I could get a lot of support for that one

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Barry Gold@21:1/5 to Roy on Sat Aug 5 20:01:54 2023
    On 8/5/2023 12:32 PM, Roy wrote:
    From some of the comments bouncing around, I disagree.  Recent topics

    -  Lets ignore the supreme court
    -  Lets ignore Congress
    -  Lets ignore the second amendment
    -  Lets rule by executive order

    I am going to go with:  Lets ignore the 16th amendment and do away with income tax.  Bet I could get a lot of support for that one

    Until the Social Security checks stop arriving. And the soldiers,
    sailors, etc. stop getting paid. And all the national parks and
    monuments close. And illegal aliens pour across the border in (even
    bigger) droves because there's no border patrol.

    Without the income tax, there is (almost) no money to pay for ANYTHING
    the federal government does.

    Be careful what you wish for: you might get it.

    --
    I do so have a memory. It's backed up on DVD... somewhere...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stuart O. Bronstein@21:1/5 to Roy on Sat Aug 5 20:01:14 2023
    Roy <montanawolf@outlook.com> wrote:

    On 8/5/2023 12:23 PM, Rick wrote:
    ....

    The real question is do people in the US want an autocratic
    dictatorship where the people have no say in the choice of a
    leader, and I don't see any strong evidence of that.  People in
    the US are sharply divided in the specifics of various laws and
    the definitions and parameters of individual rights, but I think
    there is general agreement that the leader should be chosen
    through some flavor of election by the people (whether direct
    popular vote or through election of state electors).  I think
    the percentage of Americans that would actually favor a return to
    a true monarchy would be very small.

    --

    From some of the comments bouncing around, I disagree. Recent
    topics

    - Lets ignore the supreme court
    - Lets ignore Congress
    - Lets ignore the second amendment
    - Lets rule by executive order

    I am going to go with: Lets ignore the 16th amendment and do away
    with income tax. Bet I could get a lot of support for that one

    There are a lot of tax protesters who come up with all sorts of wacky
    theories as to why the income tax is unconstitutional or otherwise unenforceable. They never prevail, but they keep trying.

    --
    Stu
    http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick@21:1/5 to Roy on Sat Aug 5 20:02:50 2023
    "Roy" wrote in message news:uam80v$1rnne$1@dont-email.me...

    On 8/5/2023 12:23 PM, Rick wrote:
    ....

    The real question is do people in the US want an autocratic dictatorship
    where the people have no say in the choice of a leader, and I don't see
    any strong evidence of that. People in the US are sharply divided in the
    specifics of various laws and the definitions and parameters of
    individual rights, but I think there is general agreement that the leader
    should be chosen through some flavor of election by the people (whether
    direct popular vote or through election of state electors). I think the
    percentage of Americans that would actually favor a return to a true
    monarchy would be very small.

    --

    From some of the comments bouncing around, I disagree. Recent topics

    - Lets ignore the supreme court
    - Lets ignore Congress
    - Lets ignore the second amendment
    - Lets rule by executive order

    I am going to go with: Lets ignore the 16th amendment and do away with >income tax. Bet I could get a lot of support for that one

    I agree you'd get a lot of support on this site for many of these items, and I'd personally be more than ok killing the 16th amendment. But I think it would be wrong to conclude the rebel rousers on this site are representative
    of the general populace, and I believe if a national referendum were held on whether to replace our particular brand of democracy with a monarchy or outright dictatorship, it would have no chance of winning.

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stuart O. Bronstein@21:1/5 to Barry Gold on Sun Aug 6 10:48:03 2023
    Barry Gold <bgold@labcats.org> wrote:
    Roy wrote:

    From some of the comments bouncing around, I disagree.  Recent
    topics

    -  Lets ignore the supreme court
    -  Lets ignore Congress
    -  Lets ignore the second amendment
    -  Lets rule by executive order

    I am going to go with:  Lets ignore the 16th amendment and do
    away with income tax.  Bet I could get a lot of support for that
    one

    Until the Social Security checks stop arriving. And the soldiers,
    sailors, etc. stop getting paid. And all the national parks and
    monuments close. And illegal aliens pour across the border in
    (even bigger) droves because there's no border patrol.

    Without the income tax, there is (almost) no money to pay for
    ANYTHING the federal government does.

    There are those, including many members of Congress, who are calling
    for exactly that - fund the military and nothing else.

    Be careful what you wish for: you might get it.


    --
    Stu
    http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roy@21:1/5 to Rick on Sun Aug 6 13:49:06 2023
    On 8/6/2023 1:42 PM, Rick wrote:
    "Stuart O. Bronstein"  wrote in message news:XnsB0585FD908A5Cavocatstuyahoofr@130.133.4.11...

    Barry Gold <bgold@labcats.org> wrote:
    Roy wrote:

     From some of the comments bouncing around, I disagree.  Recent
     topics

    -  Lets ignore the supreme court
    -  Lets ignore Congress
    -  Lets ignore the second amendment
    -  Lets rule by executive order

    I am going to go with:  Lets ignore the 16th amendment and do
    away with income tax.  Bet I could get a lot of support for that
    one

    Until the Social Security checks stop arriving. And the soldiers,
    sailors, etc. stop getting paid. And all the national parks and
    monuments close. And illegal aliens pour across the border in
    (even bigger) droves because there's no border patrol.

    Without the income tax, there is (almost) no money to pay for
    ANYTHING the federal government does.

    There are those, including many members of Congress, who are calling
    for exactly that - fund the military and nothing else.

    Be careful what you wish for: you might get it.



    There's also the view held by many in Congress that the income tax
    should be replaced by a national consumption or Sales Tax - e.g., the
    Fair Tax

    --


    I was trying to make the point that there are crazies at every point
    across the political spectrum. They all want some change that the pesky constitution and other laws is preventing.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rick@21:1/5 to Stuart O. Bronstein on Sun Aug 6 13:42:03 2023
    "Stuart O. Bronstein" wrote in message news:XnsB0585FD908A5Cavocatstuyahoofr@130.133.4.11...

    Barry Gold <bgold@labcats.org> wrote:
    Roy wrote:

    From some of the comments bouncing around, I disagree. Recent
    topics

    - Lets ignore the supreme court
    - Lets ignore Congress
    - Lets ignore the second amendment
    - Lets rule by executive order

    I am going to go with: Lets ignore the 16th amendment and do
    away with income tax. Bet I could get a lot of support for that
    one

    Until the Social Security checks stop arriving. And the soldiers,
    sailors, etc. stop getting paid. And all the national parks and
    monuments close. And illegal aliens pour across the border in
    (even bigger) droves because there's no border patrol.

    Without the income tax, there is (almost) no money to pay for
    ANYTHING the federal government does.

    There are those, including many members of Congress, who are calling
    for exactly that - fund the military and nothing else.

    Be careful what you wish for: you might get it.



    There's also the view held by many in Congress that the income tax should be replaced by a national consumption or Sales Tax - e.g., the Fair Tax

    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Stuart O. Bronstein@21:1/5 to Roy on Sun Aug 6 14:15:34 2023
    Roy <montanawolf@outlook.com> wrote:

    On 8/6/2023 1:42 PM, Rick wrote:
    "Stuart O. Bronstein"  wrote in message
    news:XnsB0585FD908A5Cavocatstuyahoofr@130.133.4.11...

    Barry Gold <bgold@labcats.org> wrote:
    Roy wrote:

     From some of the comments bouncing around, I disagree. 
    Recent  topics

    -  Lets ignore the supreme court
    -  Lets ignore Congress
    -  Lets ignore the second amendment
    -  Lets rule by executive order

    I am going to go with:  Lets ignore the 16th amendment and
    do away with income tax.  Bet I could get a lot of support
    for that one

    Until the Social Security checks stop arriving. And the
    soldiers, sailors, etc. stop getting paid. And all the national
    parks and monuments close. And illegal aliens pour across the
    border in (even bigger) droves because there's no border
    patrol.

    Without the income tax, there is (almost) no money to pay for
    ANYTHING the federal government does.

    There are those, including many members of Congress, who are
    calling for exactly that - fund the military and nothing else.

    Be careful what you wish for: you might get it.



    There's also the view held by many in Congress that the income
    tax should be replaced by a national consumption or Sales Tax -
    e.g., the Fair Tax

    I was trying to make the point that there are crazies at every
    point across the political spectrum. They all want some change
    that the pesky constitution and other laws is preventing.

    I agree, there are crazies on all sides.

    I remember years ago reading about a sect in Israel that was
    extremely, well, "right wing" isn't quite right, but neither is
    "conservative." Their rabbis declared a brand of Spaghetti O's non-
    kosher. It wasn't based on the food - what was in the can was fine.
    the problem was the label on the can. It had a picture of a dinosaur
    on it. And everyone knows the world is really only 6,000 years old,
    dinosaurs never actually existed, so having one on the label was
    blasphemy.


    --
    Stu
    http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)