• McCarthy: Biden =?UTF-8?B?4oCYYWJkaWNhdGVk?= his responsibilities at ou

    From Johnny@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 2 10:26:58 2022
    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President
    Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern border
    and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration
    announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security and
    to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it will
    be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has been used by
    both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel migrants at
    the southern border since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done
    nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to Johnny on Sat Apr 2 08:56:10 2022
    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President
    Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern border
    and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security and
    to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it will
    be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has been used by
    both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel migrants at
    the southern border since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done
    nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so his
    poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Johnny@21:1/5 to Josh Rosenbluth on Sat Apr 2 11:11:34 2022
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President
    Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern
    border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public
    health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security
    and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it
    will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has
    been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly
    expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the
    COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done
    nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so
    his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the
    country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this,
    and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    It's a shame the black voters are not intelligent enough to know Biden
    is hurting them the most.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to Johnny on Sat Apr 2 11:19:39 2022
    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President
    Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern
    border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public
    health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his
    responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security
    and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it
    will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has
    been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly
    expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the
    COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done
    nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so
    his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the
    country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this,
    and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the
    policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it.

    It's a shame the black voters are not intelligent enough to know Biden
    is hurting them the most.

    If only Republicans would say this out loud, black turnout would skyrocket.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 2 13:23:57 2022
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President
    Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern
    border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public
    health order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his
    responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nations security
    and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it
    will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has
    been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly
    expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the
    COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done
    nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so
    his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the
    country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this,
    and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the
    policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it.

    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the
    meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however
    congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and
    should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also
    recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to El Castor on Sat Apr 2 15:09:05 2022
    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President
    Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern
    border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public
    health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his
    responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of >>>>> his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security >>>>> and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it
    will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has
    been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly
    expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the
    COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done
    nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so
    his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the
    country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this,
    and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the
    policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it.

    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the
    meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also
    recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House
    to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences
    (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that
    would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum
    applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and
    they aren't going to).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 2 22:25:52 2022
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President >>>>>> Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern
    border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public
    health order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his
    responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the >>>>>> border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of >>>>>> his administration, he has failed to protect our nations security >>>>>> and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it
    will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has
    been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly
    expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the
    COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done >>>>>> nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so
    his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the
    country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this, >>>> and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the
    policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it.

    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the
    meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not
    necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however
    congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and
    should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also
    recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House
    to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences
    (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that
    would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum >applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and
    they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack
    thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an
    existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for
    them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment?
    Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with
    endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land
    I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican
    congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically
    motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court
    packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Johnny@21:1/5 to Josh Rosenbluth on Sun Apr 3 09:45:07 2022
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused
    President Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at
    the southern border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse
    after the administration announced that it is lifting the Title
    42 public health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated
    his responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to
    make the border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement.
    "From day one of his administration, he has failed to protect
    our nation’s security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that
    it will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that
    has been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to
    quickly expel migrants at the southern border since the start
    of the COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has
    done nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this,
    so his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across
    the country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans
    know this, and also know that the policy change will allow more
    illegal immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on
    the policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over
    it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was
    the meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted?
    Apparently not necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling,
    bungling, and however congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could,
    and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has
    also recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal,
    that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats
    asylum applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says
    so (and they aren't going to).

    These people are not asylum seekers. They are criminals for entering
    this country illegally. They could have asked for asylum while Trump's
    remain in Mexico policy was in place.

    People seek asylum because of war or discrimination. The countries
    these people come from are not at war, and they weren't discriminated
    against because of skin color or religion.

    So many people were entering this country at one time, they were being
    released without having a court date set.

    Why did Biden rescind Trump's remain in Mexico policy?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to El Castor on Sun Apr 3 09:06:34 2022
    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President >>>>>>> Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern >>>>>>> border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public
    health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his >>>>>>> responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the >>>>>>> border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of >>>>>>> his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security >>>>>>> and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it >>>>>>> will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has
    been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly >>>>>>> expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the
    COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done >>>>>>> nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so >>>>>> his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the
    country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this, >>>>> and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the
    policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it.

    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the
    meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not
    necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however
    congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and
    should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also
    recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House
    to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences
    (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that
    would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum
    applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and
    they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an
    existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for
    them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment?
    Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land
    I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican
    congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically
    motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court
    packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy differences.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to Johnny on Sun Apr 3 09:26:25 2022
    On 4/3/2022 7:45 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused
    President Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at
    the southern border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse
    after the administration announced that it is lifting the Title
    42 public health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated
    his responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to
    make the border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement.
    "From day one of his administration, he has failed to protect
    our nation’s security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that
    it will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that
    has been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to
    quickly expel migrants at the southern border since the start
    of the COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has
    done nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this,
    so his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across
    the country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans
    know this, and also know that the policy change will allow more
    illegal immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on
    the policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over
    it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was
    the meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted?
    Apparently not necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling,
    bungling, and however congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could,
    and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has
    also recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy
    differences (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal,
    that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats
    asylum applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says
    so (and they aren't going to).

    These people are not asylum seekers. They are criminals for entering
    this country illegally. They could have asked for asylum while Trump's remain in Mexico policy was in place.

    The law explicitly permits unauthorized aliens in the USA to seek
    asylum. Whether or not they should be required to stay out of the USA to
    do so is a policy choice permitted by law.

    People seek asylum because of war or discrimination. The countries
    these people come from are not at war, and they weren't discriminated
    against because of skin color or religion.

    So many people were entering this country at one time, they were being released without having a court date set.

    Why did Biden rescind Trump's remain in Mexico policy?

    That answer has no relevance to whether he should be impeached for
    choosing to rescind the policy, but I suspect he felt conditions in
    Mexico were substandard.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 3 12:50:01 2022
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President >>>>>>>> Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern >>>>>>>> border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public >>>>>>>> health order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his >>>>>>>> responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the >>>>>>>> border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of >>>>>>>> his administration, he has failed to protect our nations security >>>>>>>> and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it >>>>>>>> will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has >>>>>>>> been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly >>>>>>>> expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the
    COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done >>>>>>>> nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so >>>>>>> his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal
    immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the >>>>>> country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this, >>>>>> and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the >>>>> policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it.

    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the
    meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not >>>> necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however
    congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and >>>> should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also
    recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House
    to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences >>> (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that
    would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum
    applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and
    they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack
    thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an
    existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for
    them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment?
    Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with
    endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land
    I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican
    congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically
    motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court
    packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the
    impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye of the
    beholder be a consideration in making that determination?

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps wall
    and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a policy
    difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders is an attempt
    to flood the United States with an underclass guaranteed to support
    Democrat politicians and policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine
    our constitutional democracy.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to El Castor on Sun Apr 3 15:11:15 2022
    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President >>>>>>>>> Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern >>>>>>>>> border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the >>>>>>>>> administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public >>>>>>>>> health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his >>>>>>>>> responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the >>>>>>>>> border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of >>>>>>>>> his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security >>>>>>>>> and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it >>>>>>>>> will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has >>>>>>>>> been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly >>>>>>>>> expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done >>>>>>>>> nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so >>>>>>>> his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal >>>>>>> immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the >>>>>>> country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this, >>>>>>> and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the >>>>>> policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it.

    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the >>>>> meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not >>>>> necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however >>>>> congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and >>>>> should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also
    recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House >>>> to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences >>>> (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that >>>> would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum
    applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and
    they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack
    thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an
    existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for
    them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment?
    Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with
    endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land
    I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican
    congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically
    motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court
    packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the
    impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye of the beholder be a consideration in making that determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal
    investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes to the
    heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal the election
    (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps wall
    and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a policy
    difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders is an attempt
    to flood the United States with an underclass guaranteed to support
    Democrat politicians and policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine
    our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain
    partisan support. But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an
    emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the wall, that
    would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But by your logic, it
    would be acceptable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 3 22:54:17 2022
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President >>>>>>>>>> Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern >>>>>>>>>> border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the >>>>>>>>>> administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public >>>>>>>>>> health order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his >>>>>>>>>> responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the >>>>>>>>>> border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of >>>>>>>>>> his administration, he has failed to protect our nations security >>>>>>>>>> and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it >>>>>>>>>> will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has >>>>>>>>>> been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly >>>>>>>>>> expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done >>>>>>>>>> nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so >>>>>>>>> his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal >>>>>>>> immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the >>>>>>>> country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this, >>>>>>>> and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal
    immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the >>>>>>> policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it. >>>>>>>
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the >>>>>> meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not >>>>>> necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however >>>>>> congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and >>>>>> should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also
    recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from
    office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House >>>>> to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences >>>>> (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that >>>>> would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum
    applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and >>>>> they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack >>>> thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an
    existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for
    them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment?
    Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with >>>> endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land >>>> I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican
    congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically
    motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court
    packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the
    impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye of the
    beholder be a consideration in making that determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal >investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes to the
    heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal the election
    (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so what
    was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps wall
    and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a policy
    difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders is an attempt
    to flood the United States with an underclass guaranteed to support
    Democrat politicians and policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine
    our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain
    partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support
    immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border
    crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or job
    offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, and so
    do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us the lowest
    Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason that those border
    crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border crossings, but do Democrats give a
    damn about that? Apparently not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: 180,000
    in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction from
    Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to visit the
    2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored calls for more
    action from Republicans, as well as Democrats." https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home and you
    chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is that a
    scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some members of
    the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat mayors and DAs
    already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an
    emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the wall, that >would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But by your logic, it
    would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a Constitution
    which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with virtually
    unlimited leeway in determining grounds for impeachment. On that you
    apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to El Castor on Mon Apr 4 09:00:18 2022
    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President >>>>>>>>>>> Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern >>>>>>>>>>> border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the >>>>>>>>>>> administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public >>>>>>>>>>> health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the >>>>>>>>>>> border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security
    and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it >>>>>>>>>>> will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has >>>>>>>>>>> been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly >>>>>>>>>>> expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done >>>>>>>>>>> nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so >>>>>>>>>> his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal >>>>>>>>> immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the >>>>>>>>> country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this,
    and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal >>>>>>>>> immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the >>>>>>>> policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it. >>>>>>>>
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the >>>>>>> meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not >>>>>>> necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however >>>>>>> congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and >>>>>>> should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also >>>>>>> recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing >>>>>>> pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from >>>>>>> office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House >>>>>> to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences >>>>>> (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that >>>>>> would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum >>>>>> applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and >>>>>> they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack >>>>> thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an
    existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for >>>>> them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment? >>>>> Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with >>>>> endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land >>>>> I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican
    congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically
    motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court
    packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the >>>>> impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye of the
    beholder be a consideration in making that determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal
    investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes to the
    heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal the election
    (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so what
    was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is disqualification from
    future office. That would have been the right thing to do.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps wall
    and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a policy
    difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders is an attempt
    to flood the United States with an underclass guaranteed to support
    Democrat politicians and policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine
    our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain
    partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support
    immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border
    crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or job
    offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, and so
    do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us the lowest
    Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border crossings, but do Democrats give a
    damn about that? Apparently not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: 180,000
    in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction from
    Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to visit the
    2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored calls for more
    action from Republicans, as well as Democrats." https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home and you
    chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is that a
    scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some members of
    the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat mayors and DAs
    already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an
    emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the wall, that
    would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But by your logic, it
    would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a Constitution
    which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with virtually
    unlimited leeway in determining grounds for impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I think both
    are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Mon Apr 4 10:37:10 2022
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President >>>>>>>>>>>> Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern >>>>>>>>>>>> border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the >>>>>>>>>>>> administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public >>>>>>>>>>>> health order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nations security >>>>>>>>>>>> and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it >>>>>>>>>>>> will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has >>>>>>>>>>>> been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly >>>>>>>>>>>> expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done >>>>>>>>>>>> nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so >>>>>>>>>>> his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal >>>>>>>>>> immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the >>>>>>>>>> country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this,
    and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal >>>>>>>>>> immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the >>>>>>>>> policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it. >>>>>>>>>
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the >>>>>>>> meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not >>>>>>>> necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however >>>>>>>> congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and >>>>>>>> should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also >>>>>>>> recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing >>>>>>>> pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from >>>>>>>> office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House >>>>>>> to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences
    (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that >>>>>>> would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum >>>>>>> applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and >>>>>>> they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack >>>>>> thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an
    existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for >>>>>> them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment? >>>>>> Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with >>>>>> endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land >>>>>> I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican >>>>>> congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically >>>>>> motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court
    packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the >>>>>> impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy differences. >>>>
    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye of the
    beholder be a consideration in making that determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal
    investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes to the
    heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal the election
    (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so what
    was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is disqualification from >future office. That would have been the right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps wall
    and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a policy
    difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders is an attempt
    to flood the United States with an underclass guaranteed to support
    Democrat politicians and policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine
    our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain
    partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support
    immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border
    crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or job
    offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, and so
    do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us the lowest
    Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason that those border
    crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. That, in and of itself, is
    sufficient reason to control border crossings, but do Democrats give a
    damn about that? Apparently not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: 180,000
    in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction from
    Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to visit the
    2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored calls for more
    action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html >>
    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home and you
    chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is that a
    scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some members of
    the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat mayors and DAs
    already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an
    emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the wall, that >>> would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But by your logic, it
    would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a Constitution
    which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with virtually
    unlimited leeway in determining grounds for impeachment. On that you
    apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I think both
    are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can
    you say the same about Biden?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to El Castor on Mon Apr 4 12:23:09 2022
    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President
    Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern >>>>>>>>>>>>> border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the >>>>>>>>>>>>> administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public >>>>>>>>>>>>> health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his
    responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s security
    and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it >>>>>>>>>>>>> will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has >>>>>>>>>>>>> been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly >>>>>>>>>>>>> expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done
    nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so
    his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal >>>>>>>>>>> immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the >>>>>>>>>>> country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this,
    and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal >>>>>>>>>>> immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the
    policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it. >>>>>>>>>>
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the >>>>>>>>> meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not
    necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however >>>>>>>>> congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and
    should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also >>>>>>>>> recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the
    Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing >>>>>>>>> pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from >>>>>>>>> office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House >>>>>>>> to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences
    (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that >>>>>>>> would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum >>>>>>>> applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and >>>>>>>> they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack >>>>>>> thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an
    existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for >>>>>>> them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment? >>>>>>> Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with >>>>>>> endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land >>>>>>> I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican >>>>>>> congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically >>>>>>> motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court
    packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the >>>>>>> impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy differences. >>>>>
    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye of the >>>>> beholder be a consideration in making that determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal
    investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes to the >>>> heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal the election >>>> (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so what
    was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is disqualification from
    future office. That would have been the right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps wall >>>>> and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a policy
    difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders is an attempt >>>>> to flood the United States with an underclass guaranteed to support
    Democrat politicians and policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine >>>>> our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain
    partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support
    immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border
    crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or job
    offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, and so
    do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us the lowest
    Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason that those border
    crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. That, in and of itself, is
    sufficient reason to control border crossings, but do Democrats give a
    damn about that? Apparently not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: 180,000
    in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction from
    Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to visit the
    2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored calls for more
    action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home and you
    chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is that a
    scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some members of
    the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat mayors and DAs
    already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an
    emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the wall, that >>>> would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But by your logic, it >>>> would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a Constitution
    which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with virtually
    unlimited leeway in determining grounds for impeachment. On that you
    apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I think both
    are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can
    you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office
    and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in
    question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day from
    COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Mon Apr 4 22:48:14 2022
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday accused President
    Biden of having "abdicated his responsibilities" at the southern >>>>>>>>>>>>>> border and making the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public >>>>>>>>>>>>>> health order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has abdicated his
    responsibilities at our borders and is actively working to make the
    border crisis worse," McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of
    his administration, he has failed to protect our nations security
    and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday announced that it
    will be terminating the Title 42 public health policy, that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been used by both the Trump and Biden administrations to quickly >>>>>>>>>>>>>> expel migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. He has done
    nothing but cause one crisis after another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans know this, so
    his poll numbers will improve if he is impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million illegal >>>>>>>>>>>> immigrants to cross the border, and then flying them all across the
    country so they will be hard to find and remove. Americans know this,
    and also know that the policy change will allow more illegal >>>>>>>>>>>> immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with you on the
    policy, they will punish republicans for impeaching him over it. >>>>>>>>>>>
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". What was the
    meaning of that term when the Constitution was drafted? Apparently not
    necessarily a crime, but misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however
    congress chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" could, and
    should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. Ted Cruz has also >>>>>>>>>> recommended impeachment for Bidens pathetic bungling of the >>>>>>>>>> Afghanistan withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing >>>>>>>>>> pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is removed from >>>>>>>>>> office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the House
    to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine for policy differences
    (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are illegal, that
    would be properly an impeachable offense. But, how he treats asylum >>>>>>>>> applicants is not a violation of the law unless a court says so (and >>>>>>>>> they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions (or lack >>>>>>>> thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a violation of an >>>>>>>> existing border law, and they impeach him. Would it be necessary for >>>>>>>> them to obtain a court approval of the grounds for their impeachment? >>>>>>>> Lacking such approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with >>>>>>>> endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over the land >>>>>>>> I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm in a Republican >>>>>>>> congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless politically >>>>>>>> motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood for DC and Court >>>>>>>> packing -- ideas posed by numerous Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the >>>>>>>> impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy differences. >>>>>>
    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye of the >>>>>> beholder be a consideration in making that determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal
    investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes to the >>>>> heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal the election >>>>> (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so what
    was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is disqualification from >>> future office. That would have been the right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps wall >>>>>> and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a policy
    difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders is an attempt >>>>>> to flood the United States with an underclass guaranteed to support >>>>>> Democrat politicians and policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine >>>>>> our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain
    partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support
    immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border
    crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or job
    offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, and so
    do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us the lowest
    Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason that those border
    crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. That, in and of itself, is >>>> sufficient reason to control border crossings, but do Democrats give a >>>> damn about that? Apparently not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: 180,000
    in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction from
    Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to visit the
    2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored calls for more
    action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home and you >>>> chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is that a
    scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some members of
    the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat mayors and DAs
    already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an
    emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the wall, that >>>>> would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But by your logic, it >>>>> would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a Constitution
    which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with virtually
    unlimited leeway in determining grounds for impeachment. On that you
    apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I think both >>> are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can
    you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office
    and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in
    question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day from >COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    May surprise you, but that doesn't bother me in the slightest. Just a politician trying to insert a breath of optimism into an important
    day.

    The problem I have with Biden is with his actions, not well meant
    verbiage. The day he took office he struck a severe blow to the oil
    industry. Canada is very angry over the XL pipeline, and we are no
    longer self sufficient exporters -- thousands of jobs lost in the
    process. And no, soaring oil prices can't be blamed on Putin. Then
    there is the poorly executed Afghan withdrawal. Numerous botched
    attempts to slip ill conceived legislation through congress under the
    guise of build back better. The spectacularly botched open border,
    fence materials and signed contracts left to rust, and a VP he placed
    in charge of the border who couldn't be bothered to visit it for 3
    months until endless criticism finally drove her to go. I could go on,
    but I will spare you.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Johnny@21:1/5 to Josh Rosenbluth on Tue Apr 5 08:11:33 2022
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday
    accused President Biden of having "abdicated his
    responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s >>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday
    announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel
    migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for
    impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors".
    What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but
    misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress
    chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens
    pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a
    withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our
    Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is
    removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president --
    shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine
    for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are
    illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the
    law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions
    (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a
    violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him.
    Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of
    the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval,
    might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless
    lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy.

    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over
    the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm
    in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless
    politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood
    for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous
    Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy
    differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye
    of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal
    investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes
    to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal
    the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so
    what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the
    right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps
    wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a
    policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders
    is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass
    guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a
    scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain
    partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support
    immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border
    crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or
    job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know,
    and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us
    the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason
    that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens.
    That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border
    crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently
    not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden:
    180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction
    from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to
    visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored
    calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home
    and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is
    that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some
    members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat
    mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an
    emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the
    wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But
    by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with
    virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I
    think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can
    you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office
    and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in
    question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day
    from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this
    country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to Johnny on Tue Apr 5 08:34:55 2022
    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday
    announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for
    impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but
    misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress
    chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens
    pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a
    withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our
    Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is
    removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president --
    shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine >>>>>>>>>> for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections. >>>>>>>>>>
    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are
    illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the
    law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions >>>>>>>>> (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a
    violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him.
    Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of >>>>>>>>> the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval,
    might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless
    lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy. >>>>>>>>
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over >>>>>>>>> the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm
    in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless
    politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood
    for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous
    Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy
    differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye
    of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal
    investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes
    to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal
    the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so
    what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the
    right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps
    wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a
    policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders
    is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass
    guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a
    scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain
    partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support
    immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border
    crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or
    job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know,
    and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us
    the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason
    that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens.
    That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border
    crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently
    not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden:
    180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction
    from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to
    visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored
    calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home
    and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is
    that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some
    members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat
    mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an
    emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the
    wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But
    by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with
    virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I
    think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can
    you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office
    and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in
    question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day
    from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this
    country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Johnny@21:1/5 to Josh Rosenbluth on Tue Apr 5 11:32:39 2022
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 42 public health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration. >>>>>>>>>>>>
    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree >>>>>>>>>>>> with you on the policy, they will punish republicans for >>>>>>>>>>>> impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution >>>>>>>>>>> was drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but
    misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress
    chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border
    "LAWS" could, and should, be a legitimate reason for
    impeachment. Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment >>>>>>>>>>> for Bidens pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan
    withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing
    pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is
    removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority >>>>>>>>>> in the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is
    routine for policy differences (*), we can dispense with >>>>>>>>>> elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense.
    But, how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of >>>>>>>>>> the law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to). >>>>>>>>>>

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's
    actions (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor >>>>>>>>> or a violation of an existing border law, and they impeach >>>>>>>>> him. Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court
    approval of the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such >>>>>>>>> approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with
    endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for
    democracy.
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised
    over the land I doubt there would be much impeachment
    enthusiasm in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless
    politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous
    Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy
    differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent
    criminal investigation into a political opponent is not a
    policy. It goes to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto
    for trying to steal the election (did you support Trump's
    second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so
    what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the
    right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus
    Trumps wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing
    more than a policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of
    open borders is an attempt to flood the United States with an
    underclass guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and
    policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine our
    constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to
    maintain partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I)
    support immigration of those who present themselves at a
    recognized border crossing and bring something of value -- like
    a needed talent or job offer, assets sufficient to support
    themselves, or familial relationships. Democrats, on the other
    hand ... well you know, and so do the voters. Trumps border
    policy, by the way, gave us the lowest Black unemployment on
    record, for the simple reason that those border crossers take
    jobs from our Black citizens. That, in and of itself, is
    sufficient reason to control border crossings, but do Democrats
    give a damn about that? Apparently not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden:
    180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction
    from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to
    visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored
    calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home
    and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry,
    is that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose
    some members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some
    Democrat mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring
    an emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building
    the wall, that would have been over policy and thus very
    wrong. But by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with
    virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in
    the House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I
    think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard.
    Can you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the
    office and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his
    competence is in question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021
    as independence day from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have
    done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state
    this country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.


    You have called Trump a "man baby" for four years, and claim he is not
    a normal functioning adult. Prove it.

    Trump is a very intelligent person. He could stand in front of dozens
    of reporters and answer their questions without any help. Biden can't,
    and even with help, he still screws up.

    It's very obvious Biden is not a normal functioning human being, and he
    will only get worse.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to Johnny on Tue Apr 5 11:14:02 2022
    On 4/5/2022 9:32 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ongoing migrant crisis worse after the
    administration announced that it is lifting the Title >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 42 public health order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another.

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with you on the policy, they will punish republicans for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution >>>>>>>>>>>>> was drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but >>>>>>>>>>>>> misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress >>>>>>>>>>>>> chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border >>>>>>>>>>>>> "LAWS" could, and should, be a legitimate reason for >>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachment. Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment >>>>>>>>>>>>> for Bidens pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan
    withdrawal, a withdrawal that violated long standing >>>>>>>>>>>>> pledges to our Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is >>>>>>>>>>>>> removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority >>>>>>>>>>>> in the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is >>>>>>>>>>>> routine for policy differences (*), we can dispense with >>>>>>>>>>>> elections.

    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. >>>>>>>>>>>> But, how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of >>>>>>>>>>>> the law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to). >>>>>>>>>>>>

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's
    actions (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor >>>>>>>>>>> or a violation of an existing border law, and they impeach >>>>>>>>>>> him. Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court
    approval of the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such >>>>>>>>>>> approval, might Biden stall the order of impeachment with >>>>>>>>>>> endless lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for
    democracy.
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised >>>>>>>>>>> over the land I doubt there would be much impeachment
    enthusiasm in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless
    politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous
    Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy
    differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent
    criminal investigation into a political opponent is not a
    policy. It goes to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto
    for trying to steal the election (did you support Trump's
    second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so
    what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the
    right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus
    Trumps wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing
    more than a policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of >>>>>>>>> open borders is an attempt to flood the United States with an >>>>>>>>> underclass guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and
    policies -- a scheme to ultimately undermine our
    constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to
    maintain partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I)
    support immigration of those who present themselves at a
    recognized border crossing and bring something of value -- like
    a needed talent or job offer, assets sufficient to support
    themselves, or familial relationships. Democrats, on the other
    hand ... well you know, and so do the voters. Trumps border
    policy, by the way, gave us the lowest Black unemployment on
    record, for the simple reason that those border crossers take
    jobs from our Black citizens. That, in and of itself, is
    sufficient reason to control border crossings, but do Democrats
    give a damn about that? Apparently not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden:
    180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction
    from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to
    visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored
    calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home
    and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry,
    is that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose
    some members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some
    Democrat mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring >>>>>>>> an emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building
    the wall, that would have been over policy and thus very
    wrong. But by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with >>>>>>> virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in
    the House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I
    think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard.
    Can you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the
    office and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his
    competence is in question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021
    as independence day from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have
    done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state
    this country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.


    You have called Trump a "man baby" for four years, and claim he is not
    a normal functioning adult. Prove it.

    Trump is a very intelligent person. He could stand in front of dozens
    of reporters and answer their questions without any help. Biden can't,
    and even with help, he still screws up.

    It's very obvious Biden is not a normal functioning human being, and he
    will only get worse.

    Trump cannot admit he lost at anything in his life. He can't even admit
    he lost the popular vote in 2016. That's what man-babies do.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to El Castor on Tue Apr 5 11:39:45 2022
    On 4/5/2022 11:15 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but
    misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress >>>>>>>>>>>>> chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens >>>>>>>>>>>>> pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a
    withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our >>>>>>>>>>>>> Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is >>>>>>>>>>>>> removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine >>>>>>>>>>>> for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>
    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the >>>>>>>>>>>> law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions >>>>>>>>>>> (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a >>>>>>>>>>> violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him. >>>>>>>>>>> Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of >>>>>>>>>>> the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval, >>>>>>>>>>> might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless
    lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy. >>>>>>>>>>
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over >>>>>>>>>>> the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm >>>>>>>>>>> in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless
    politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous
    Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy
    differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal >>>>>>>> investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes >>>>>>>> to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal >>>>>>>> the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so
    what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the
    right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps >>>>>>>>> wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a >>>>>>>>> policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders >>>>>>>>> is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass
    guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a >>>>>>>>> scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain >>>>>>>> partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support >>>>>>> immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border >>>>>>> crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or >>>>>>> job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know,
    and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us
    the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason
    that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens.
    That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border
    crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently
    not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden:
    180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction
    from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to
    visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored
    calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home
    and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is >>>>>>> that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some >>>>>>> members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat
    mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an >>>>>>>> emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the
    wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But >>>>>>>> by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with >>>>>>> virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the >>>>>>> House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I
    think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can
    you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office
    and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in
    question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day
    from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this
    country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.

    Trump is a populist with an arrogant irritating personality, however
    despite that off the track personality he gave us a much needed
    corporate tax cut, deregulation, a booming economy, lots of new jobs,
    energy independence, strengthened the military and gave us the Space
    Force, clamped down on an increasingly one sided China trade
    relationship, and (to repeat) the lowest Black unemployment on record,
    He controlled the border, a border that is not now controlled by VP
    Harris, but rather by Mexican cartels. And lastly he poured billions
    into Operation Warp Speed, a project which a former member of this
    group said could not possibly succeed, but instead was an enormous
    success and went a long way toward literally saving the world.
    I honor Trump solely for his accomplishments, not his irritating
    personality and despicable last few days in office.

    Biden's accomplishments? Oh, he has several, all grossly negative.

    And yet, with the possibility of more accomplishments, you won't ever
    vote for Trump again.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 5 11:15:51 2022
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration.

    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for
    impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but
    misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress
    chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens
    pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a
    withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our
    Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is
    removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine >>>>>>>>>>> for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections. >>>>>>>>>>>
    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the >>>>>>>>>>> law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to).

    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions >>>>>>>>>> (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a
    violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him. >>>>>>>>>> Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of >>>>>>>>>> the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval,
    might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless
    lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy. >>>>>>>>>
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over >>>>>>>>>> the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm >>>>>>>>>> in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless
    politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous
    Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump?

    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy
    differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal >>>>>>> investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes >>>>>>> to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal >>>>>>> the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so
    what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the
    right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps >>>>>>>> wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a >>>>>>>> policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders >>>>>>>> is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass
    guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a
    scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy.

    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain >>>>>>> partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support
    immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border >>>>>> crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or
    job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial
    relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know,
    and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us
    the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason
    that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens.
    That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border
    crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently
    not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden:
    180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction
    from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to
    visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored
    calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats."
    https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home
    and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is
    that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some
    members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat
    mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an >>>>>>> emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the
    wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But
    by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with
    virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the
    House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different
    matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then
    impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I
    think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can
    you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office
    and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in
    question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day
    from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this
    country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.

    Trump is a populist with an arrogant irritating personality, however
    despite that off the track personality he gave us a much needed
    corporate tax cut, deregulation, a booming economy, lots of new jobs,
    energy independence, strengthened the military and gave us the Space
    Force, clamped down on an increasingly one sided China trade
    relationship, and (to repeat) the lowest Black unemployment on record,
    He controlled the border, a border that is not now controlled by VP
    Harris, but rather by Mexican cartels. And lastly he poured billions
    into Operation Warp Speed, a project which a former member of this
    group said could not possibly succeed, but instead was an enormous
    success and went a long way toward literally saving the world.
    I honor Trump solely for his accomplishments, not his irritating
    personality and despicable last few days in office.

    Biden's accomplishments? Oh, he has several, all grossly negative.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 5 13:25:37 2022
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:39:45 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 11:15 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but
    misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress >>>>>>>>>>>>>> chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine >>>>>>>>>>>>> for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to). >>>>>>>>>>>>
    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions >>>>>>>>>>>> (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a >>>>>>>>>>>> violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him. >>>>>>>>>>>> Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of >>>>>>>>>>>> the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval, >>>>>>>>>>>> might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless >>>>>>>>>>>> lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy. >>>>>>>>>>>
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over >>>>>>>>>>>> the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm >>>>>>>>>>>> in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless >>>>>>>>>>>> politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous
    Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump? >>>>>>>>>>>
    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy >>>>>>>>>>> differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal >>>>>>>>> investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes >>>>>>>>> to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal >>>>>>>>> the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so >>>>>>>> what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the
    right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps >>>>>>>>>> wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a >>>>>>>>>> policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders >>>>>>>>>> is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass >>>>>>>>>> guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a >>>>>>>>>> scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy. >>>>>>>>>
    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain >>>>>>>>> partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support >>>>>>>> immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border >>>>>>>> crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or >>>>>>>> job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial >>>>>>>> relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, >>>>>>>> and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us >>>>>>>> the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason >>>>>>>> that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens.
    That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border >>>>>>>> crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently >>>>>>>> not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden:
    180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction >>>>>>>> from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to
    visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored
    calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats." >>>>>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home >>>>>>>> and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is >>>>>>>> that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some >>>>>>>> members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat >>>>>>>> mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an >>>>>>>>> emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the >>>>>>>>> wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But >>>>>>>>> by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with >>>>>>>> virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the >>>>>>>> House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different >>>>>>> matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then >>>>>>> impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I
    think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can >>>>>> you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office >>>>> and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in
    question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day
    from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this
    country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.

    Trump is a populist with an arrogant irritating personality, however
    despite that off the track personality he gave us a much needed
    corporate tax cut, deregulation, a booming economy, lots of new jobs,
    energy independence, strengthened the military and gave us the Space
    Force, clamped down on an increasingly one sided China trade
    relationship, and (to repeat) the lowest Black unemployment on record,
    He controlled the border, a border that is not now controlled by VP
    Harris, but rather by Mexican cartels. And lastly he poured billions
    into Operation Warp Speed, a project which a former member of this
    group said could not possibly succeed, but instead was an enormous
    success and went a long way toward literally saving the world.
    I honor Trump solely for his accomplishments, not his irritating
    personality and despicable last few days in office.

    Biden's accomplishments? Oh, he has several, all grossly negative.

    And yet, with the possibility of more accomplishments, you won't ever
    vote for Trump again.

    His last few despicable weeks in office in no way mitigate those accomplishments, but they do cast a shadow on possible future
    behavior. Truth be known, given the choice of Trump or a fellow
    traveler of the Squad, a choice I don't relish, I don't know what I
    might do.

    As for you, which of the Trump's "accomplishments" that I listed do
    you disagree with? What has Biden done that you treasure?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to El Castor on Tue Apr 5 17:06:06 2022
    On 4/5/2022 1:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:39:45 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 11:15 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to). >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions >>>>>>>>>>>>> (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a >>>>>>>>>>>>> violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of >>>>>>>>>>>>> the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval, >>>>>>>>>>>>> might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless >>>>>>>>>>>>> lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy. >>>>>>>>>>>>
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over >>>>>>>>>>>>> the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm >>>>>>>>>>>>> in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless >>>>>>>>>>>>> politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous
    Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump? >>>>>>>>>>>>
    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy >>>>>>>>>>>> differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal >>>>>>>>>> investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes >>>>>>>>>> to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal >>>>>>>>>> the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment).

    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so >>>>>>>>> what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the
    right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps >>>>>>>>>>> wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a >>>>>>>>>>> policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders >>>>>>>>>>> is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass >>>>>>>>>>> guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a >>>>>>>>>>> scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy. >>>>>>>>>>
    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain >>>>>>>>>> partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support >>>>>>>>> immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border >>>>>>>>> crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or >>>>>>>>> job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial >>>>>>>>> relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, >>>>>>>>> and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us >>>>>>>>> the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason >>>>>>>>> that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. >>>>>>>>> That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border >>>>>>>>> crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently >>>>>>>>> not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: >>>>>>>>> 180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction >>>>>>>>> from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to >>>>>>>>> visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored >>>>>>>>> calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats." >>>>>>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home >>>>>>>>> and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is >>>>>>>>> that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some >>>>>>>>> members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat >>>>>>>>> mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an >>>>>>>>>> emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the >>>>>>>>>> wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But >>>>>>>>>> by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with >>>>>>>>> virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the >>>>>>>>> House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different >>>>>>>> matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then >>>>>>>> impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I
    think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can >>>>>>> you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office >>>>>> and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in >>>>>> question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day >>>>>> from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this >>>>> country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.

    Trump is a populist with an arrogant irritating personality, however
    despite that off the track personality he gave us a much needed
    corporate tax cut, deregulation, a booming economy, lots of new jobs,
    energy independence, strengthened the military and gave us the Space
    Force, clamped down on an increasingly one sided China trade
    relationship, and (to repeat) the lowest Black unemployment on record,
    He controlled the border, a border that is not now controlled by VP
    Harris, but rather by Mexican cartels. And lastly he poured billions
    into Operation Warp Speed, a project which a former member of this
    group said could not possibly succeed, but instead was an enormous
    success and went a long way toward literally saving the world.
    I honor Trump solely for his accomplishments, not his irritating
    personality and despicable last few days in office.

    Biden's accomplishments? Oh, he has several, all grossly negative.

    And yet, with the possibility of more accomplishments, you won't ever
    vote for Trump again.

    His last few despicable weeks in office in no way mitigate those accomplishments, but they do cast a shadow on possible future
    behavior. Truth be known, given the choice of Trump or a fellow
    traveler of the Squad, a choice I don't relish, I don't know what I
    might do.

    As for you, which of the Trump's "accomplishments" that I listed do
    you disagree with? What has Biden done that you treasure?

    A booming economy and lots of new jobs isn't a policy. I did like
    Operation Warp Speed, but otherwise his handling of the pandemic
    (motivated by his not-functioning-adult desire for the whole thing to go
    away) cost lives. Biden's pandemic relief and infrastructure programs
    are laudable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 5 18:32:48 2022
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 17:06:06 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 1:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:39:45 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 11:15 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>> wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless >>>>>>>>>>>>>> lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless >>>>>>>>>>>>>> politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy >>>>>>>>>>>>> differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal >>>>>>>>>>> investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes >>>>>>>>>>> to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal >>>>>>>>>>> the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment). >>>>>>>>>>
    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so >>>>>>>>>> what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the >>>>>>>>> right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps >>>>>>>>>>>> wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a >>>>>>>>>>>> policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders >>>>>>>>>>>> is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass >>>>>>>>>>>> guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a >>>>>>>>>>>> scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy. >>>>>>>>>>>
    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain >>>>>>>>>>> partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support >>>>>>>>>> immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border >>>>>>>>>> crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or >>>>>>>>>> job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial >>>>>>>>>> relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, >>>>>>>>>> and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us >>>>>>>>>> the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason >>>>>>>>>> that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. >>>>>>>>>> That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border >>>>>>>>>> crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently >>>>>>>>>> not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: >>>>>>>>>> 180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction >>>>>>>>>> from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to >>>>>>>>>> visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored >>>>>>>>>> calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats." >>>>>>>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home >>>>>>>>>> and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is >>>>>>>>>> that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some >>>>>>>>>> members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat >>>>>>>>>> mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a
    policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an >>>>>>>>>>> emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the >>>>>>>>>>> wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But >>>>>>>>>>> by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with >>>>>>>>>> virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the >>>>>>>>>> House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different >>>>>>>>> matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then >>>>>>>>> impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I >>>>>>>>> think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can >>>>>>>> you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office >>>>>>> and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in >>>>>>> question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day >>>>>>> from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this >>>>>> country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.

    Trump is a populist with an arrogant irritating personality, however
    despite that off the track personality he gave us a much needed
    corporate tax cut, deregulation, a booming economy, lots of new jobs,
    energy independence, strengthened the military and gave us the Space
    Force, clamped down on an increasingly one sided China trade
    relationship, and (to repeat) the lowest Black unemployment on record, >>>> He controlled the border, a border that is not now controlled by VP
    Harris, but rather by Mexican cartels. And lastly he poured billions
    into Operation Warp Speed, a project which a former member of this
    group said could not possibly succeed, but instead was an enormous
    success and went a long way toward literally saving the world.
    I honor Trump solely for his accomplishments, not his irritating
    personality and despicable last few days in office.

    Biden's accomplishments? Oh, he has several, all grossly negative.

    And yet, with the possibility of more accomplishments, you won't ever
    vote for Trump again.

    His last few despicable weeks in office in no way mitigate those
    accomplishments, but they do cast a shadow on possible future
    behavior. Truth be known, given the choice of Trump or a fellow
    traveler of the Squad, a choice I don't relish, I don't know what I
    might do.

    As for you, which of the Trump's "accomplishments" that I listed do
    you disagree with? What has Biden done that you treasure?

    A booming economy and lots of new jobs isn't a policy.

    Of course it is. The policy being restoration of US economic power
    across the globe combined with a thriving US economy and employment.
    The strategy that accomplished that goal was a corporate tax cut that
    once again made US corporations competitive with foreign rivals,
    combined with a leasing and taxing strategy that stimulated US oil
    production and supplied a low cost power source to US manufacturers,
    and added export income to our coffers and the pockets of our workers.
    This in turn produced booming employment and the lowest Black
    unemployment on record. The day Biden arrived he set out to ruin it
    all -- starting with oil production.

    "On day one in the Oval Office, Mr. Biden canceled the Keystone XL
    pipeline, killing 11,000 U.S. jobs and limiting supply. Hes placed a moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands, threatening
    another 268,000 jobs and limiting U.S. production. The Biden
    administration has suspended oil and gas leases in Alaskas Arctic
    National Wildlife Refuge. It is increasing the number of
    endangered-species protections to limit oil production on private
    land." https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/oct/14/editorial-bidens-energy-contradictions/

    I did like
    Operation Warp Speed, but otherwise his handling of the pandemic
    (motivated by his not-functioning-adult desire for the whole thing to go >away) cost lives. Biden's pandemic relief and infrastructure programs
    are laudable.

    Laudable? Biden's pandemic relief would have gone nowhere without
    Trump's Operation Warp Speed. Infrastructure programs "may" be
    laudable, but please list the accomplishments -- hot air is not an accomplishment.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Josh Rosenbluth@21:1/5 to El Castor on Tue Apr 5 19:07:24 2022
    On 4/5/2022 6:32 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 17:06:06 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 1:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:39:45 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 11:15 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>> wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Today’s decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nation’s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border."

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy >>>>>>>>>>>>>> differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>>>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal >>>>>>>>>>>> investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes >>>>>>>>>>>> to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal >>>>>>>>>>>> the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment). >>>>>>>>>>>
    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so >>>>>>>>>>> what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the >>>>>>>>>> right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps >>>>>>>>>>>>> wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a >>>>>>>>>>>>> policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders >>>>>>>>>>>>> is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass >>>>>>>>>>>>> guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a >>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy. >>>>>>>>>>>>
    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain >>>>>>>>>>>> partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support >>>>>>>>>>> immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border >>>>>>>>>>> crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or >>>>>>>>>>> job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial >>>>>>>>>>> relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, >>>>>>>>>>> and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us >>>>>>>>>>> the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason >>>>>>>>>>> that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. >>>>>>>>>>> That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border >>>>>>>>>>> crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently >>>>>>>>>>> not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: >>>>>>>>>>> 180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction >>>>>>>>>>> from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to >>>>>>>>>>> visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored >>>>>>>>>>> calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats." >>>>>>>>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home >>>>>>>>>>> and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is >>>>>>>>>>> that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some >>>>>>>>>>> members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat >>>>>>>>>>> mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a >>>>>>>>>>>> policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an >>>>>>>>>>>> emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the >>>>>>>>>>>> wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But >>>>>>>>>>>> by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a
    Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with >>>>>>>>>>> virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the >>>>>>>>>>> House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different >>>>>>>>>> matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then >>>>>>>>>> impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I >>>>>>>>>> think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can >>>>>>>>> you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office >>>>>>>> and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in >>>>>>>> question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day >>>>>>>> from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this >>>>>>> country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy.

    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.

    Trump is a populist with an arrogant irritating personality, however >>>>> despite that off the track personality he gave us a much needed
    corporate tax cut, deregulation, a booming economy, lots of new jobs, >>>>> energy independence, strengthened the military and gave us the Space >>>>> Force, clamped down on an increasingly one sided China trade
    relationship, and (to repeat) the lowest Black unemployment on record, >>>>> He controlled the border, a border that is not now controlled by VP
    Harris, but rather by Mexican cartels. And lastly he poured billions >>>>> into Operation Warp Speed, a project which a former member of this
    group said could not possibly succeed, but instead was an enormous
    success and went a long way toward literally saving the world.
    I honor Trump solely for his accomplishments, not his irritating
    personality and despicable last few days in office.

    Biden's accomplishments? Oh, he has several, all grossly negative.

    And yet, with the possibility of more accomplishments, you won't ever
    vote for Trump again.

    His last few despicable weeks in office in no way mitigate those
    accomplishments, but they do cast a shadow on possible future
    behavior. Truth be known, given the choice of Trump or a fellow
    traveler of the Squad, a choice I don't relish, I don't know what I
    might do.

    As for you, which of the Trump's "accomplishments" that I listed do
    you disagree with? What has Biden done that you treasure?

    A booming economy and lots of new jobs isn't a policy.

    Of course it is.

    It's an outcome, not a policy.

    The policy being restoration of US economic power
    across the globe combined with a thriving US economy and employment.
    The strategy that accomplished that goal was a corporate tax cut that
    once again made US corporations competitive with foreign rivals,
    combined with a leasing and taxing strategy that stimulated US oil
    production and supplied a low cost power source to US manufacturers,
    and added export income to our coffers and the pockets of our workers.
    This in turn produced booming employment and the lowest Black
    unemployment on record. The day Biden arrived he set out to ruin it
    all -- starting with oil production.

    "On day one in the Oval Office, Mr. Biden canceled the Keystone XL
    pipeline, killing 11,000 U.S. jobs and limiting supply. He’s placed a moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands, threatening
    another 268,000 jobs and limiting U.S. production. The Biden
    administration has suspended oil and gas leases in Alaska’s Arctic
    National Wildlife Refuge. It is increasing the number of
    endangered-species protections to limit oil production on private
    land." https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/oct/14/editorial-bidens-energy-contradictions/

    I did like
    Operation Warp Speed, but otherwise his handling of the pandemic
    (motivated by his not-functioning-adult desire for the whole thing to go
    away) cost lives. Biden's pandemic relief and infrastructure programs
    are laudable.

    Laudable? Biden's pandemic relief would have gone nowhere without
    Trump's Operation Warp Speed. Infrastructure programs "may" be
    laudable, but please list the accomplishments -- hot air is not an accomplishment.

    We've finally got money to repair roads and bridges that have been long
    in need.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From El Castor@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 5 20:28:44 2022
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 19:07:24 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:32 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 17:06:06 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com>
    wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 1:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 11:39:45 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>> wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 11:15 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 08:34:55 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> >>>>>> wrote:

    On 4/5/2022 6:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 12:23:09 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/4/2022 10:37 AM, El Castor wrote:
    On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 09:00:18 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 10:54 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 15:11:15 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
    <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/3/2022 12:50 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sun, 3 Apr 2022 09:06:34 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 10:25 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 15:09:05 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 1:23 PM, El Castor wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 11:19:39 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

    On 4/2/2022 9:11 AM, Johnny wrote:
    On Sat, 2 Apr 2022 08:56:10 -0700
    Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 4/2/2022 8:26 AM, Johnny wrote:

    By Adam Shaw
    Published April 2, 2022

    House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accused President Biden of having "abdicated his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsibilities" at the southern border and making the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ongoing migrant crisis worse after the administration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it is lifting the Title 42 public health >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order.

    "Todays decision confirms that President Biden has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abdicated his responsibilities at our borders and is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actively working to make the border crisis worse," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCarthy said in a statement. "From day one of his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administration, he has failed to protect our nations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> security and to secure the border." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on Friday >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announced that it will be terminating the Title 42 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public health policy, that has been used by both the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump and Biden administrations to quickly expel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrants at the southern border since the start of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COVID-19 outbreak, on May 23.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mccarthy-biden-abidicated-responsibilities-border-title-42-repeal

    Biden will be impeached after the mid term elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has done nothing but cause one crisis after another. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Impeachment isn't for policy disagreements. Americans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know this, so his poll numbers will improve if he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeached.

    He will be impeached for deliberately allowing 2 million >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal immigrants to cross the border, and then flying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them all across the country so they will be hard to find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and remove. Americans know this, and also know that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy change will allow more illegal immigration. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    That's a policy disagreement. Even if Americans agree with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you on the policy, they will punish republicans for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeaching him over it.
    The Constitution permits impeachment for "misdemeanors". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the meaning of that term when the Constitution was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drafted? Apparently not necessarily a crime, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misbehavior, fumbling, bungling, and however congress >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chooses to interpret it.

    Failure to enforce, and willful violation of, border "LAWS" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could, and should, be a legitimate reason for impeachment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ted Cruz has also recommended impeachment for Bidens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pathetic bungling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> withdrawal that violated long standing pledges to our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Afghan aides.

    However, Johnny should keep in mind that if Biden is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed from office, Kamala Harris becomes president -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shudder.

    Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the House to agree to. However, once impeachment is routine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for policy differences (*), we can dispense with elections. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    If Biden ignores a court order that says his actions are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> illegal, that would be properly an impeachable offense. But, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how he treats asylum applicants is not a violation of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> law unless a court says so (and they aren't going to). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    So the US Congress (House and Senate) defines Biden's actions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (or lack thereof) on the Border to be a misdemeanor or a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> violation of an existing border law, and they impeach him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would it be necessary for them to obtain a court approval of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the grounds for their impeachment? Lacking such approval, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might Biden stall the order of impeachment with endless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lawsuits and challenges in court?

    The courts have no say. It's legal but very bad for democracy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    In any case with the shadow of a President Harris poised over >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the land I doubt there would be much impeachment enthusiasm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a Republican congress.

    BTW -- I agree with you on the danger posed by endless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politically motivated impeachments -- as well as statehood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for DC and Court packing -- ideas posed by numerous >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Democrats. BTW, did you oppose the impeachment of Trump? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Yes. Both were for undermining democracy, not over policy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> differences.

    Hmm, undermining democracy or policy difference. Could the eye >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the beholder be a consideration in making that
    determination?

    Blackmailing a foreign leader to announce a non-existent criminal >>>>>>>>>>>>> investigation into a political opponent is not a policy. It goes >>>>>>>>>>>>> to the heart of undermining democracy. Ditto for trying to steal >>>>>>>>>>>>> the election (did you support Trump's second impeachment). >>>>>>>>>>>>
    I paid no attention to it. He had already lost the election, so >>>>>>>>>>>> what was the real purpose? A lame partisan exercise?

    One of the available punishments for conviction is
    disqualification from future office. That would have been the >>>>>>>>>>> right thing to do.

    I'm OK with that.

    You might contend that Biden's open border policy versus Trumps >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wall and far stricter immigration rules was nothing more than a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy difference. In my eye a Democrat policy of open borders >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is an attempt to flood the United States with an underclass >>>>>>>>>>>>>> guaranteed to support Democrat politicians and policies -- a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> scheme to ultimately undermine our constitutional democracy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    By that logic, closed borders is a Republican scheme to maintain >>>>>>>>>>>>> partisan support.

    Republicans do not support closed borders -- they (and I) support >>>>>>>>>>>> immigration of those who present themselves at a recognized border >>>>>>>>>>>> crossing and bring something of value -- like a needed talent or >>>>>>>>>>>> job offer, assets sufficient to support themselves, or familial >>>>>>>>>>>> relationships. Democrats, on the other hand ... well you know, >>>>>>>>>>>> and so do the voters. Trumps border policy, by the way, gave us >>>>>>>>>>>> the lowest Black unemployment on record, for the simple reason >>>>>>>>>>>> that those border crossers take jobs from our Black citizens. >>>>>>>>>>>> That, in and of itself, is sufficient reason to control border >>>>>>>>>>>> crossings, but do Democrats give a damn about that? Apparently >>>>>>>>>>>> not.

    "Illegal border crossing attempts reach new high under Biden: >>>>>>>>>>>> 180,000 in May".
    "The situation at the southern border has drawn little reaction >>>>>>>>>>>> from Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris. Both have yet to >>>>>>>>>>>> visit the 2,000-mile international boundary and have ignored >>>>>>>>>>>> calls for more action from Republicans, as well as Democrats." >>>>>>>>>>>> https://news.yahoo.com/illegal-border-crossing-attempts-reach-215900861.html

    As for a Republican scheme, if a burglar breaks into your home >>>>>>>>>>>> and you chase him out before he can steal your wife's jewelry, is >>>>>>>>>>>> that a scheme to maintain your ill gotten wealth? I suppose some >>>>>>>>>>>> members of the Left would think so -- and perhaps some Democrat >>>>>>>>>>>> mayors and DAs already do?

    But, that's garbage logic. Open or closed borders is a >>>>>>>>>>>>> policy choice. Had the Democrats impeached Trump for declaring an >>>>>>>>>>>>> emergency in order to divert Pentagon funding to building the >>>>>>>>>>>>> wall, that would have been over policy and thus very wrong. But >>>>>>>>>>>>> by your logic, it would be acceptable.

    It would not be acceptable by my logic, but rather by a >>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution which (arguably unfortunately) leaves congress with >>>>>>>>>>>> virtually unlimited leeway in determining grounds for
    impeachment. On that you apparently agree.

    You -- this thread ...
    "Of course impeachment can be for whatever gets a majority in the >>>>>>>>>>>> House to agree to."

    That's the legal reality. Whether it is acceptable is a different >>>>>>>>>>> matter. If impeaching Biden over open borders is acceptable, then >>>>>>>>>>> impeaching Trump over emergency funding of the wall is too. I >>>>>>>>>>> think both are unacceptable even though they are legal.

    I don't hold Trump, or every Republican policy, in high regard. Can >>>>>>>>>> you say the same about Biden?

    I've been disappointed in him. He brings a nice empathy to the office >>>>>>>>> and a return to normalcy from Trump. However, his competence is in >>>>>>>>> question. For example, he declared July 4, 2021 as independence day >>>>>>>>> from COVID. That's a stupid thing to have done.

    Normalcy? You have to be joking. Do you really think the state this >>>>>>>> country is in, is anywhere near normal?

    We don't need a president that makes decisions based on empathy. >>>>>>>
    Trump isn't a normal functioning adult. Biden is.

    Trump is a populist with an arrogant irritating personality, however >>>>>> despite that off the track personality he gave us a much needed
    corporate tax cut, deregulation, a booming economy, lots of new jobs, >>>>>> energy independence, strengthened the military and gave us the Space >>>>>> Force, clamped down on an increasingly one sided China trade
    relationship, and (to repeat) the lowest Black unemployment on record, >>>>>> He controlled the border, a border that is not now controlled by VP >>>>>> Harris, but rather by Mexican cartels. And lastly he poured billions >>>>>> into Operation Warp Speed, a project which a former member of this >>>>>> group said could not possibly succeed, but instead was an enormous >>>>>> success and went a long way toward literally saving the world.
    I honor Trump solely for his accomplishments, not his irritating
    personality and despicable last few days in office.

    Biden's accomplishments? Oh, he has several, all grossly negative.

    And yet, with the possibility of more accomplishments, you won't ever >>>>> vote for Trump again.

    His last few despicable weeks in office in no way mitigate those
    accomplishments, but they do cast a shadow on possible future
    behavior. Truth be known, given the choice of Trump or a fellow
    traveler of the Squad, a choice I don't relish, I don't know what I
    might do.

    As for you, which of the Trump's "accomplishments" that I listed do
    you disagree with? What has Biden done that you treasure?

    A booming economy and lots of new jobs isn't a policy.

    Of course it is.

    It's an outcome, not a policy.

    So educate me, but let me guess. The Biden "policy" consists of saving
    the planet by eliminating oil production and use.

    The policy being restoration of US economic power
    across the globe combined with a thriving US economy and employment.
    The strategy that accomplished that goal was a corporate tax cut that
    once again made US corporations competitive with foreign rivals,
    combined with a leasing and taxing strategy that stimulated US oil
    production and supplied a low cost power source to US manufacturers,
    and added export income to our coffers and the pockets of our workers.
    This in turn produced booming employment and the lowest Black
    unemployment on record. The day Biden arrived he set out to ruin it
    all -- starting with oil production.

    "On day one in the Oval Office, Mr. Biden canceled the Keystone XL
    pipeline, killing 11,000 U.S. jobs and limiting supply. Hes placed a
    moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands, threatening
    another 268,000 jobs and limiting U.S. production. The Biden
    administration has suspended oil and gas leases in Alaskas Arctic
    National Wildlife Refuge. It is increasing the number of
    endangered-species protections to limit oil production on private
    land."
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/oct/14/editorial-bidens-energy-contradictions/

    I did like
    Operation Warp Speed, but otherwise his handling of the pandemic
    (motivated by his not-functioning-adult desire for the whole thing to go >>> away) cost lives. Biden's pandemic relief and infrastructure programs
    are laudable.

    Laudable? Biden's pandemic relief would have gone nowhere without
    Trump's Operation Warp Speed. Infrastructure programs "may" be
    laudable, but please list the accomplishments -- hot air is not an
    accomplishment.

    We've finally got money to repair roads and bridges that have been long
    in need.

    Hmmm. Crippling the economy and inflation through the roof is going to
    repair roads and bridges? Brilliant strategy.

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