Winners only.

[RobGMN Premium Member]

No, your ego makes you try to make people look like fools. I couldn't tell you why your ego is what it is or what you are compensating for. I really don't care. Hell, you can't let anything go. How many pages do you drag shit on for? That ego is a ***** huh. I would not be surprised that it keeps you working at home, single and divorced.

You have an uncanny ability to make incorrect predictions. No wonder you think history is irrelevant in analyzing the present, and making predictions of the future. Lol.

So, DO you think Trump should be jailed for selling off 500,000 barrels from the SPR?
And, what do you suggest Biden do to keep gas prices from spiking due to the Red Sea situation?

I guess you forgot your past post about how a crime is a crime and punishment should be the same regardless of the severity of a crime.
Maybe that rule doesn't apply when it's Trump committing the "crime" of utilizing SPR stock as it was intended, as opposed to Biden doing the same?
Convenient.
Are you also upset that under Trump, our reserve was 25,000,000 barrels lower than what it is now?

Can you cite the Federal Regulation that makes it a crime for a president to utilizes the SPR?

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Interesting point/quote. So now the States are trying to decide if the courts or the voters should be able to disqualify Trump. Ironic considering Trump tried to use the power of the State and/or courts to over ride the voters. I disagree with the Colorado Supreme Court's decision, but it's hard to have any sympathy for Trump given his prior actions.

At the heart of the brewing conflicts is a question: Should courts or voters decide if a candidate is disqualified for the presidency?

Innocent until proven guilty? Voters split on Donald Trump being disqualified from Colorado ballot

After the Colorado Supreme Court ruled to disqualify Trump from the state's presidential primary ballot, voters across the country gave their reactions on the move.

www.usatoday.com

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Interesting point/quote. So now the States are trying to decide if the courts or the voters should be able to disqualify Trump. Ironic considering Trump tried to use the power of the State and/or courts to over ride the voters. I disagree with the Colorado Supreme Court's decision, but it's hard to have any sympathy for Trump given his prior actions.

At the heart of the brewing conflicts is a question: Should courts or voters decide if a candidate is disqualified for the presidency?

Innocent until proven guilty? Voters split on Donald Trump being disqualified from Colorado ballot

After the Colorado Supreme Court ruled to disqualify Trump from the state's presidential primary ballot, voters across the country gave their reactions on the move.

www.usatoday.com

It's an interesting argument, as it all seems to be hinged on whether he was an "officer of the United States".

It seem commons sense that he would indeed be an "officer of the United States" by both definition ("An officer of the United States is a functionary of the executive or judicial branches of the federal government of the United States to whom is delegated some part of the country's sovereign power. The term officer of the United States is not a title, but a term of classification for a certain type of official.") and by historical references to the POTUS as such.

Of course, his attorneys argument is that he was not an officer and thus could not have violated his Oath of Office per the 14th Amendment.

That's a slipppery slope if you ask me. If he was not indeed an "officer", does that mean anything he did in the capacity of an "officer of the United States" was done in violation of statute/COTUS/amendment, etc.?
Quite the chess game.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Can you cite the Federal Regulation that makes it a crime for a president to utilizes the SPR?

IIRC it was specifically created for "supply disruption;" such as a major war.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

It's an interesting argument, as it all seems to be hinged on whether he was an "officer of the United States".

It seem commons sense that he would indeed be an "officer of the United States" by both definition ("An officer of the United States is a functionary of the executive or judicial branches of the federal government of the United States to whom is delegated some part of the country's sovereign power. The term officer of the United States is not a title, but a term of classification for a certain type of official.") and by historical references to the POTUS as such.

Of course, his attorneys argument is that he was not an officer and thus could not have violated his Oath of Office per the 14th Amendment.

That's a slipppery slope if you ask me. If he was not indeed an "officer", does that mean anything he did in the capacity of an "officer of the United States" was done in violation of statute/COTUS/amendment, etc.?
Quite the chess game.

I think clearly he is an "officer" but the POTUS gets some leeway in their speech as well. Personally, I just don't think there is enough evidence to say Trump took part in a insurrection.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I think clearly he is an "officer" but the POTUS gets some leeway in their speech as well. Personally, I just don't think there is enough evidence to say Trump took part in a insurrection.

If the insurrection is the only violation of the oath that they think he committed, then it'll def. hinge on what part they decide he took in the events of Jan 6th. Maybe the ongoing lie about the "big steal" is a violation. Or maybe any other number of thing he did that were not in the best interest of the country were.
I guess it has to be determiend if they were bad enough to meet the level of a violation versus a simple failure to meet the oath.
Interesting times.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

CaliExpress: World’s First Fully Autonomous AI-Powered Restaurant Is Set to Open in Southern California

This establishment will deploy cutting-edge food tech, automating both grill and fry stations.

www.techtimes.com

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

If the insurrection is the only violation of the oath that they think he committed, then it'll def. hinge on what part they decide he took in the events of Jan 6th. Maybe the ongoing lie about the "big steal" is a violation. Or maybe any other number of thing he did that were not in the best interest of the country were.
I guess it has to be determiend if they were bad enough to meet the level of a violation versus a simple failure to meet the oath.
Interesting times.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

It's a bit of a weird. The first judge ruled Trump did commit insurrection, but that POTUS is not an "office" and therefore he isn't banned from running for that office (see CNN article). Colorado's Supreme Court is ruling POTUS is an "office," but I don't know if they spoke to whether Trump's actions are considered insurrection. Personally, I don't like it because it's like a backdoor way of finding him guilty of insurrection. If Trump is (possibly) guilty of insurrection, then try him for insurrection.

IMHO, Jan 6th and Trump's actions leading up to Jan 6th are just shy of insurrection, but definitely irresponsible and dangerous. Trump saw how the continually feeding the BLM movement a certain narrative lead to violence and should have saw the similarly whipping up the MAGA crowd could also lead to violence.

Really it's up to his party to put an end to this and find a suitable nominee. Whoever the GOP puts forth will be running against Sleepy Joe and people more often than not are casting their vote against "the other guy." Being beholden to any cult of personality is a dangerous situation to put oneself or an organization in.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/17/politics/trump-colorado-ballot-14th-amendment-insurrection/index.html

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

It's a bit of a weird. The first judge ruled Trump did commit insurrection, but that POTUS is not an "office" and therefore he isn't banned from running for that office (see CNN article). Colorado's Supreme Court is ruling POTUS is an "office," but I don't know if they spoke to whether Trump's actions are considered insurrection. Personally, I don't like it because it's like a backdoor way of finding him guilty of insurrection. If Trump is (possibly) guilty of insurrection, then try him for insurrection.

IMHO, Jan 6th and Trump's actions leading up to Jan 6th are just shy of insurrection, but definitely irresponsible and dangerous. Trump saw how the continually feeding the BLM movement a certain narrative lead to violence and should have saw the similarly whipping up the MAGA crowd could also lead to violence.

Really it's up to his party to put an end to this and find a suitable nominee. Whoever the GOP puts forth will be running against Sleepy Joe and people more often than not are casting their vote against "the other guy." Being beholden to any cult of personality is a dangerous situation to put oneself or an organization in.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/17/politics/trump-colorado-ballot-14th-amendment-insurrection/index.html

It really is a bummer that lately it seems we have to vote for the best of the worst, or specifically to keep someone OUT of a position.
Also a bummer that in this day of almost unlimited access to info and knowledge, the cult of personality can still so easily fool people into the role follower/supporter/sycophant.
But some people still also believe Earth is flat, and that we sprang from the rib of Adam 600 years ago, so maybe it's not that tough.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

You have an uncanny ability to make incorrect predictions. No wonder you think history is irrelevant in analyzing the present, and making predictions of the future. Lol.

What predictions of the future do you speak of?

So, DO you think Trump should be jailed for selling off 500,000 barrels from the SPR?
And, what do you suggest Biden do to keep gas prices from spiking due to the Red Sea situation?

Man it must be killing you about that 500,000 barrels.

View attachment 55467


I guess you forgot your past post about how a crime is a crime and punishment should be the same regardless of the severity of a crime.

What Biden is doing is criminal.

Maybe that rule doesn't apply when it's Trump committing the "crime" of utilizing SPR stock as it was intended, as opposed to Biden doing the same?
Convenient.

Biden is using it to make money to pay his obligations.

Are you also upset that under Trump, our reserve was 25,000,000 barrels lower than what it is now?

The fault of Democrats that held office before him.

Can you cite the Federal Regulation that makes it a crime for a president to utilizes the SPR?

I probably could just as easy as you could. I also have access to the Internet. Why do you ask?

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

It really is a bummer that lately it seems we have to vote for the best of the worst, or specifically to keep someone OUT of a position.
Also a bummer that in this day of almost unlimited access to info and knowledge, the cult of personality can still so easily fool people into the role follower/supporter/sycophant.
But some people still also believe Earth is flat, and that we sprang from the rib of Adam 600 years ago, so maybe it's not that tough.

It is sad that our choices will be between Sleepy Joe who is fading in & out of consciousness and Trump, who clearly places himself above any and everybody else including the entire general population.

The problem with "unlimited access to info" is a lot of the info is conflicting and clearly we have a bunch of propogandist out there, so instead of researching and digging through all the BS it's easier to just believe whatever works for whatever your narrative is or whatever "your tribe's" narrative is.

The Steele Dossier is a great example - "they" found some bad information in it, so they ignore all the good information contained within. People lack either the will or ability to do some research so they just run with whatever narrative suits their political leanings.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

What predictions of the future do you speak of?

Pretty much every prediction you've made about me, for starters.

Man it must be killing you about that 500,000 barrels.

Actually, no. he utilized the SPR. That's what it is there for.
But your hypocrisy and extreme bias is evident when you want Biden to go to jail for using it, but have no similar desire for Trump to go to jail for using it.

What Biden is doing is criminal.

You've claimed it often. What Federal law is he violating by utilizing the SPR?

Biden is using it to make money to pay his obligations.

Explain how he is doing this.

The fault of Democrats that held office before him.

So for the 13 years before he became POTUS, they were setting him up for a fall?
Interesting. How'd they know he'd become POTUS?

I probably could just as easy as you could. I also have access to the Internet. Why do you ask?

I'd prefer you cite it so I know your reference point.
If I find something, it may not be close to what you are referencing.

So, what's the law/rule/regualation/etc that Biden broke or is breaking by utilizing the SPR?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Pretty much every prediction you've made about me, for starters.

No, be specific Rob, you made the claim. Support it.

Actually, no. he utilized the SPR. That's what it is there for.
But your hypocrisy and extreme bias is evident when you want Biden to go to jail for using it, but have no similar desire for Trump to go to jail for using it.

Why did Trump use it?
Why is Biden using it?

You've claimed it often. What Federal law is he violating by utilizing the SPR?

The one where he puts the needs of other countries and himself in front of the needs of our nation.

Explain how he is doing this.

I have. Go back and read, it's not far back.

So for the 13 years before he became POTUS, they were setting him up for a fall?
Interesting. How'd they know he'd become POTUS?

Could have been any President to take office. It's just easier for Dem's to blame Republicans.

I'd prefer you cite it so I know your reference point.
If I find something, it may not be close to what you are referencing.

Nah, you go first.

So, what's the law/rule/regualation/etc that Biden broke or is breaking by utilizing the SPR?

Ask your questions once Rob, when you repeat yourself you look like you have an agenda.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

No, be specific Rob, you made the claim. Support it.

Your most recent ones.
"I would not be surprised that it keeps you working at home, single and divorced."
Their existence alone proves my claim.

Why did Trump use it?
Why is Biden using it?

That doesn't answer my question. If you are using the "whys" as your basis for claiming one use was illegal and the other was not, then tell us those "whys".
Tell us how Trump's "why" is legal, but you think Biden's "why" is not legal.

The one where he puts the needs of other countries and himself in front of the needs of our nation.

That's not an answer. What is the specific law/rule/regulation/etc that Biden "broke" when he utilized the SPR?
Feel free to cite it.

I have. Go back and read, it's not far back.

No, you haven't. Simply repeating your mantra that Biden's use of the SPR was illegal does not explain the why or how.

Could have been any President to take office. It's just easier for Dem's to blame Republicans.

So if a Democrat took office in 2017, the same thing would have happened? They just got lucky that it happened to be Republican Trump?
Wow, what luck!

Nah, you go first.

42 USC title 1 Part B

Ask your questions once Rob, when you repeat yourself you look like you have an agenda.

It seems you often forget to answer questions. Maybe your absentmindedness is a convenient way to argue without arguing. Maybe you actually are forgetful.
Asking again allows you the opportunity to answer questions that may already be on a previous page,

Helping you stay active in the discussion.
Maybe share some info instead of just your beliefs or feelings.