- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Could McCarthy Take The Presidency After The Mid-Terms?
Posted on 4/1/22 at 6:50 pm to VoxDawg
Posted on 4/1/22 at 6:50 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
I've shared with you the best resource I've found when it comes to understanding the matter. Based on your response, I can only assume that you have not read it or on the remotest of possibilities that you did, you do not understand it.
I don’t want you to link anything, and I’m never going to read PatelPatriot without first being convinced that it’s even potentially viable. Cite actual legal or factual authority. Not some random guy’s blog
Why can’t you just explain it? Even in bullet points.
All you have to do is provide actual details, which you clearly already know and are aware of, to counter my supposition that the Presidential Succession Act would still operate. Why do you never do so? Why can’t you articulate the merits of your belief?
Every time we get on this merry go round, I list the reasons for my position, and cite to legal authority when asked to do so. Why do you never reciprocate?
The problem is, every time you or BoarEd or the new guy from the govt in exile thread or Jjdoc post something on these lines, or the Devolution thing, holes are easily poked in the underlying facts and assumptions that support your conclusions. You hate that, and refuse to expose your other thoughts to that scrutiny.
This post was edited on 4/1/22 at 6:54 pm
3
Posted on 4/1/22 at 6:56 pm to Indefatigable
The frick do you think I've been doing in all these threads?
Posted on 4/1/22 at 6:57 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
The frick do you think I've been doing in all these threads?
Not once ever answering my specific questions on the mechanics or legality of what you allege to be possible.
If I only wanted to troll you, I wouldn’t expend the effort of continuing to engage the specifics every single time. I would just troll. Eventually I suppose you’ll realize that.
This post was edited on 4/1/22 at 6:59 pm
Posted on 4/1/22 at 6:58 pm to Indefatigable
Here. Until Devolution for Dummies comes out, it's something I wrote elsewhere:
Throughout Trump's Presidency, he and the MIL leadership saw the 2020 election heist coming from a mile away. Numerous Executive Orders were put in place to establish a continuity of government plan in case the DS went through with the election steal in the attempt to depose the bad, orange man.
EOs 13818 and 13848 set the parameters for sanctions against multinational criminal orgs for human trafficking and international interference in our critical infrastructure (including election integrity).
EO 13961 established Federal Mission Resilience (FMR) , i.e. continuity of the federal government with respect to leadership in the absence of a Commander in Chief of the MIL, and sets the stage for Devolution of command to the 11 Combatant Commanders and the FMR Executive Committee with Mark Meadows being the Chairman and other civilians (Kash Patel and Ezra Cohen Watnick among others) in advisory roles.
This FMR Exec Committee and the MIL (real MIL not TV Generals and woke-arse Joint Chiefs who have no command authority) are keeping us from being invaded and out of pointless military conflict. They're basically keeping the nation treading water while we sort the 2020 election shenanigans out.
The sooner folks wake up to the heist, demand decertification of the EC and we uninstall this illegitimate administration, the sooner we get our republic back.
TL;DR watch Devolved, then do the proper Devolution articles on PatelPatriot's Substack
LINK
Throughout Trump's Presidency, he and the MIL leadership saw the 2020 election heist coming from a mile away. Numerous Executive Orders were put in place to establish a continuity of government plan in case the DS went through with the election steal in the attempt to depose the bad, orange man.
EOs 13818 and 13848 set the parameters for sanctions against multinational criminal orgs for human trafficking and international interference in our critical infrastructure (including election integrity).
EO 13961 established Federal Mission Resilience (FMR) , i.e. continuity of the federal government with respect to leadership in the absence of a Commander in Chief of the MIL, and sets the stage for Devolution of command to the 11 Combatant Commanders and the FMR Executive Committee with Mark Meadows being the Chairman and other civilians (Kash Patel and Ezra Cohen Watnick among others) in advisory roles.
This FMR Exec Committee and the MIL (real MIL not TV Generals and woke-arse Joint Chiefs who have no command authority) are keeping us from being invaded and out of pointless military conflict. They're basically keeping the nation treading water while we sort the 2020 election shenanigans out.
The sooner folks wake up to the heist, demand decertification of the EC and we uninstall this illegitimate administration, the sooner we get our republic back.
TL;DR watch Devolved, then do the proper Devolution articles on PatelPatriot's Substack
LINK
Posted on 4/1/22 at 7:00 pm to VoxDawg
(Placeholder to read and reply—I’m sitting down for dinner)
Posted on 4/1/22 at 7:00 pm to Indefatigable
No, what you do is find some minute detail to fixate on and strawman the ever living frick out of it then strut around the thread like you've scored some overwhelming intellectual victory, when all you've accomplished is proven that you don't even remotely understand the premise.
We've done this before.
We've done this before.
Posted on 4/1/22 at 7:06 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Not once ever answering my specific questions on the mechanics or legality of what you allege to be possible.
Insisting that I be the one satisfy your alleged curiosity when I'm giving you the very source I used to satisfy my own is the height of willful ignorance, btw. It makes little difference to me if you reject or accept the premise.
What bugs the ever loving shite out of me is that you choose to dismiss it out of hand without getting the proper information about it. I'm not your concierge.
This post was edited on 4/1/22 at 7:07 pm
Posted on 4/1/22 at 7:20 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
No, what you do is find some minute detail to fixate on and strawman the ever living frick out of it then strut around the thread like you've scored some overwhelming intellectual victory, when all you've accomplished is proven that you don't even remotely understand the premise.
Funny that you see threshold legal or practical details as minute given the severity of what we are talking about. You are supposing an extraordinary remedy and/or action. How or why you are so unprepared to address your theory’s foundational weaknesses is amazing to me. “Minute” details in this instance consist of language from the Constitution itself. No, I’m not going to just ignore legal or factual holes in your theory, or in the suppositions that underlie your theory, just because you consider those details minor or inconsequential. The fact that you never have any meritorious response to my pointing out those “minor” discrepancies is telling enough. If they were truly minor you’d be able to brush them aside.
All of that said, give me a few and I’ll respond in that post above that I saved.
This post was edited on 4/1/22 at 7:21 pm
Posted on 4/1/22 at 7:23 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
There is no possible way to get 67 votes in the Senate.
This plus it would take ALL Republicans, including the Romney types and some Dems and Hell will freeze over before Dems dump their crew and allow a Republican to become POTUS. Seriously, this is beyond unrealistic!!!
Posted on 4/1/22 at 8:01 pm to Indefatigable
quote:Dude, you argued with someone for 4 pages about whether or not AF1 is labeled as such in flight and then tried to lift up your position as proof of how none of this could be possible, as a result. You are the metaphorical pigeon on the chessboard.
If they were truly minor you’d be able to brush them aside.
Have you not yet noticed that the 3-4 people who are convinced that I'm unwilling or incapable of communicating this matter clearly all have the same, obvious axe to grind? There have been more than enough opportunities to retire to some rhetorical ivory tower if I needed to feel like I should bask in some exclusive insider knowledge.
I go back to my example from the Government in Exile thread - you want someone to tell you about the movie so you can talk shite about it when the simplest solution would be to watch the movie for yourself and then you can flame away.
My understanding of the topic is wholly immaterial to whether or not you get it. What is important at this point is that folks on the sidelines see that you're incapable of debating in good faith, as indicated by your admission that you aren't going to read the source material that would likely address 99% of your perceived "holes" in the theory. But if you did that, you might read something you don't like, and then it eats away at what you thought might be true and what was or wasn't possible.
We're likely never going to agree on this. Extra-Constitutional crimes are never going to have an established remedy when no one could have possibly seen them coming. The difference between us is that IDGAF where you land on the matter. You know where to go to find the info if you ever decide to emerge from your cozy, nihilistic shell.
Prove you're willing to exert a little effort and educate yourself and we might both be shocked.
This post was edited on 4/1/22 at 8:05 pm
Posted on 4/1/22 at 8:12 pm to VoxDawg
Nobody is grinding an axe. You post consistent devolution links and that you are comfy AF. If you were comfy AF you wouldn't see the need to constantly post links like you were a Scientologist saving just one soul because you showed them..
You are used to being protected and dog whistle people to pile on all those that question you. Tader Salad et al... look like fools contributing nothing to the subject; but defending you like you are all in high school at the cool kids table.
Stand on your own. Start a thread with your devolution & Q theories if it does not pass muster and survive then STFU- or know that you will be questioned or ignored in your spam. Can you do this w/o acting like a child that took his ball and ran home & told on everybody?
You are used to being protected and dog whistle people to pile on all those that question you. Tader Salad et al... look like fools contributing nothing to the subject; but defending you like you are all in high school at the cool kids table.
Stand on your own. Start a thread with your devolution & Q theories if it does not pass muster and survive then STFU- or know that you will be questioned or ignored in your spam. Can you do this w/o acting like a child that took his ball and ran home & told on everybody?
Posted on 4/1/22 at 8:14 pm to Indefatigable
IIRC: (I can't remember the subjects ATM) but you were very thoughtful & even keeled in a few subjects of debate & discussion & I don't care what your politics are.
You won't get reasonable discussion. It is some anonymous entity is correct no matter what-even if that anonymous entity said they were a con; they would still be talked about as if they are the great pumpkin and the goal post moved to a new con. Repeat Rinse.
You won't get reasonable discussion. It is some anonymous entity is correct no matter what-even if that anonymous entity said they were a con; they would still be talked about as if they are the great pumpkin and the goal post moved to a new con. Repeat Rinse.
Posted on 4/1/22 at 8:15 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
You post consistent devolution links and that you are comfy AF.
And apparently it's driven you to the brink of insanity, so I've got that going for me, which is nice.
Posted on 4/1/22 at 8:24 pm to Penrod
quote:Maybe.
The Iran deal would be canceled.
quote:Trump did during the pandemic, and McCarthy supported him.
We would not be sending stimulus checks to loafers.
quote:True, but I haven’t seen anything in the way of pushback from any “conservative” judges. Leftism continues its relentless March through the institutions.
We would no longer be appointing judges who legislate leftism from the bench.
quote:Well, we’d have that to look forward to, at least.
There would be no tax increases proposed.
quote:This I highly doubt, seeing as how profitable war is to the Chamber of Commerce wing of the GOPe, to which McCarthy is beholden.
Foreign policy would be less ambitious and progress towards a one world government would slow, if not cease.
quote:Did you just seriously imply a McCarthy Presidency would in any way resemble Trump’s?
Let me ask, did you notice a difference when Biden took over for Trump?
Posted on 4/1/22 at 9:13 pm to FearlessFreep
quote:
From a policy perspective, would we be able to perceive a difference?
None at all. Maybe even worse.
Posted on 4/1/22 at 9:21 pm to biglego
Ryan and McCarthy were separated at birth, ideologically.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News