2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (pbmus) on Sat Jan 14, 2017, 08:43 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
onenote
(44,915 posts)The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
pbmus
(12,444 posts)Just for this monster...
Who has broken every rule...
onenote
(44,915 posts)But "we" don't get to make up new laws.
pbmus
(12,444 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(122,434 posts)11,539 proposals to amend the Constitution have been introduced in Congress since 1789. 27 of them have actually been adopted.
yardwork
(65,136 posts)Congress makes laws. Congress is currently under control of the Republican Party. They're not interested in postponing Trump's inauguration. Even if they wanted to change the Constitution about this, it would take years. Next week's inauguration will move forward as scheduled.
Seriously, this is the kind of magical thinking and lack of knowledge of how our laws work that led to Trump being elected. Elections have serious consequences. Your vote matters. It's the only chance you have to make your voice heard.
FBaggins
(27,922 posts)If ten or more citizens petition the White House with a specific code... then it gets forwarded to the USSSC (United States Super Secret Court) which has the power to postpone changes in Presidential control by up to six to eight months while ordering a new election.
But you have to really REALLY want it.
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)I'm tired of people saying it can't be done!
cilla4progress
(26,047 posts)Call for desperate measures.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)does in office. Some of this prior stuff might help down the road, but January 20 will come and go. I'll wake up the next day, monitor Trump's admin closely, and focus on 2018, 2020 at all levels of office.
cilla4progress
(26,047 posts)And has gotten us nowhere. It is rational and we are dealing with irrational people.
longship
(40,416 posts)Sheesh!
pbmus
(12,444 posts)By the time he steps on that stage...
longship
(40,416 posts)pbmus
(12,444 posts)We are really screwed...
longship
(40,416 posts)Let it stay that way.
What are some people thinking? That's right; they aren't.
cilla4progress
(26,047 posts)And please don't swear at me. Thanks.
longship
(40,416 posts)Which requires 2/3rds of the state legislatures once it is approved by the US Congress.
You need to read your fucking US Constitution to understand how things work under a fucking constitutional republic.
Some people think that some things are just laws. Then again, there's the fucking US Constitution, which has served us all fairly well in most times, but is nevertheless imperfect.
There is a reason why it is so God damned difficult to amend it. That's because we don't want any damned knee jerk asshole jerking (or collection of knee jerk assholes) our freedoms out from under us.
I put this as plainly as I could, in plain language.
The US Constitution! All citizens should fucking read it!
I am not swearing at you. I am just swearing because this is a passion to me and I find ignorance of such topics to be very unfortunate.
dflprincess
(28,610 posts)was this corrupt. So they gave us no way to avoid this disaster.
I feel like I'm walking to the guillotine.
JI7
(91,183 posts)Trump will become president Friday. Unless he resigns and then Pence will become president.
The only way to remove Trump is impeachment.
longship
(40,416 posts)In both cases we would get Pence.
triron
(22,240 posts)according to this
http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences-and-law/law/law-divisions-and-codes/martial-law
longship
(40,416 posts)Thrust the USA into a civil war.
What are some people thinking? That's right; they're not thinking.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)onenote
(44,915 posts)"If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course. As necessity creates the rule, so it limits its duration; for, if this government is continued after the courts are reinstated, it is a gross usurpation of power. Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war."
sarisataka
(21,440 posts)the number of Generals in the next administration but we want the military to take charge...
Note martial law does not negate the transfer of power. Lincoln still had to be re-elected in 1864 even with the country under martial law. President Obama would have to declare himself above the Constitution, i.e. a dictator, to remain in office.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(27,021 posts)and an attempt to overthrow the new President once he is sworn in, but I would never suggest anything like that.
yardwork
(65,136 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)The date of the inauguration is codified in law there.
cilla4progress
(26,047 posts)A lack of imagination.
The US revolution, many civil rights protest actions, were all illegal at the time. . It shouldn't stop activism against this monster. The Constitution is a living document.
onenote
(44,915 posts)So are you saying that the inauguration should be blocked by illegal means? Or that the Constitution, as a "living document" should be interpreted to ignore specific provisions?
cilla4progress
(26,047 posts)This is no longer a nation of laws. If it were, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
I grow impatient with the mindset that doesn't see this yet.
I am advocating for nonviolent revolution. Yes.
onenote
(44,915 posts)the constitutional means for removing the president, etc etc.
There is no way to have a nonviolent revolution to override the constitution.
Response to onenote (Reply #29)
pbmus This message was self-deleted by its author.
ElementaryPenguin
(7,852 posts)Isn't that true? Trump is not the President. You can't impeach him yet - and you don't need to. If he committed a murder right now in broad daylight - he would not be sworn in as President on Jan. 20th (nor would he if he were found guilty of treason). I believe the evidence is there - and that Anthony Kennedy would rule against Trump - and the Supremes would rule 5-3 to convict.
Trump would ultimately be pardoned by President Hillary Clinton.
All sounds far-fetched - but is it not possible?
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,591 posts)It's not possible.
onenote
(44,915 posts)The Attorney General can't unilaterally "bring charges" -- there would have to be an indictment based on the presentation of evidence. And it would be impossible to present evidence of "treason" under the Constitutional standard and there is no crime called "high crimes". Bribery? Fine. Make a case under the federal bribery statute whatever th
at might say. Not going to waste time looking.
And no the Supreme Court can't "step in and rule on it." There is a process by which cases come to the Court. It does not have original jurisdiction except in limited circumstances.
And if he committed a murder right now in public he would still become president on January 20.He could be convicted of murder between now and January 20 and he'd still become president on January 20.
And even if all the things you suppose can happen could happen (and they can't) how does Hillary Clinton end up as President?
Oh wait -- she doesn't.
Response to onenote (Reply #43)
pbmus This message was self-deleted by its author.
onenote
(44,915 posts)My reply was to your post and a post that followed it that did mention Hillary
ElementaryPenguin
(7,852 posts)That's more far-fetched than anything I'm suggesting - which, granted, is far-fetched enough.
ElementaryPenguin
(7,852 posts)And handed the victory in a tainted election to the opponent. This was upheld by the Supreme Court - so there is a legal precedent.
yardwork
(65,136 posts)The American Revolution required a lot of violence and took years.
The Civil Rights movement required people accepting violence - vicious attacks on their bodies and lives, assassinations - and took years before Congress was forced to act.
Our current Republican-controlled Congress doesn't care if you take to the streets. They are ramming their own agenda through at lightning speed.
Yes, organize. Fight. But know that it will take years and it won't be easy at all and you might die. In the meantime, be sure to vote wisely. Democrats aren't perfect but we need to put the Republicans out of power.
triron
(22,240 posts)especially if Russians continue to hack elections for the authoritarian
and we continue to let it happen.
sarisataka
(21,440 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)First Speaker
(4,858 posts)...an interim President, until we know whether or not our incoming "President" is a goddam traitor or not. As for the "constitutionality" of it--to coin a phrase, the Constitution is not a suicide pact. If we permit Trump to take the oath Friday, we, as a nation, are committing suicide. The Constitution--*all* of it--will be a dead letter by 2020. Better to bend the letter of it now, than lose the reality of it. And I don't want to hear any more "well, what if the Repubs do this to the next Dem President" arguments. I find it very hard to believe that these arguments are being made in good faith. The Repubs are a fascist party out to destroy liberal democracy. We are not. We do not elect Trumps. I know what the men of 1775, 1861, and 1941 would have done.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)"an interim President, until we know whether or not our incoming "President" is a goddam traitor or not"
It's called a coup. Not that I'm against such things. At least frame it properly.
mythology
(9,527 posts)would allow this nonsense.
Please stop this. If you had bothered to do even the slightest research, you'd know the answer is no.