Politics

[Ontario Hunter]

Here is the current leader of the opposition Conservatives at his leadership review. He took 87.4% of the vote. I don’t get the common belief that he isn’t leadership material. His father is gay, his wife is an immigrant, his daughter is autistic, and he has pledged not to change the abortion laws here. The only attack the left has on him is that he is not personable. It’s a lie. This guy is obviously very connected to people.

The problem has been his inability to connect to his own people ... clearly demonstrated by Conservative members who have walked to the other side of the aisle.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Are you talking about Trump's knowledge of the Constitution, Bondi's or your own?

Don Lemon, Eight Others Indicted on Civil Rights Charges | National Review

The indictment, said to charge civil rights conspiracy and a FACE Act violation, has not yet been posted on DOJ’s website.

www.nationalreview.com

From Section 241 of US Code 18:
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

In other words, the question is whether he was simply "reporting", or if he was in on the conspiracy to "intimidate". By "in on it", I mean was he part of the planning: "You guys do this, I'll get it on film". In this section of the code, there is no "physically". The people in that service have the right to "the free exercise..." of their religion, no matter what the pastor's day job is. Clearly, the intent of entering the premises was to disturb the service and intimidate the congregation with reference to the pastor's occupation. They admitted as much.

The question in this specific case is whether the "reporter" was innocently reporting on the rabble, or was actually a co-conspirator in the rabble. That is for a jury to decide, although clearly there is enough probable cause for this that a Grand Jury was able to indict. I'm not sure what's so difficult to understand about that.

Of course, we have a serious problem in our courts with people being released on their own recognizance without bail. In this case, he'll probably show up for his trial. Others are not as compliant.

Yes, we have a free press. If a reporter writes a story about a fire, that's fine. If a reporter makes a deal with the arsonist, telling him when and where to start the fire so that he can be there to provide a report on it, the crime is not in the reporting itself, but in the conspiracy to start the fire. I thought everyone knew that.

Oh, hell. I just fed the troll. We should come up with a "Troll Jar", where every time someone feeds the troll, you have to put a quarter in. Proceeds go to Jerome to keep this site running.

A real stretch trying apply this statute. There is a world of difference between "intimidating" and "informing." The object of the demonstration was clearly to inform the congregants their beloved pastor was an ICE goon during his off time. I didn't see anyone in the video being threatened or intimidated. And the demonstrators didn't show up dressed like masked "highwaymen." That would be ICE tactics.

 

[John Wasmuth]

Pretty sure a judge saw enough to sign the warrant…… your word salad means nada…

 

[fourfive8]

jimmy Carter did a lot to damage this country..

His Dept of Education was probably the single worst action IMO…

Yes. In addition, he and Barbara Walters were two people possibly most responsible for the Iran of Ayatollahs the world has had to deal with since 1980.

 

[Pheroze]

The problem has been his inability to connect to his own people ... clearly demonstrated by Conservative members who have walked to the other side of the aisle.

As a leader he has to own that, no doubt.

One thing I heard in that speech was a return to riding associations nominating and electing the representatives. I think the habit of appointing the rep is something that was first developed in the later 80s. A useful read is Eugene Whalen’s book about his years as a Federal MP and Minister. Because they used to be elected locally, they did not fear questioning their own government. Mr Whalen describes doing that in the Commons when a backbencher could not get the ear of the cabinet minister for an issue. The back bencher would raise a question for their cabinet minister in the HoC! That all disappeared when the parties appointed who was running under their banner because you lose your right to run for the party. Ford did that and ejected a couple. As an aside, the member for Haldimand county who Ford ejected from caucus won as an independent. Whalen was also from Haldimand County. They take their politics seriously!

Anywho, I think having the local riding association nominating and electing the rep will avoid getting lukewarm opportunists who are not there for their riding association. I think that is part of the problem with the two who crossed the floor.

 

[Wheels]

jimmy Carter did a lot to damage this country..

His Dept of Education was probably the single worst action IMO…

Agree.

I worked on Capitol Hill when the Dept of Education was being created. (SALT II treaty and DOE were the two major topics of the day). At the time America was considered the top country in the world in education. Last I looked America was somewhere in the 20’s. Taking education away from the states has proven to be a disaster.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Some details on Lemon's grand jury indictment from NBC News:

"The indictment alleges Lemon attended a briefing by protesters ahead of the event and that he openly characterized the upcoming protest as one involving civil disobedience. Prosecutors said he kept the church location a secret until his live coverage."

Attending the briefing does not mean he organized the demonstration. What is "civil disobedience." Given his on camera behavior, it would not surprise me if he advised the demonstrators re what they needed to do to stay within the law (i.e. staying civil and within their constitutional rights to express themselves). He might even have told them to follow those instructions or the camera would be turned off. That would have been a good thing. Keep the demonstrators in line and congregants safe by avoiding a violent escalation. The demonstration did seem to be orchestrated ... properly and with good intentions. It is not illegal to observe, participate, or even assist in organizing a protest "briefing" as long as it does not plan to engage in physically threatening purposes. Lemon could have told the demonstrators to kick the doors down, throw chairs, chalices, etc. That would make for grand sensational footage. But I think he's smarter than that. He played Trump and Bondi. Like a fiddle. Not hard to do since their combined intelligence quotient probably doesn't make double figures. They took the bait .... that any reasonably intelligent person should have been able to see was bait.

Why shouldn't Lemon keep the church location a secret till live coverage? Obviously he and his fellow demonstrators didn't want any of the unwashed rabble joining in and getting things out of control. Thank you Mr. Lemon for helping keep the demonstration legal and safe for all. And that is grounds for a grand jury indictment? Really? Expect that to blow up in Bondi's face at trial. This was a huge mistake on the government's part. Huge! And it will cost taxpayers millions before the DOJ finally goes down in flames at trial, loses appeals, etc. And then maybe Mr. Lemon will extract his inflated pound of flesh in civil court. More taxpayers money wasted. Or maybe he will be content with his journalism career getting a great big boost (ah ... "great big" ... I have obviously been reading too many of Trump's tweets).

 

[Tundra Tiger]

I posted this on Lighter Politics but it seems appropriate here....

 

[SaintPanzer]

Blocking the troll for the unforgivable crime of boring the hell out of me.

But for those who (unlike the troll) are actually literate, and may be confused by the nonsense peddled:

18 U.S. Code § 248 - Freedom of access to clinic entrances

www.law.cornell.edu

(a)Prohibited Activities.—Whoever—
(1)
by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person because that person is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from, obtaining or providing reproductive health services;
(2)
by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship; or
(3)
intentionally damages or destroys the property of a facility, or attempts to do so, because such facility provides reproductive health services, or intentionally damages or destroys the property of a place of religious worship,
shall be subject to the penalties provided in subsection (b) and the civil remedies provided in subsection (c), except that a parent or legal guardian of a minor shall not be subject to any penalties or civil remedies under this section for such activities insofar as they are directed exclusively at that minor.

Feel free to diagram the sentence in part (2). the "or" means something specific. Here's help for the blocked illiterate one:

 

[Wheels]

Some details on Lemon's grand jury indictment from NBC News:

"The indictment alleges Lemon attended a briefing by protesters ahead of the event and that he openly characterized the upcoming protest as one involving civil disobedience. Prosecutors said he kept the church location a secret until his live coverage."

Attending the briefing does not mean he organized the demonstration. What is "civil disobedience." Given his on camera behavior, it would not surprise me if he advised the demonstrators re what they needed to do to stay within the law (i.e. staying civil and within their constitutional rights to express themselves). He might even have told them to follow those instructions or the camera would be turned off. That would have been a good thing. Keep the demonstrators in line and congregants safe by avoiding a violent escalation. The demonstration did seem to be orchestrated ... properly and with good intentions. It is not illegal to observe, participate, or even assist in organizing a protest "briefing" as long as it does not plan to engage in physically threatening purposes. Lemon could have told the demonstrators to kick the doors down, throw chairs, chalices, etc. That would make for grand sensational footage. But I think he's smarter than that. He played Trump and Bondi. Like a fiddle. Not hard to do since their combined intelligence quotient probably doesn't make double figures. They took the bait .... that any reasonably intelligent person should have been able to see was bait.

Why shouldn't Lemon keep the church location a secret till live coverage? Obviously he and his fellow demonstrators didn't want any of the unwashed rabble joining in and getting things out of control. Thank you Mr. Lemon for helping keep the demonstration legal and safe for all. And that is grounds for a grand jury indictment? Really? Expect that to blow up in Bondi's face at trial. This was a huge mistake on the government's part. Huge! And it will cost taxpayers millions before the DOJ finally goes down in flames at trial, loses appeals, etc. And then maybe Mr. Lemon will extract his inflated pound of flesh in civil court. More taxpayers money wasted. Or maybe he will be content with his journalism career getting a great big boost (ah ... "great big" ... I have obviously been reading too many of Trump's tweets).

Protestors can protest on public property. Journalism 101. Journalists can cover stories on public property. That’s why so many news stories are covered/videoed from the sidewalk.

Can a protestor walk into your home to protest. Absolutely not. It is private property. Can a journalist walk into your home to cover a story. Absolutely not. It is private property.

The Church was not public property. It was private property.

This is very simple for most people to understand.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

jimmy Carter did a lot to damage this country..

His Dept of Education was probably the single worst action IMO…

I thought the 25th Amendment predated Carter. It specifies the transition for chain of command should something happen to the president. First is VP, then House Speaker, then Secty of State ... on down to number sixteen in line: the Secretary of Education.
Edit: Correction. The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 lists Secty of Education as #16 in line. Was there a Secty of Education in 1947 without a Dept of Education? Possibly I guess.

Blocking the troll for the unforgivable crime of boring the hell out of me.

But for those who (unlike the troll) are actually literate, and may be confused by the nonsense peddled:

18 U.S. Code § 248 - Freedom of access to clinic entrances

www.law.cornell.edu

(a)Prohibited Activities.—Whoever—
(1)
by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person because that person is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from, obtaining or providing reproductive health services;
(2)
by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship; or
(3)
intentionally damages or destroys the property of a facility, or attempts to do so, because such facility provides reproductive health services, or intentionally damages or destroys the property of a place of religious worship,
shall be subject to the penalties provided in subsection (b) and the civil remedies provided in subsection (c), except that a parent or legal guardian of a minor shall not be subject to any penalties or civil remedies under this section for such activities insofar as they are directed exclusively at that minor.

Feel free to diagram the sentence in part (2). the "or" means something specific. Here's help for the blocked illiterate one:

Again, read the preamble "Whoever BY FORCE or [by] THREAT, or by PHYSICAL OBSTRUCTION ..." Those are the legal requirements needed to satisfy intimidation, interference, etc. Essentially, those three criteria define what constitutes interference, intimidation, etc. You can't simply dissect parts of the Act and avoid the qualifiers.

 

[mdwest]

The 25th Amendment DOES NOT address the Secretary of Education in any way, shape, or form. There was no SECED when the 25th was passed in 1967. The first SECED was named in 1979 when Jimmy Carter established the US Department of Education... Honestly I dont know where you come up with most of the drivel you post..

What the 25th Amendment says is "principal officers of the executive departments". Meaning all senior cabinet members. the 25th doesnt establish a line of succession. It establishes how the government can remove a sitting president and establishes that if this happens, that the VP becomes president.

25th Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 established the line of succession.. It also DOES NOT call out a Secretary of Education by name, because in 1947 no SECED existed. It merely establishes a line of succession based on the date that each executive department was established.. Currently, there are 18 positions in the line of succession.. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Homeland Security were established after the Secretary of Education..

 

[Betterinthebush]

The 25th Amendment DOES NOT address the Secretary of Education in any way, shape, or form. There was no SECED when the 25th was passed in 1967. The first SECED was named in 1979 when Jimmy Carter established the US Department of Education... Honestly I dont know where you come up with most of the drivel you post..

What the 25th Amendment says is "principal officers of the executive departments". Meaning all senior cabinet members. the 25th doesnt establish a line of succession. It establishes how the government can remove a sitting president and establishes that if this happens, that the VP becomes president.

25th Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 established the line of succession.. It also DOES NOT call out a Secretary of Education by name, because in 1947 no SECED existed. It merely establishes a line of succession based on the date that each executive department was established.. Currently, there are 18 positions in the line of succession.. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Homeland Security were established after the Secretary of Education..

Trying to set an example.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Protestors can protest on public property. Journalism 101. Journalists can cover stories on public property. That’s why so many news stories are covered/videoed from the sidewalk.

Can a protestor walk into your home to protest. Absolutely not. It is private property. Can a journalist walk into your home to cover a story. Absolutely not. It is private property.

The Church was not public property. It was private property.

This is very simple for most people to understand.

Churches typically throw the doors open to all. Evangelism is a major tenant of Christianity. Therefore by implication, if not definition, a church is public property ... until the church authority declares it is not. The pastor asked Lemon to leave. At that point he could either leave or he's trespassing. He complied and presumably the rest followed. Our church does not lock the doors unless no one is in the building (or some ladies are inside alone at night). Everyone is welcome to enter ... except those in pursuit of building occupants who are seeking sanctuary. Bums and mentally ill and even junkie hookers have walked into the building unannounced (usually to get warm). They aren't told to leave unless exhibiting dangerous behavior. The mentally ill person did have to be removed from the property by police (he was naked and raving mad). I guess our church is as open to the public as the city bus shelter.

 

[Mark A Ouellette]

Gentlemen,

Regarding the seven Like through Dislike icons users can assign to each post, I would love one more,
a WTF icon...

I do place wastes of time, pot stirers, and oxygen thieves on Ignor but I ofter have to open their posts to learn why others are being driven crazy

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

 

[Ontario Hunter]

The 25th Amendment DOES NOT address the Secretary of Education in any way, shape, or form. There was no SECED when the 25th was passed in 1967. The first SECED was named in 1979 when Jimmy Carter established the US Department of Education... Honestly I dont know where you come up with most of the drivel you post..

What the 25th Amendment says is "principal officers of the executive departments". Meaning all senior cabinet members. the 25th doesnt establish a line of succession. It establishes how the government can remove a sitting president and establishes that if this happens, that the VP becomes president.

25th Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

The Presidential Succession Act of 1947 established the line of succession.. It also DOES NOT call out a Secretary of Education by name, because in 1947 no SECED existed. It merely establishes a line of succession based on the date that each executive department was established.. Currently, there are 18 positions in the line of succession.. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of Homeland Security were established after the Secretary of Education..

I was in the process of correcting that error when you made your post. Note the edit and time. I have to wonder if the Presidential Succession Act would actually stand the test of court challenge. It would seem something like that would require an amendment to the Constitution. Why wasn't the line of succession officially made unquestionably "constitutional" when 25th Amendment was put forward in 1967? Seems it should have been part of the package. Odd.

 

[spike.t]

Gentlemen,

Regarding the seven Like through Dislike icons users can assign to each post, I would love one more,
a WTF icon...

I do place wastes of time, pot stirers, and oxygen thieves on Ignor but I ofter have to open their posts to learn why others are being driven crazy

A vomit one would come in handy sometimes as well......

 

[Brent in Az]

Gentlemen,

Regarding the seven Like through Dislike icons users can assign to each post, I would love one more,
a WTF icon...

I do place wastes of time, pot stirers, and oxygen thieves on Ignor but I ofter have to open their posts to learn why others are being driven crazy

 

[mdwest]

I was in the process of correcting that error when you made your post. Note the edit and time. I have to wonder if the Presidential Succession Act would actually stand the test of court challenge. It would seem something like that would require an amendment to the Constitution. Why wasn't the line of succession officially made unquestionably "constitutional" when 25th Amendment was put forward in 1967? Seems it should have been part of the package. Odd.

Not odd at all..

there are currently 190,000+ pages of Federal Law (Code of Federal Regulations).. If every law passed was deemed important enough to include in the Constitution, it would be an unreadable and completely unmanageable document..

What is odd is.. in 1960.. there were only 22,800 pages of Federal Law... In the last 65 years our legislators have decided 22,800 pages werent enough and expanded the CFR by more than 800%..

Our government is out of control.. and every day we become less of the land of the free..