TheSanSabaSongbird

We all do that. Whether we're aware of it or not. Some of us are more aware of it than others.

According to my British friends Yorkshire Gold is legit. I don't know if it's as strong though. Not much of a tea drinker myself, just reporting what I've been told.

Except that's not what he says at all. He says that our overseas opponents will fall in line when he's president again because they are afraid of him. That's an implicit threat for the use of force. You can't have it both ways. You don't get to claim that he's "the least warlike" while also using an implicit threat of force. It's a contradiction in terms.

Also, I like how you people always conveniently forget the fact that he nearly started a shooting war with Iran by blowing up Suliemani in the middle of fucking Baghdad. Yeah, that's very much not "warlike." Cut me a fucking husk.

Why wouldn't they be pushing it? Seriously. Ask yourself, why wouldn't both conservatives and the Russians be pushing the genocide Joe narrative? You people have made it way too easy for them. There is a less than zero chance that they aren't running with it as hard as they can.

It was. It's also being pushed very hard by the Russians and other foreign actors who have a huge interest in seeing Trump reelected. Why wouldn't they? It's way too easy and it's working exactly as intended.

This is exactly how they want you to think. It's disempowering. It's a kind of fatalistic politics of inevitability that keeps the masses docile and resigned.

It's living in a state of childish denial is what it is. It's like a child who flips over the boardgame because they don't like the rules of the game. Change the rules first, then you can vote third party. Until then you're just defacto voting for the GOP. It's beyond stupid. Obviously you don't understand basic game theory.

Unfortunately that's not the game we're playing in this country. By voting for a 3d party candidate you're defacto voting for the party that gets more representation for less votes which in this case is the Republicans.

Grow up. If you don't like the rules, work to change them, but you won't accomplish anything by simply ignoring them. You have to change the system first, and only then can we have real multi party elections.

I suggest that you read up on it a little more. That article 3 is self-executing is not a controversial or extreme opinion and is well within the mainstream of legal scholarship. The SCOTUS may rule that it isn't, but that's going to be a tough nut to crack for its three conservative originalists since at its inception article 3 was clearly used to bar all former Confederate officers from holding federal office without the necessity of a trial and conviction.

It was originally intended to bar former Confederate officers from holding federal office, but as you suggest, it is not confined to them and also bars anyone who has engaged in insurrection.

Article 3 of the 14th is arguably self-executing meaning that it doesn't require a trial, but only a simple finding of fact. This is because it was intended to bar all former Confederate officers from holding federal office, and it would have been impossible to hold trials and get convictions for all of them.

That's the historical reading in any case, and it puts the SCOTUS's originalists --Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch-- in quite the bind since they're either going to have to find a way to argue that it wasn't intended to be self-executing, which is pretty absurd on its face, or that it doesn't apply to the presidency, which is also absurd.

That said, they almost certainly will find a way out of it for Trump, but I'm no expert and don't have an educated opinion on how they'll do it.

None of that, however, means that we shouldn't be talking about it. The exchange of ideas, thoughts and opinions is important in and of itself.