The snowflakes are completely losing it

First, in taking the oath of office, a president promises to “faithfully execute the laws and the constitution.” That’s Article II Section 2.

But Trump is unfaithfully executing his duties as president by accusing his predecessor, president Obama, of undertaking an illegal and impeachable act, with absolutely no evidence to support the accusation.

Eh?

Third: The 1st Amendment to the Constitution bars any law “respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” But Trump’s ban on travel into the United States from six muslim countries — which he initiated, advocated for and oversees — violates that provision.

Whut?

Fourth: The 1st Amendment also bars “abridging the freedom of the press.” But Trump’s labeling the press “the enemy of the people,” and choosing who he invites to news conferences based on whether they’ve given him favorable coverage, violates this provision.

Look, folks,

A fifth possible ground if the evidence is there: Article II Section 3 of the Constitution defines “treason against the United States” as “adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

Evidence is mounting that Trump and his aides colluded with Russian operatives to win the 2016 presidential election.

Presidents can be impeached for what the Constitution calls “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The question is no longer whether there are grounds to impeach Trump. The practical question is whether there’s the political will.

Someone’s got to own up to putting the psilocybin in Robert Reich’s sippy cup here. Seriously, it’s not fair to keep him this high.

There’s another one at Salon just as bad. Georgian (ie, Caucasus Georgia) diplomat tweets that Trump DC is a great hotel. This violates the emoluents clause? FFS.

18 comments on “The snowflakes are completely losing it

  1. I don’t hold with all this psycho mubo jumbo, but if I was I’d say Reich is in denial. As it is, I’ll just say he’s a giant, stupid cunt.

  2. Shorter Robert Reich (if that is possible): “Look at me! I’m over here! Me! Here! Look!”

    This is about Robert Reich ensuring he’ll be getting praise at the next cocktail party he attends in Berkley… Nothing more.

    Sad, really, if you think about it.

  3. Our US friends must be so glad they’re not subject to the jurisdiction of the ECJ or the ECHR (or even for that matter these days our own traitorous Supreme Court) when all of these arguments would be likely to have strong judicial support

  4. BF – there’s no “accusation” there that couldn’t be levelled at O’bama or dozens of previous presidnets, or else has no evidence base whatsoever.

    these ridiculous accusations are melting away like the proverbial snowflake under a blowtorch, which would be a good solution to a lot of those bastards.

    They are pathetic.

  5. ‘with absolutely no evidence to support the accusation’

    Confessions of the perps not withstanding.

    ‘But Trump’s ban on travel into the United States from six muslim countries violates that provision.’

    U.S. Constitution does not apply to people from other countries.

    ‘The 1st Amendment also bars “abridging the freedom of the press.” But Trump’s labeling the press “the enemy of the people,” and choosing who he invites to news conferences based on whether they’ve given him favorable coverage, violates this provision.’

    What is the press being stopped from doing? Choosing who he invites? Outrageous! Who do the press think should choose?

    ‘Evidence is mounting that Trump and his aides colluded with Russian operatives to win the 2016 presidential election.’

    MOUNTING ?!?! NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PUT FORTH. NONE. WTF IS HE TALKING ABOUT?

  6. Dennis +1

    Yesterday Russia was “our enemies”; today it’s a peaceful country trying to find a peaceful solution to the Syrian conflict in the face of naked interference and bloodlust from the fascist USA.

  7. Gamecock:

    Of course “evidence is mounting.” They’re making more and more accusations every day; though such accusations are of the flimsiest sort, a certain portion of the population will treat them as believable–based simply on sheer numbers (and repetition) and (to a certainty) their own political leaning.

  8. Gamecock: that needs repeating, repeatedly and with force. The US constitution protects the US people from the US government. It does not and /cannot/ protect foreigners from the US government.

  9. Correct me if I’m wrong but haven’t the press been reporting that there is an enquiry going on into Mr Trump and his associates? Have they been making it up or has there actually been an enquiry? If there has it beggars belief that Obama didn’t know about it and let it continue. So there are grounds for suspecting that Obama committed an impeachable offence. And if the suspicions prove ungrounded there is reason to totally ignore the press.
    Maybe I got this wrong, but have there not been immigration bans in the past directed towards majority Christian and majority Shinto peoples. Were they unconstitutional?
    Is Mr Reich giving us to believe that he needed Mr. Trump’s approval to publish this article. All he has actually shown is that Mr. Trump is not spoonfeeding information to the press. So they have to do some work for a change!
    And clearly both the Syrians and the Russians regard Tomohawk missiles as helpful and comforting, just as the Mexicans really want a wall, and China wants to reduce its exports.
    Has this guy got anything right?

  10. From the article not Tim’s extract
    May not receive items of value from a foreign government- like a Nobel prize for example. Or a couple of million into the foundation plus half a million for a speech?
    It just about seems possible that Trump hotels are actually pretty good- after all Trump made billions from them before he had political influence.
    If Mr Reich doesn’t come to soon he’ll find himself floating in the Med.

  11. Reich is absolutely batshit crazy.

    He is working on the premise that hysterical weekly shrieking will eventually make some of it stick in the minds of people.

    What actually happens is that people say “Who is that crazy guy over there?” and switch off listening to anything they say.

  12. That river’s still flowing strongly through Cairo. Must the the flood-of -the-century event, so often predicted. Gerbil Worming an’ all that.

  13. “Evidence is mounting…” translation: wild and unsupportable claims are mounting.

    Like the mounting ‘evidence’ for Man-made Global Warming, or saturated fats/sugar/salt/red meat/fish/alcohol causes _______ (insert fashionable thing to be a burden on the NHS this week).

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.