Big Problems if Trump is Indicted

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Too binary?
    Yes. It is too binary. And that's a problem you have. Binary thinking reduces the resolution you can apply to reality. If you model reality where only two outcomes are possible, you'll keep being wrong about stuff. To you it seems like if someone isn't nibbling Trump's mushroom, then they must absolutely hate Trump. That's binary thinking.

    It's my opinion that Trump isn't what America needs right now. And I'm sorry if that causes you discomfort. It shouldn't. But I'm not too sorry that I'll stop saying it. You should be able to handle people saying things you don't agree with. It's just one guy's opinion on the internet. It doesn't hurt you if someone doesn't adore Trump. But that someone doesn't adore Trump does not make them a neverTrumper, or whateverthe**** you're calling them these days.
     

    BigRed

    Banned More Than You
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Dec 29, 2017
    18,926
    149
    1,000 yards out
    Yes. It is too binary. And that's a problem you have. Binary thinking reduces the resolution you can apply to reality. If you model reality where only two outcomes are possible, you'll keep being wrong about stuff. To you it seems like if someone isn't nibbling Trump's mushroom, then they must absolutely hate Trump. That's binary thinking.

    It's my opinion that Trump isn't what America needs right now. And I'm sorry if that causes you discomfort. It shouldn't. But I'm not too sorry that I'll stop saying it. You should be able to handle people saying things you don't agree with. It's just one guy's opinion on the internet. It doesn't hurt you if someone doesn't adore Trump. But that someone doesn't adore Trump does not make them a neverTrumper, or whateverthe**** you're calling them these days.

    Now do secession and union by consent compared to union by force.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Now do secession and union by consent compared to union by force.
    I see that whole thing as nuanced. There wasn't a means encoded in the constitution for having a peaceful separation. I think there should have been. There should be. But there wasn't. And there still isn't.

    Okay so how then does a state or group of states leave the union? Both parties have a stake. States have federal resources including property within their borders. States have interest in the federal government. Federal government has interests in the state. There needs to be some mutual understanding of how to separate, or even whether they can separate.

    In a way it's like a divorce. You don't just leave your spouse. You can. But it's not legal. You go through a legal procedure to get a divorce. Maybe one party contests the divorce. Who gets what property? It's not just as simple as a group of states claiming they're no longer part of the union.
     

    BigRed

    Banned More Than You
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Dec 29, 2017
    18,926
    149
    1,000 yards out
    I see that whole thing as nuanced. There wasn't a means encoded in the constitution for having a peaceful separation. I think there should have been. There should be. But there wasn't. And there still isn't.

    I am reminded of what folks who came before me said....that nuance you're smelling is cow ****.

    The constitution of the States is very clear...that which is not delegated is reserved.

    I'll add that what one delegates to an agent, one can recall.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    I am reminded of what folks who came before me said....that nuance you're smelling is cow ****.

    The constitution of the States is very clear...that which is not delegated is reserved.

    I'll add that what one delegates to an agent, one can recall.
    Where does it say how a state can secede? What's the process? I think a state should be able to secede, but I think the other states have a stake in that too. There are federal resources and lands in all states. How does that get disposed? I think you put a lot more into that which is not delegated is reserved than there is.
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    You remember MrJerrell? Banned for his caustic comments. He ain’t the only one.
    I've been here since late 2015, but I've read quite a few older threads just for fun on occasion, and I think Mr. "It used to be peace and love here" might be misremembering. Lots of those early 2010s threads have more than a couple of shooters in them, and they didn't get that way because everyone was joining in on a group production of Kumbaya.
     

    BigRed

    Banned More Than You
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Dec 29, 2017
    18,926
    149
    1,000 yards out
    Where does it say how a state can secede? What's the process? I think a state should be able to secede, but I think the other states have a stake in that too. There are federal resources and lands in all states. How does that get disposed? I think you put a lot more into that which is not delegated is reserved than there is.
    The entire constitution amongst the States that created the delegated common state is a contract of retained rights and powers.

    What you are looking for is directly in front of your blind eye in the 9th and 10th.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    The entire constitution amongst the States that created the delegated common state is a contract of retained rights and powers.

    What you are looking for is directly in front of your blind eye in the 9th and 10th.
    Don't assume that because I disagree with you on a few parts that I'm the blind one. But anyway, I'm not saying that the lack of specific language granting states the ability to secede implies that they can't. I say it as a practical matter. The constitution doesn't say how it should be done. So I ask the question, how should it be done? The state just gets to claim it's no longer a part of the union? It's that simple? Does it get to keep federal resources? I think not. Both are stakeholders in the union. There needs to be some legal means to secede. Or when secession is contested, there will be violence.
     
    Last edited:

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    I've been here since late 2015, but I've read quite a few older threads just for fun on occasion, and I think Mr. "It used to be peace and love here" might be misremembering. Lots of those early 2010s threads have more than a couple of shooters in them, and they didn't get that way because everyone was joining in on a group production of Kumbaya.

    It's not like they've just recently dusted off the ban hammer. The political sub-forum has always had some strife. I've seen some pretty bad meltdowns. I mentioned MrJerrell because his meltdown was pretty intense. There were some others as well.

    Actually, if it doesn't involve Trump, I'd say the top 30 or so posters in the political section pretty much agree on most things.
     

    BigRed

    Banned More Than You
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Dec 29, 2017
    18,926
    149
    1,000 yards out
    Don't assume that because I disagree with you on a few parts that I'm the blind one. But anyway, I'm not saying that the lack of specific language granting states the ability to secede implies that they can't. I say it as a practical matter. The constitution doesn't say how it should be done. So I ask the question, how should it be done? The state just gets claim it's no longer a part of the union? It's that simple? Does it get to keep federal resources? I think not. Both are stakeholders in the union. There needs to be some legal means to secede. Or when secession is contested, there will be violence.

    Violence most often comes from agents who believe they have more authority under the contract than was delegated.
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,896
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Yes. It is too binary. And that's a problem you have. Binary thinking reduces the resolution you can apply to reality. If you model reality where only two outcomes are possible, you'll keep being wrong about stuff. To you it seems like if someone isn't nibbling Trump's mushroom, then they must absolutely hate Trump. That's binary thinking.

    It's my opinion that Trump isn't what America needs right now. And I'm sorry if that causes you discomfort. It shouldn't. But I'm not too sorry that I'll stop saying it. You should be able to handle people saying things you don't agree with. It's just one guy's opinion on the internet. It doesn't hurt you if someone doesn't adore Trump. But that someone doesn't adore Trump does not make them a neverTrumper, or whateverthe**** you're calling them these days.
    I find it disingenuous that you formulate a binary, [someone else] not Trump and then insist it is not binary thinking simply because one term is a variable which can only have one value for any particular solution
     

    Ingomike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,176
    113
    North Central
    I see that whole thing as nuanced. There wasn't a means encoded in the constitution for having a peaceful separation. I think there should have been. There should be. But there wasn't. And there still isn't.
    There is as I read it. All it needs is an amendment. Not that it is a practical outcome but it is a possible one.

    If the government can add states, where is it established that it cannot by the same mechanisms remove one?
     

    Ingomike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    28,176
    113
    North Central
    Don't assume that because I disagree with you on a few parts that I'm the blind one. But anyway, I'm not saying that the lack of specific language granting states the ability to secede implies that they can't. I say it as a practical matter. The constitution doesn't say how it should be done. So I ask the question, how should it be done? The state just gets to claim it's no longer a part of the union? It's that simple? Does it get to keep federal resources? I think not. Both are stakeholders in the union. There needs to be some legal means to secede. Or when secession is contested, there will be violence.
    Where is the specific language for adding new states?
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    I find it disingenuous that you formulate a binary, [someone else] not Trump and then insist it is not binary thinking simply because one term is a variable which can only have one value for any particular solution
    Binaries are common in normal communication. I've made this point before, and obviously it needs restating. The kind of binary thinking we're talking about here is setting up a false dilemma or false dichotomy. It excludes other possibilities.

    For example, the the quote you "fixed", you made these modifications.

    I dunno…. I don’t see it as dire as you. The biggest divide politically is nobody-but-Trump vs let’s-vet-others-beside-Trump [anybody-but-Trump] folks.

    The original is a binary, but is true in that the "biggest divide politically" is between ardant Trumpers vs anyone who is capable of voting for someone else. You modified that to continue your "neverTrumper" claim. That's a false dichotomy.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Where is the specific language for adding new states?
    Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1.

    Now a question for you [all interested parties]. Which states have entered the US without congress voting on it?

    Edit: to modify the scope of the last question.
     
    Last edited:

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    There is as I read it. All it needs is an amendment. Not that it is a practical outcome but it is a possible one.

    If the government can add states, where is it established that it cannot by the same mechanisms remove one?
    I think it can. It's not explicit, but I think that if a state, or group of states wants to leave, it would require the state legislatures and the federal legislature to approve it. To get in you have to have everyone's approval. It seems to be that to leave, the same would apply. So I don't think it's the case that a state can just leave at it's sole will.

    Like I've said all along, how will they resolve who owns what? How will they legally handle secession? That's not spelled out. The closest thing is to look at how they joined, and reverse that process.
     

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    Man its gonna be a long way until arraignment Tuesday when the indictment comes out.

    Feeling a strong urge to speculate some more.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,169
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Assuming this goes through as advertised I would imagine that he'll be booked, post bond, and go home. As much as the left leadership is praying for some sort of 1/6 redux I don't see it happening.
    The bee has a different take.

     
    Top Bottom