A pass for, or to do, what exactly?
Um, to. .
He hasn't exactly done much since. Not that he did a whole lot before...
So, exactly how "[absurd" was my "analogy]", please?
So then are you done calling for impeachment?
As I was explaining to my dad during the daily call on the way home, the way politics works, you don't bring anything to a vote unless you know what the outcome will be. While, in a absolute sense, I don't doubt that orders of magnitude more information exists than would be needful to demonstrate "high crimes and misdemeanors"
Contrary to some less than informed opinion, "high crimes and misdemeanors"--the legal standard for impeachment--refers not to indictable criminal offenses but to profound breaches of the public trust by high-ranking officials. Once the standard is understood, it becomes easy to see that the president and his underlings have committed numerous, readily provable impeachable offenses. Yet, even if a president commits a hundred high crimes and misdemeanors, impeachment is a non-starter unless the public is convinced that the president should be removed from power. The real question is political: Are his lawlessness and unfitness so thoroughgoing that we can no longer trust him with the awesome power of the chief executive?
Thus, November can be reviewed as a No-Talent Rodeo Clown Referendum: the same fickle electorate that returned Pres'ent Obama to the White House could just as easily. .
I couldn't get the article to load
Google cache?
It requires no intellect, and certainly no "morality" of any kind. It is a natural predator and prey relationship. And all attempts to regulate it have been quite farcical at best. Can't expect much different when sociopathy is the dominant trait of those we support.
Examples of cooperative ecosystems abound. Indeed, things veer into "sociopathy" when resources are constrained, which is an odd word choice following your 'no "morality" of any kind'. If it's all amoral, how do you gauge a sociopath? (Asking for a cereal killer).
you want to discard the fundamental principle of innocent until proven guilty - as well as protection from double jeopardy and other basic rights extended to the accused in the criminal justice system in this country - when the accused is someone who has the dreaded letter D after their name.
This is false, you know it's false, and you're just trolling to say that I would:
(a) disregard the Constitution I've sworn to support and defend, even in the case of the rank idiocy to which you seem to tend,
(b) set a precedent that would surely be used as a club against me
You can let that go right there.
Your political spectrum actually is better represented as a monopole, really. You only have people who you see as "good" (republicans) and those who you see as evil (everyone else). You don't even bother looking at what they actually believe in, only who they associate with. The obsolete one-dimensional political spectrum at least sorts on some sort of continuum, yours is binary.
Oh yeah! Well, your system is like kryptonite mixed with anti-matter! [Trying to come up with a formulation as silly as yours.]
So, is your new strategy to accuse your way to "victory", whatever that is?
I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"