And that’s not correct either. Romney ran as a liberal on the Republican ticket. A wolf in sheeps clothing . The reason was he could not beat in the primaries the democrat who won the primary. And if he was truly a Constitutionalist, then he lied to the people to get elected in Massachusetts. Just like he did in Utah. He handed Obama the election. Why?
These people that believe “all things in moderation” are the cause of the decay of moral values. And they don’t see it. The progressives have been slowly moving the country left. Since Obama, they are trying to put it in high gear because they believe they have conservative Constitutionalists on the ropes. They want to knock down capitalism so bad they will destroy the Constitution to do it. And that is what they are doing in this impeachment. It’s up to the Senate to check the House as Congress does over the Executive. That’s why this farse should end immediately.
Until now. The only reason Trump hasn’t accomplished everything he set out to do is because of the Democrats in Congress along with a few liberal Never-Trumpers Republicans. Look at the economy. Far better than under Reagan. So is the peace in the world. So is trade. I could go on and on. Interesting thing is that both RR and DT were once liberal Democrats.
I won’t bother to address any one individual but will comment on several things I have read.
The Tea Party movement was not extreme. It was a movement by people who wanted to bring the country back to the principles of the founders and hold elected representatives accountable to uphold the constitution. Their gatherings were peaceful and lawful. Extremists are people like Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Nazis, KKK etc. those are extremists. The difference between Democrats and Republicans is that Republicans distance themselves from the KKK (which ironically was formed by Democrats right after the Civil War), Nazis, and others the left likes to tie conservatives to. No good conservative would ever embrace those people. The Democrats on the other hand say nothing about Antifa which is every bit as bad as the KKK and modern Nazis (not the Nazis of Germany in WWII) in terms of lawlessness and violence. Antifa excuses itself for its violence, and lawlessness, by branding everybody they disagree with as fascists and then try to shut them up often using violent tactics if necessary. They will admit to their violence saying anything goes to stop fascism (ironic considering their own fascist tactics) the Democrat Party won’t say anything about them. BLM is another matter. I can understand the Democrats embracing that movement because they stand to lose many votes from a core constituency if they did not. BLM is obnoxious and is based on a false narrative, but not unlawful as far as I can tell, but is extremist.
I was also a Cruz supporter but he will never be elected president because a lot of people don’t find him likable. His senate race was too close this time around because the Democrats put up a candidate that connected with the young and uninformed. Beto O’Rourke was bankrolled by millions of Hollywood dollars and still lost to Cruz who didn’t get serious about the race until the last few months after Beto had been advertising and campaigning for mothers. Fortunately he finally campaigned but only won by about 3% and lost in the urban areas and nearly all the urban area local races were won by the Democrats because of Beto.
According to Mark Levin (who was in the Reagan justice dept. and is a constitutional scholar), McConnell could have held a vote to dismiss the articles without a hearing. All it would have taken was a simple majority and the Republicans have 53 senators. Even with a couple of defections this could have been ended. I guess the issue is whether it would have been politically wise to do so. The hearing can still be held with no new witnesses and a vote taken. If witnesses are called then the Republicans would be fools not to insist on the testimony of the whistle blower. Incidentally the whistle blower law does not even apply in the accusation against Trump. The whole premise of he impeachment is phony and the whistle blower is not protected in this case.
It is more like blaming the Governor for what the Legislature does… That is plain bogus…
Having worked in State Government for 32 years, I can tell you that the only thing the Governor can really do with anything in the State concerning budgets, Services, etc. is to submit his ideas (Like a budget) and submit it to the State Legislature for consideration.
The Legislature is the sole responsible group for State budgets, or in Utah case Medicaid for all" new expansion. Because they are the ones that put it into law. The governor can deny, but nine out ten times the Legislature has the vote to override the veto (Especially if one party is in control).
The California Legislature is 100% responsible for the mess that State is in concerning the homelessness, immigration, etc… Because they are the ones deciding what is going to be acceptable policy or not. Governor in California is liberal himself, so I guess you could put him there as well because he went along with it. When “Arnold” was Governor, he tried to veto several bills only to be overridden by the Legislature.
That is my point about Mitt Romney, he was not responsible for the Health Care system they created in that state, because he was not the “author” of the system, That was the Massachusetts State legislature responsibility.
If you had researched this issue, you would have found Mitt offered a alternative the to liberal legislature using more of a capitalistic system. But that was rejected by the Legislature, so he did his best to mitigate the problems he saw.
As for Cruz, he openly boasted he was “Tea Party” candidate. That is his words, not mine. That is why I used “That Label”.
Second, I believe the Constitution is base document our country is run on. But that does not mean it can not be modified to account for things that needed to be changed.
You say Cruz is a “Strict Constitutionalist”,
so then answer this Question: "Which Constitution is Cruz strictly following? There has been 26 changes to the Constitution since it was created. So when you say, you follow the Constitution, which one is he specifically following?
I know that it is myopic point,but it proves my point. The Constitution and the foundation of our government was created to be able to be modified when needed. It is not a “Living Document” the Liberal idiots spew their rhetoric crap, but neither is it “Strictly” observed as some of the Tea Party people think.
A
Wow, I never said that, It is still our responsibility to search out the best candidate and elect them to office. The problem with voters today is that they are lazy and believe the crap spewed out on both Conservative and Liberal news outlets instead of doing their own research and find out the truth.
Salt Lake City(proper) is getting more liberal, Niot Utah as a whole, they are staying pretty much conservative. that is why 98 percent of the Legislature is Republicans, but also means that people like Matheson or Orton and some democrat candidates can still be elected, because they are moderate in their beliefs.
Sorry if I ruffled your feathers, but I stand by my comments because I actually do my own research, I don’t always believe what the news says.
Mark Levin did a mock close for the Senate yesterday. It was 38 minutes long. It was spot on. You will love it if you listen to it. Everyone should. There was no high crime or misdemeanor. He also stated again Treason and Bribary are the high crimes and misdemeanors stated in the Constitution. The Democrats are trying to destroy the separation of powers to destroy the Constitution. The Senate must check the House who are trying to usurp the Executive, ignore the Judicial and take over the Senate. He’s right. End the trial and explain to the American people that Nancy Pelosi is attempting to become the most powerful person on the planet, not the President. It’s a true coup at this point. Democrats, Moderates, Independents, open your brains up before it’s too late!
Gavin Newsom, the California Governor, supports the Democrat Legislature 100% with their Marxist destruction.
By the way, what crimes did the President commit? Treason? No…Bribary? No… That is what high crimes and misdemeanors are. Those two things only. And “other crimes” refers to anything at the same level. The Ukrainian President and others in the Ukrainian Government have said no Bribary, Extortion or quid pro quo.
I agree, Originally that was there motivation, which I supported. But like all good things, people starting taking it to the far right. Now, I look at the certain Tea Party groups and wonder how they went from the original design to what they are saying now?
I view extremist as people who can only accept their viewpoint. In today’s “conservative” republican party Ronald Reagan would not be accepted. Because Reagan believed in “compromise” to get the things he wanted to accomplish.
I also believe that extremism can be in all areas of life. as an example, I believe you can be an Extremist Member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Meaning that you take your beliefs to the extremes. Past President of the Church has warned us against becoming to extreme in how we live by micro focusing on certain aspects of the gospel.
Today, Republican and Democrats view “Compromise” as a dirty word. One reason I like Trump, was he works with both parties to get his agenda accomplished.
I don’t listen to Beck Hannity or Levin or any of those talking heads, because to me they are extremist (Far far right). Most of the media (MSNBC, NBC, ABC, etc.) today are far far left.
So where is the real “truth”?, is that not what we as Christian are taught to do, “Find the Truth and the Truth shall set you free”?
I am not sure about the dismissal, because other “Constitutional” scholars says that is not really in the realm of reality for the Senate. Then add to that, Trump himself wanted the Trial to “Prove my Innocence”. So that kind of complicated the issue as well.
I guess you don’t listen to Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost. In their present celestial being they cannot look upon any degree of unrighteousness. Extremists!
Matthew- Be ye therefore perfect.
If you want to decide for yourself good or evil, then you have to listen to both. But, you don’t. Instead, you listen to confused wishy washy people that are allowing Marxism (Progressivism) to grow stronger and stronger.
You can disagree with Floyd without calling into question whether he is spiritually in tune. I have read enough things Floyd has written that it is apparent to me he is a good man and we actually have lot in common as far as our background is concerned. I haven’t talked much about mine but I have read enough of what he has said about his background to see the things we have in common. I don’t always agree with him but he has never questioned my spirituality.
I probably agree more with your politics than his but you should stop making broad assumptions about people based on their political positions. I don’t agree with Floyd about Ted Cruz and the Tea Party but he has his reasons for his views. I know a number of people at church who don’t care a bit for Trump including our former bishop but there is no question our former bishop is a good man. I just don’t agree with him about Trump and I fully understand my friends misgivings about Trump. My daughter despises him based on his immoral past and his tactless remarks. I understand where she is coming from but I think she is shortsighted in supporting Democrats. I would never question her spirituality based on her attitude about Trump.
I wasn’t calling into question Floyd’s spirituality. I was simply pointing out his error in assuming “extremism” is a bad word. You understand analogies, right?
Yes, we are at the same understanding with direction Democrats are going with the country. We also understand the nonsense of Mitt Romney. And, we understand California and where Utah is headed with this moderation of things. That’s what happened to California.
You punctuated the end of your sentence with a period which would make it appear to the average reader that you were making a statement. I am just saying you should be a bit more careful about how you phrase things. It is hard for me to see what your intent was by the way you worded the post.
I punctuate because I can write properly. Is your name Adam Schiff, interjecting your own slanted ideas. Like he’s doing right now on the floor of the Senate brainwashing wishy washy people. The statement was to make him open his eyes about the lie concerning moderation and extremism the leftist media has taught everyone.
Interesting to me that you know that I have not researched what I write about - even though you do not know me. And I don’t listen to Hannity, Beck, et al. for my views. I listen to all points and then research what I am able to research and then decide.
Liberal governors who are leftist, socialists who are in cahoots with their liberal, socialist legislatures are indeed responsible for the leftist, liberal, socialist policies they employ. If you are saying that state governors have no power, then I am concerned about your understanding about how state governments operate.
Thank you Reed, I appreciate our civil discussion without the innuendo’s or negative personal comments.
Like I said, I have no problem with your support of Cruz, because to be honest when it came down to just Cruz and Trump, I was hoping Cruz would win.
But one thing I think that hurt Cruz was the “tag” of being part of the establishment (Standard GOP candidate). People were sick of politics as usual, they wanted change, they wanted to “Drain the swamp”. Not sure people felt Cruz would do that.
As for Scott, You may have noticed I do not respond to him. In fact, I told him I would not respond to him. He is a flame thrower, he like to ignite people anger and angst. When called on it, he will deny it and try to twist it around to make himself look less judgmental.
Personally, I could care less what he thinks of me or my spirituality. Because the only two people in this world I really have to please is “God” and “Myself”. As long as I am straight in the eyes of the Lord, everyone else has an opinion, and it is just that “An Opinion”.
Thanks for being civil, I enjoy the conversation, actually I have learned some things from you and Arkiecoug that has made me want to do a little more research on some items you both brought up.
Thanks again.
But, I can’t have an opinion. Is that being straight with the Lord when you aren’t with your fellow man? Instead of reacting like you are injured by my words, just answer. I’m a big boy and don’t cry tears when others don’t agree with me. I’m not a liberal.
Again, I used an analogy and wasn’t attacking your spirituality. I was challenging your logic and reasoning. You equate believing being correct with fascism. That’s your take on “extremism.” Liberalism has deteriorated into fascism leading into Marxism. That’s the plan if Progressives. It always has been. Now is the time to defeat progressivism. It can’t be done by moderation. This is why Democrats (who have been taken over by Marxists) hate Trump. With all the attacks, he’s been doing things that are far right that are moving the country back towards the middle.
I was listening to some commentary on the push for new witnesses by the house. This is bogus because in any trial, including impeachment, a jury does not call witnesses. The Senate is the jury. It is the job of the House to investigate and present their case. That is how it works. They claim to have overwhelming evidence, and if they do, the call for witnesses is a sham anyway. There is no need. Now they want the Senate to do the job they were unable to do. It is a fraud and no Republican in the Senate should play their game or it further cheapens the concept of impeachment and puts all future presidents in peril of being impeached at the whims of the opposition party.
When the House wraps up its case the Senate should go forward with a vote without calling new witnesses. That would be the best way to end this quickly. All McConnell needs is 51 votes so he can afford two defections. When it is clear he has 51 he needs to call for a vote.
Right now the impeachment process is just a campaign add to aid a party that has a weak field of potential presidential nominees. Most of America isn’t watching the trial. Most voters work so all they hear is press spin.
Actually they do…
The impeachment proceedings unfold in the form of a trial, with each side having the right to call witnesses and perform [cross-examinations]. The House members, who are given the collective title of managers during the course of the trial, present the prosecution case, and the impeached official has the right to mount a defense with his or her own attorneys as well.
Much like a Trial
- The house committees investigates the accusation against the President.
- The committee chairman presents their case to the grand jury (The complete House of Representatives)
- The House of Representatives votes (Simple majority) to impeach or not.
- The House speaker forwards the impeachment to Senate for Trial.
- The Senate hears the case with the SCOTUS Chief Justice as Judge
- Both Sides presents their cases, which includes calling witnesses.
- Senate Members vote.
McConnell is using the same format for the Trail that was established when Clinton was tried on impeachment.
Not sure what the angst is about the process, it has been established procedures for decades.
I will say this, The democrats in the house violated their own rules and procedures to impeach Trump. They did not follow the fair and balanced process (allowing both sides equal time and witnesses). Then Pelosi withholding the impeachment articles furthered the skewed process even more.
Personally I don’t think it is a wise move to dismiss, I think the country is so divided that it will look like a cover-up (even though it is not) to half the population. I would like to see if that the Trump Defense team puts on such a great view of just how political this impeachment really is, show what really happened in the Ukraine and the Biden’s involvement.
Then the people of this country may realize that their is a bigger problem in this country than Trump and his many weaknesses.
They could call witnesses since the Senate is the jury they shouldn’t call the witnesses. The Trump defense team should call witnesses on his behalf if it is decided to call them. The Senates job is to hear the testimony and then vote on its merits. The house should have allowed testimony from witnesses other than those the Democrats hand picked. The Senate shouldn’t call any witnesses. They can vote to hear more witnesses but those would be called by the Trump defense team. At least that is how I understand it. I could be wrong.
The problem is that an impeachment isn’t technically a court trial it is a political process and that being the case it doesn’t always unfold like a case in court.
You both have good points. Air is correct in that the Senate should not be able to call witnesses. They are the jury deciding the penalty phase of the trial. Remove or not remove. The House rendered the guilty phase. It should be up to the President whether to call witnesses. You are correct stating the House trial was a sham in that the President wasn’t given the ability to defend himself.
The idea that if the Senate doesn’t call witnesses would be a cover up is a Democrat Hail Mary. The only people who should be called should be those asked by the President. The thing is, in order to remove, not convict (that’s been done already) two-thirds of the Senate have to vote to do so. Not 51. I say end it and let both sides take the case to the people with our judgments in November.