US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[The Ugly One]

A compromise is a compromise. It gave Lincoln and his compatriots the choice of preserving slavery in slave-holding states and potentially new states or doubling down on opposition to what would later become the Confederacy.

"Do everything we want, or we start a war" is the same sort of "compromise" a shop owner gets offered when a robber says, "give me everything in the cash register, or I'll shoot." The South was no more "forced" to start a war than the robber was "forced" to shoot the cashier. Note that several slave states didn't participate in the rebellion. South Carolina was no more "forced" to fire on Ft Sumter than a robber is "forced" to shoot a cashier.

There is also the possibility that slavery as an institution in the USA would of died a slow gradual death throughout the late 1800s and early 1900s.

No, there really isn't, because, as you pointed out, the South's stance was to take a hardline stance on slavery and use threats of war to prevent any constitutional way of ending it. The minority trying to prevent the majority from winning by using threats of violence only ends one way, when somebody finally calls their bluff.

The Western world was moving toward the outlawing of slavery in general by the time of the 1850s and 1860s even if the American South itself resisted such moves.

This is exactly why the Civil War happened. The entire Western world had turned against slavery, but the Southern gentry's wealth was so heavily dependent on it that they decided they'd rather go to war than risk the growing anti-slavery majority in the North ending the institution peacefully.

If the USA had changed the Constitution in 1861 to make slavery a permanent, constitutionally protected institution at the threat of war, what do you think happens when the anti-slavery majority in the North grows enough to undo that amendment? The South's already established that threatening war gets what it wants. Same exact thing will happen, just a decade or two later - the South threatens war, and the North calls their bluff. Except now the North has machine guns.

 

[Your Girlfriend's Dad]

Someone post a union and confederate soldier 69ing so we can give this multi-day sperg-jerk some real gas.

 

[The Nothingness]

Bluntly put: until there are consequences, why should the left behave any differently?

And I don't mean 'two percent less cock sucking from the media'. I mean at a bare minimum 'stripped of power, position, and pension'.

I remember back in 2015 when Trump was bitching about defamation laws and how it needed to be easier to sue. At the time I thought he was being typically thin-skinned. Now? I'm starting to think he had a point. At the very least, NY vs Sullivan needs to be revisited because journoslime can smear a person to hell and back and be on their merry way, and even their retractions are half-hearted (if you can get one at all).

They basically need the Alex Jones treatment for what they did to Nick Sandmann and Kyle Rittenhouse. Unfortunately, we live in Clown World.

 

[RybenZ999]

I'm gay lol

Oh, okay

 

[The Taco Santo!]

Force of arms proved that the United States had the right to declare independence from Great Britain, and that the Confederacy did not from the Union. Everything else is coping and seething

Secession wasn't a settled legal issue until the Confederacy lost. If you look at the history of threatened secessions, it happened a lot, especially by New England states, going back to the War of 1812.

 

[The Ugly One]

Superior primary sources . Cope and seethe, He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored. Secession was made illegal by right of conquest, maybe don't lose if you don't like it. The speshul treatment history's losers always want

A state can secede via treaty. All the elements are in the Constitution. What a state doesn't have is a unilateral right to secede and seize all federal property in its land without the consent of the other states.

Secession wasn't a settled legal issue until the Confederacy lost.

Yes, it was, that's why they fired on Ft Sumter instead of filing a lawsuit. This wasn't settled under the Articles of Confederation, and were resolved by the 1783 Constitution:

I.10 Denies states the right to act as independent countries.
II The powers taken from states in I.10 are given to the federal government.
III.2 All power to resolve conflicts between states and the federal government is vested in the Supreme Court
III.3 explicitly defines making war against the United States as treason.
IV.3 denies states the power to seize federal property
IV.4 vests in the federal government the right to put down rebellions

The Whiskey Rebellion is the first time these powers were put into use. In 1861, there was no question of which way a lawsuit asserting a unilateral right of secession and seizure of federal property would go, which is why the South decided to try war instead of suing Washington.

You do not resolve questions of law with war, only questions of power. The South knew the law wasn't on their side, so they hoped they were powerful enough, and the federal government weak enough, that they could break free. They ended up being pretty wrong about that.

 

[Meat Target]

Any word on Clarence Thomas?

 

[TJT]

No, there really isn't, because, as you pointed out, the South's stance was to take a hardline stance on slavery and use threats of war to prevent any constitutional way of ending it. The minority trying to prevent the majority from winning by using threats of violence only ends one way, when somebody finally calls their bluff.

Tell me how this was supposed to work because Congress had no chance in hell of legally banning slavery with the Southern states being represented in the chamber. Hence they only did after the war was over but before the Southern representatives were reinstated.

 

[Fatsuit Shinji]

like I often repeat, the bush II years and the great war on terror gave the left such a blank check to be the morally correct ones its not even funny,

Those rethuglicains want to bomb goat fuckers! should we really be doing this?

Missing that the Clinton Administration (January 20, 1993, through January 20, 2001) was eight years of democrats bombing goat fuckers in Iraq, Sudan and Serbia to name a few. There is no morally correct one, unless one likes eating shit squeezed out by the muslim nigger messiah.

A state can secede via treaty. All the elements are in the Constitution. What a state doesn't have is a unilateral right to secede and seize all federal property in its land without the consent of the other states.

By this logic England would've kept their military installations in the new United States. Cause what is the point of secession if the other country can and will keep their military inside your new formed country.

 

[dustbuster]

I.10 Denies states the right to act as independent countries.
II The powers taken from states in I.10 are given to the federal government.
III.2 All power to resolve conflicts between states and the federal government is vested in the Supreme Court
III.3 explicitly defines making war against the United States as treason.
IV.3 denies states the power to seize federal property
IV.4 vests in the federal government the right to put down rebellions

The problem with this little case of yours is Lincoln didn't go to the supreme court, either, with this supposedly "open and shut" argument.
Instead, he issued an ARREST warrant for the Chief Justice for refusing to tow his dictatorial line and started marching an army into the then-seceded and separate nation of the confederacy.

Tell me how this was supposed to work because Congress had no chance in hell of legally banning slavery with the Southern states being represented in the chamber. Hence they only did after the war was over but before the Southern representatives were reinstated.

That raises the hairy question of the imposition of the current constitution, period, because the articles of confederation require 100% of states to ratify to be modified, but that didn't happen.

 

[TerminalTryHard]

I swear I'm starting to think @dustbuster might be RazorFist with how much he spams that stupid video.

 

[dustbuster]

I swear I'm starting to think @dustbuster might be RazorFist with how much he spams that stupid video.

When people keep presenting nails, i'm going to use the hammer, and not the wrench or crowbar.

 

[TerminalTryHard]

When people keep presenting nails, i'm going to use the hammer, and not the wrench or crowbar.

Razor and that video is about as much of a hammer as Sargon and literally any of his videos.

Honestly just waiting for Razor's humiliating failed political campaign.

 

[dustbuster]

Razor and that video is about as much of a hammer as Sargon and literally any of his videos.

Sargon talks out of his ass.
The video I've been posting has a bibliography longer than most school texts on the subject and doesn't go longer than a minute of mostly swearing before veering right back into the explicit quotes from the horse's mouth on the subject.

The only "rebuttals" i've seen are the raving handwavings of commies saying "just disregard this source, and that source, and Lincoln's own correspondence, and the actual records in the library of congress BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY SAY! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

The reflexive regurgitation of absolute agitprop regarding Lincoln's reign of terror is something to behold from the userbase of the KiwiFarms. It's the Gell Mann Amnesia effect in stark relief.

The quality of school texts for "American History" is something to behold btw.
Have you seen the GamerGate level anti-fanfiction that passes for AP history texts distributed to high schools regarding Trump's presidency? The Daily Beast couldn't be that embarrassingly marxist.

 

[tehpope]

House Managers To Deliver Mayorkas Impeachment Articles To Senate​

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/house-managers-deliver-mayorkas-impeachment-articles-senate

Two counts of impeachment against Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, approved on Feb. 13 by the House of Representatives, are to be formally presented to the U.S. Senate today.

Eleven House members previously named as impeachment managers will walk from the lower chamber through Statuary Hall in the Capitol and then to the Senate in a brief ceremony that has been repeated only 17 times since the first Congress in 1789. House Democrats did so twice after impeaching former President Donald Trump in 2020 and 2021.

Eight of the 17 Senate impeachment trials resulted in convictions, while nine ended without convictions. A two-thirds majority of the Senate is required to convict an impeached officer of the federal government. Neither former President Donald Trump, former President Bill Clinton in 1998, nor President Andrew Johnson in 1868 were convicted.


Senate rules require the House managers to read the two counts in the Senate chamber. Then Senate Senate President Pro Tempore Patty Murray (D-Wash.) will swear the senators in as jurors. A written summons will be issued to Mr. Mayorkas for him to appear, which he may or may not choose to heed.

The senators will then have an opportunity to adopt rules governing how the trial will be conducted. The rules adopted by the Senate in 1986 were in place for the Clinton and Trump trials.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is expected to enter a motion either to dismiss or table the two impeachment counts against Mr. Mayorkas. Earlier this year, Mr. Schumer described the House impeachment action as a “sham.”


With public anger over the more than 8 million illegal immigrants allowed to enter the country under President Joe Biden, Mr. Schumer is determined to avoid a public trial during which the House managers can be expected to present evidence demonstrating Mr. Mayorkas acted at the direction of the chief executive.

Senate Republicans, led by senators Ted Cruz of Texas, Mike Lee of Utah, John Kennedy of Louisiana, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Eric Schmitt of Missouri, and Roger Marshall of Kansas will attempt to bring multiple points of order against Mr. Schumer’s motion.

If any one of the GOP points of order is approved by a simple majority of the Senate, the motion will be defeated and the trial will commence. But Ms. Murray is not obligated under Senate rules to recognize any of the senators offering points of order, so none of their objections may be heard on the Senate floor.


Should the Senate trial go forward, the House managers will present their evidence, and defenders of Mr. Mayorkas from among the Senate Democratic majority will respond. At some point thereafter, a rollcall vote will be taken, which is expected to fail to reach the required two-thirds for conviction.

At that point, Mr. Mayorkas will be able to continue performing his duties but he will go into the history books as only the second presidential cabinet member to be impeached.


The first was Secretary of War William W. Belknap, who resigned in 1876 after the House passed five counts of impeachment against him. The Senate failed to convict Mr. Belknap, who was appointed by President Ulysses S. Grant.

Article I of the measure accuses Mr. Mayorkas of a “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” and claims that “in large part because of his unlawful conduct, millions of aliens have illegally entered the United States on an annual basis with many unlawfully remaining in the United States.”

“His refusal to obey the law is not only an offense against the separation of powers in the Constitution of the United States, it also threatens our national security and has had a dire impact on communities across the country,” it reads.

Article II accuses Mr. Mayorkas of breaching the public’s trust by having “knowingly made false statements, and knowingly obstructed lawful oversight of the Department of Homeland Security, principally to obfuscate the results of his willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law.”

The 20-page impeachment resolution contains two articles with multiple examples of laws Mr. Mayorkas is alleged to have ignored or refused to enforce and illustrations of his blocking congressional oversight, including not producing requested copies of documents.

The House managers, all Republicans, include Mr. Green, House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Reps. Mike McCaul of Texas, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Clay Higgins of Louisiana, Ben Cline of Virginia, Michael Guest of Mississippi, Andrew Garbarino of New York, August Pfluger of Texas, Harriet Hageman of Wyoming, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, and Laurel Lee of Florida.

Shadowy Mayorkas-Linked NGO In Mexico Tells Border Invaders To "Vote Biden"​

The Heritage Foundation's Oversight Project posted an image on X of what they say is a flyer from a non-governmental organization operating in Mexico encouraging migrants to vote for President Biden once they arrive in the United States.

"Reminder to vote for President Biden when you are in the United States. We need another four years of his term to stay open," part of the flyer read.

BREAKING - Flyers distributed at NGO in Mexico encouraging illegals to vote for President Biden

The flyers reads:

“Reminder to vote for President Biden when you are in the United States. We need another four years of his term to stay open”

A MUST READ CRITICAL THREAD pic.twitter.com/Mod4IeROXf
— Oversight Project (@OversightPR) April 16, 2024

The Oversight Project said the flyer was initially discovered by a Muckraker journalist while touring the site of Resource Center Matamoras in Mexico.

"They [flyers] also appear to be handed out when illegal aliens use the RCM for assistance in coming to the USA," the group said.

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/shadowy-mayorkas-linked-ngo-in-mexico-tells-border-invaders-to-vote-biden.189463/

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/crime-ridden-san-francisco-wants-punish-grocery-stores-fleeing-said-crime

Unpunished crime is so out of control in San Francisco that the city now wants to punish grocery stores who want to leave.

Under the 'Grocery Protection Act' introduced by city Board of Supervisors member Dean Preston (Democratic Socialist), stores that want to flee all the crime and other increased liabilities will have to provide the city with six months advanced notice, and make efforts to find a replacement supermarket for the location being vacated, Benzinga reports.

The move comes after While Foods shut down its flagship store in San Francisco after being open for just over a year, citing employee safety concerns.

The reports show how workers at the store were routinely threatened with weapons, while vagrants would throw food at staff, engage in fights, and even defecate on the floor.
One incident saw a homeless man with a knife spray an employee with a fire extinguisher.
...
There were also cases of drug overdoses with one man dying in the bathroom after overdosing on fentanyl and methamphetamine. Thefts were also common with large quantities of alcohol stolen from the store. -Daily Mail

Nearly 570 emergency calls were logged from the location, including one call with desperate pleas to the police saying "male [with] machete is back," and "another security guard was just assaulted."

Former SF Board of Supervisors member Matt Dorsey (who wasn't assaulted at Whole Foods) said he was "incredibly disappointed" at the closing.

"Our neighborhood waited a long time for this supermarket, but we’re also well aware of problems they’ve experienced with drug-related retail theft, adjacent drug markets and the many safety issues related to them," Dorsey said.

According to Preston, "Our communities need notice, an opportunity to be heard and a transition plan when major neighborhood grocery stores plan to shut their doors."


Preston's proposal would allow anyone impacted by a noncompliant store closure to initiate legal proceedings.

As Benzinga further notes, "It’s not just grocery stores that have had enough of the city. Other large businesses that recently closed their downtown San Francisco locations include Adidas, AT&T Inc., Nordstrom and Lego Group."

Maybe start punishing crime?

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/crime-ridden-san-francisco-wants-punish-grocery-stores-fleeing-said-crime

 

[TerminalTryHard]

Sargon talks out of his ass.

Yes, which is what makes the comparison so apt.

The video I've been posting has a bibliography longer than most school texts on the subject and doesn't go longer than a minute of mostly swearing before veering right back into the explicit quotes from the horse's mouth on the subject.

The only "rebuttals" i've seen are the raving handwavings of commies saying "just disregard this source, and that source, and Lincoln's own correspondence, and the actual records in the library of congress BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY SAY! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

The reflexive regurgitation of absolute agitprop regarding Lincoln's reign of terror is something to behold from the userbase of the KiwiFarms. It's the Gell Mann Amnesia effect in stark relief.

The quality of school texts for "American History" is something to behold btw.
Have you seen the GamerGate level anti-fanfiction that passes for AP history texts distributed to high schools regarding Trump's presidency? The Daily Beast couldn't be that embarrassingly marxist.

Razorfist can't maintain Impartiality or intellectual honesty while discussing heavy metal bands from the 80's. So good on them for not wasting time humoring his amateur historian stick by looking into his 19 SOURCES.

 

[dustbuster]

Razorfist can't maintain Impartiality or intellectual honesty while discussing heavy metal bands from the 80's.

So genetic fallacy (via attacks on his criticism of MUSIC, which is by its very nature 100% subjective).
Ok.

Were you one of the Daily Beast's layoffs or something?

 

[Meat Target]

I swear I'm starting to think @dustbuster might be RazorFist with how much he spams that stupid video.

I came to Kiwi Farms because I was looking for more information on Razor. Even if he has his own thread, I've always suspected he himself might be an undercover Kiwi.

 

[dustbuster]

I came to Kiwi Farms because I was looking for more information on Razor. Even if he has his own thread, I've always suspected he himself might be an undercover Kiwi.

Raz0rfist is too uninformed on current events to be a kiwi.
The man is permanently stuck in 1988 (but he knows how to do and present actual research when he wants to, which is damning given his luke warm takes on the Chinese)

 

[TheDarknessGrows]

Go to graduation, do a rally and get arrested on stage.

Do it, Donald.