~~~
~~~
~~~
If true, this is a positive sign. An implosion of the for-profit/student-debt/education-industrial complex is long overdue. The rentier class has exploited this low-hanging fruit for years.
~~~
~~~
 |
This image is from another video in 2014. |
In the Philippines, Catholics recreate the crucifixion of Jesus by nailing devotees to crosses during #GoodFriday #Easter pic.twitter.com/PWadG8Hm2g— TicToc by Bloomberg (@tictoc) April 19, 2019
~~~
~~~
~~~Then there's Chef Andrés!
~~~
In case I want to find it again, here is a stream of consciousness comment I left somewhere early this morning, in response to the query Will the next investigation be into “The Mind of Mueller”?
The man knows how to thread legal needles better than anyone. If the report does nothing else it puts the ultimate responsibility on Congress to take whatever steps are needed next. As someone pointed out in the endless forensic examinations of the report, he was careful to avoid making any judgement about the president's guilt or innocence of any possible criminal activity. Although he furnished a veritable mountain of suggestive (circumstantial) evidence, he remained keenly aware that even the suggestion that a crime has been committed would make it impossible for the accused, as a sitting president, to advance any legal defense.
It's clear that the responsibility now falls to Congress to take the next steps. Impeachment arises in the House (simple majority of those voting) but has no effect (other than a protracted PR carnival) unless two-thirds of the Senate votes to remove the president from office. And that is at best highly unlikely to happen.
It occurred to me that a bipartisan solution to the problems encountered in both previous threats of impeachment (Nixon and Clinton) that a "sitting president cannot be indicted for a crime" must be clarified once and for all. That is clearly a crazy idea, and the conditions under which that might happen (and already should have been) must be spelled out in new legislation.
One remedy would be for the VP to assume the office of the president for some interval of time during which he or she can be indicted and determined guilty or innocent of a crime, after which he or she will either resume the office or surrender the remainder of the term to the VP. Otherwise we now have a really ugly precedent for any future president to push the "immunity from indictment" envelope further than we have already seen. As it is, we now have a president who also happens to be a criminal, and he's getting away with it.
It occurred to me that if the current president got assurance that such legislation would not apply to him, he would be less likely to raise hell about Congress crafting it. He might, in fact, actively support the idea by way of covering up his dirty tracks. (It would not legally apply to him anyway
as an ex post facto application.)
~~~
No comments:
Post a Comment