In your head there's nothing logical, see that's the great thing about this country, our founders decided to let you have an opinion even if most of the country see it different. You are a product of the very thing you don't like. If the country votes something in you can still disagree freely, congrats.
Stupidity can only get you so far. I can't help but think that the idiotic voting system was the main culprit here, that and the fact that one candidate was working for the FSB and had the help of the most effective spying organization and cyber warfare experts on the planet.
You're mixing free speech with representative democracy. In six months, Trump will no longer be President and the overwhelming majority of Americans will finally have the government they have chosen. And you'll still be able to come to the forum every day and complain about the "tyranny of the majority"...
Cover up Trump's collusion with Russia, the very thing you like to go on about there being no proof of. Just lying about something makes you a liar, it doesn't make you innocent.
There was no discussion of collusion in the phone call and there was not collusion in the Trump administration and the agents said they did not believe he was deceptive. Quite frankly in an unofficial visit he could have told them to take a hike and not told them, discussions between NSA'ers and foreign leaders are classified. The real question is why was it listened in on, as soon as it was apparent the ambassador was talking to an American citizen it should have been cut, and why Powers unmasked it.
I assume we can add this to the pile of Constitutional provisions the left and Democrats despise and want to get rid of.
It might be a better argument if you actually cite facts of the case instead of falsehoods and non sequiturs.
Absolutely true. However the best way to get rid of the Constitution is the same as the best way to eat an elephant: one bite at a time!
the point is the founders were smart enough to guarantee both. Carry on you’re as sure about the majority as you were in 2016 when all congressional branches and the executive branch went republican.
Don't like the actual facts and reason(s) thrown in your face again? We like seeing you and your lib/prog ilk wallow in failure. It's always fun to see. And we see it ALL the time.
Huh? He has not been accused of violating the Logan Act....that's not what the indictment says and he never plead guilty to it
It is SO ABSURD, the establishment of the OFFICAL, government funded, transition team and transition period is not to just go around and change the name plates on doors. They are expected to work with the current Executive Branch, Congress and FOREIGN LEADERS and discuss current and future polices and what changes might be brought about with the new administration.
The founders they wanted to avoid at all costs a demagogue becoming president. This is the reason why there are state electors. The election of Trump is proof that the system doesn't work.
I wish we gave these kind of resources to the Boston Marathon case, where we got the intel on the Tsnarev brothers from the Russians and didn't act on it. But we sure hell want to prosecute NSA officials!(At least if they happen to be picked or favored by the administration) What a great priority the FBI puts on things(sarcasm.)
You DO know why Yates was concerned when she found out the incoming NSA was lying to his own bosses and the media, right?? Oh... look... here's an article with her own words and thoughts... SNIP “To state the obvious, you don’t want your national security adviser compromised with the Russians.” ENDSNIP https://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/08/sally-yates-testimony-michael-flynn-238043 Obvious to most, anyway... Not so much to the completely compromised Trump administration.
As if Sally Yates, she who went renegade before even a single COURT RULING cared about this nation. She cared about one thing and one thing only: Herself. Also, in no way was Flynn compromised by the Russians. That was HER Opinion and on her opinion, she acted. What were the Russians going to say "Uh, your national security advisor talked to us about not retailating on sanctions." Trump: "And....?" "So he lied to the media about it...." "And...I should be concerned, WHY?" There was no tactical advantage gained by the Russians. There would only be time for dialogue, and for reasonable responses to something we now know isn't true. Mueller revealed it wasn't true.
LOL, you think the Russians would bring that up with Trump.... not a big blackmail expert, are you?? Why do you think Trump eventually let Flynn go?? Bad breath?? Took too long to do it, but we now know that's his SOP...
Neither is Sally Yates, because obviously I don't see the compromise. So why not enlighten me to the doomsday scenario wherein the Russians tell Trump and/or the administration that an NSA advisor asked them to not retailate against the sanctions.
Really ... so if a minority can rule the majority in reverse ... as it happened in 2016? Nice ... sorry, this is nonsense. Majority rules in any democracy at least ... and majority does not split between citiy or countryside, skin color, religion or whatever!