[It's official] Justin Amash running for US Senate (R-MI)

[Brian4Liberty]

Justin Amash explained how it was correct, so I don't even have to.

You know, the guy who went into the most detail to explain every vote that he made.

Maybe if you actually read straight from the horse's mouth you wouldn't make up absurd Trump Rearrangement revisionism like "he decided to vote for Trump impeachment under false pretenses just because he was upset with Trump's Palestine policy".

I have to wonder how Amash feels about this today in hindsight.

He seemed to have particular disdain for Bill Barr, but critiquing the standard political legalese of DC doesn't really speak to the actual charges and innocence or guilt. "He had a bad lawyer, so he must be guilty" is not a good argument.

https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1129831620838662145

 

[Brian4Liberty]

He lost me when he started supporting a UBI. And then he started supporting other idiotic woke / socialistic sort of things because of his TDS made him blind to policy just because he hated Trump.

We tend to forget negative things from the past, but there was a decidedly leftward shift from Amash and the Libertarian Party at that time. Thus the Mises Caucus was formed...

 

[Occam's Banana]

Regardless of your personal position on the impeachments, Amash's position is that impeachments are the presidential analogy to indictments. And if you can "indict a ham sandwich" as the old adage goes, then it made tons of sense to indict Trump.

He believes that presidents should be subject to the same kinds of checks on criminal behavior as ordinary citizens, and should be impeached more often.

This to me is a great position but of course R's only like this when D's are in power and D's only like it when R's are in power.

In my opinion, at least every president since after Coolidge deserves to have been impeached and removed for one reason and/or another.

Impeachments and removals from office should not need to be predicated upon the commission of criminal acts. Politicians and government bureaucrats are not entitled to their offices, and none of them have any right to not be figuratively defenestrated.

The commies and gun-grabbers and other would-be rights-violators should all be unceremoniously tossed out on their asses immediately upon detection of their presence - and for no other reason than that they are commies or gun-grabbers or would-be rights-violators. (And then they can be prosecuted for any criminal acts they might have committed.)

 

[Brian4Liberty]

He lost me when he started supporting a UBI. And then he started supporting other idiotic woke / socialistic sort of things because of his TDS made him blind to policy just because he hated Trump.

Actually, that could be applied to Trump too. Trump's COVID checks were basically a test run of UBI, and moved that agenda forward. Look how that turned out.

 

[Matt Collins]

Actually, that could be applied to Trump too. Trump's COVID checks were basically a test run of UBI, and moved that agenda forward. Look how that turned out.

Oh I agree, and I don't support Trump. He raised taxes and violated the 2nd Amendment and spent like a drunken sailor. He also let Fauci run wild and appointed the deep state to a lot of positions (Kavanaugh, Bill Barr, Mike Pompeo, etc). He did some good things too though.

 

[Swordsmyth]

In my opinion, at least every president since after Coolidge deserves to have been impeached and removed for one reason and/or another.

Impeachments and removals from office should not need to be predicated upon the commission of criminal acts. Politicians and government bureaucrats are not entitled to their offices, and none of them have any right to not be figuratively defenestrated.

The commies and gun-grabbers and other would-be rights-violators should all be unceremoniously tossed out on their asses immediately upon detection of their presence - and for no other reason than that they are commies or gun-grabbers or would-be rights-violators. (And then they can be prosecuted for any criminal acts they might have committed.)

Indictments/Impeachments for false reasons are different from those for valid reasons or Impeachments for no reason.
Supporting those predicated on falsehoods leads to tyranny.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Actually, that could be applied to Trump too. Trump's COVID checks were basically a test run of UBI, and moved that agenda forward. Look how that turned out.

Compensating people for the government depriving them of their livelihoods is not UBI.

 

[acptulsa]

Compensating people for the government depriving them of their livelihoods is not UBI.

Doesn't mean it can't be a test run, Einstein. You can test a car engine on a stand, or in a boat, turning a generator, any number of ways besides motivating a car.

And the problem with supporting the government using our money to compensate us for their recklessness is that's what really leads to tyranny in the really real world. In fact, that is tyranny in a nutshell. It promotes recklessness on their part.

 

[Invisible Man]

Compensating people for the government depriving them of their livelihoods is not UBI.

The preposition "for" is very versatile.

In the above quote, "for" means "in order to facilitate."

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Compensating people for the government depriving them of their livelihoods is not UBI.

Really? Was there some kind of carefully controlled criteria to determine who got a Trump check?

UBI was being planned. UBI was being tested. And Trump ran the biggest test of all.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Doesn't mean it can't be a test run, Einstein. You can test a car engine on a stand, or in a boat, turning a generator, any number of ways besides motivating a car.

And the problem with supporting the government using our money to compensate us for their recklessness is that's what really leads to tyranny in the really real world. In fact, that is tyranny in a nutshell. It promotes recklessness on their part.

So, government should never compensate its victims for the damage, that leads to communism.

Got it.

 

[Swordsmyth]

The preposition "for" is very versatile.

In the above quote, "for" means "in order to facilitate."

LOL

 

[Swordsmyth]

Really? Was there some kind of carefully controlled criteria to determine who got a Trump check?

UBI was being planned. UBI was being tested. And Trump ran the biggest test of all.

Bunk.
Individual damage calculation was impossible at the scale of what was done.
It was not a test of UBI and provided no useful data for such.
They also didn't need it because the left has been testing it in Blue cities.
And one of the cabal's goals with the lock downs was to impoverish people and small businesses, they didn't want any compensation to the victims, they wanted all the bailout money for the rich and connected.

 

[acptulsa]

So, government should never compensate its victims for the damage, that leads to communism.

Got it.

Nope. We should be able to sue individual politicians for malfeasance, and get our damages out of their bank accounts.

Those brats need to learn a little personal responsibility.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Nope. We should be able to sue individual politicians for malfeasance, and get our damages out of their bank accounts.

Those brats need to learn a little personal responsibility.

And until we can government should just be able to destroy the lives of most of the population with no compensation at all, right?

 

[acptulsa]

And until we can...

Who says we can't? You? Trump's judges? Who?

 

[Invisible Man]

LOL

On March 13, 2020, the Trump administration released its COVID-19 Response Plan advising the states to shut down all non-essential businesses, providing detailed plans for them to follow, and promising them federal support and funding if they did.

Beginning on March 15, 49 of the 50 states in unison adopted cookie cutter shut down policies, pursuant to the Trump administration's plan.

That summer, Trump pushed his proposal of, to use your words, "compensating people for the government depriving them of their livelihoods," and demanding that Thomas Massie be kicked out of the Republican party for so much as calling for Congress to vote on the funding that the Trump administration promised and that was needed in order to make the shutdowns that the Trump administration requested possible.

You do the math.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Who says we can't? You? Trump's judges? Who?

The law and the precedent say we can't for now.
You admitted as much by saying it is what "we SHOULD be able to do".
We do not have the political power and did not during covid to change that yet.
So, it was either compensate people or let the government destroy them without compensation.

 

[acptulsa]

So, it was either compensate people or let the government destroy them without compensation.

It obviously wasn't either/or, as Trump did both at once.

 

[Invisible Man]

So, it was either compensate people or let the government destroy them without compensation.

Of course, without the compensation, the government wouldn't have been able to shut down the peoples' businesses. The compensation enabled, and thus funded, the shutdowns.