Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

onenote

(42,714 posts)
49. Even if it is "collusion" its simply not illegal.
Thu Oct 3, 2013, 02:47 PM
Oct 2013

And it wouldn't look that way to any court in this country.

Legislators get to vote. They get to discuss and coordinate their votes. Look back at past battles on the debt ceiling. The last vote to raise the debt ceiling passed the House by a 285-144 margin. The 144 votes against this particular bill to raise the debt ceiling included 111 Democrats. Those Democrats weren't opposed to raising the debt ceiling, they were opposed to the specific terms under which the debt ceiling was being increased. And it was every bit their right to vote the way they did, even if it had meant that the debt ceiling increase was voted down in that incarnation.

What the repubs doing is irresponsible, unreasonable, and every other negative thing you can think of, except for one: its not unlawful. There is no evidence that the repubs would vote to shutter the government or prevent a debt ceiling increase if the terms on which it was done met their demands. Indeed, they all voted to keep the government funded, but on terms that were not acceptable to the administration and to the Senate. The Administration and the Senate were right to say "no way" to the repubs proposals, but that doesn't make it illegal for the repubs to make their demands. Recall 17 years ago when the government last had a major shutdown. That shutdown occurred in two stages, and the first stage occurred after Bill Clinton (correctly in my view) vetoed the continuing resolution that had been sent to him by Congress as well as a debt ceiling bill. One could hardly accuse either those in Congress who had voted to keep the government funded (but on terms unacceptable to the President and enough members of Congress to sustain his veto) or the President and those who would sustain his vetoes of having committed some act of treason or an act of malfeasance or some other action that would support legal action. It just doesn't work that way. These fights are political. They're ugly. But they're not the basis for any legal action.

Thanks for the thoughtful analysis landolfi Oct 2013 #1
Thank you for your response Samantha Oct 2013 #2
Thank you for commenting 2naSalit Oct 2013 #5
Thank you for 2naSalit Oct 2013 #3
Totally fascinating Samantha Oct 2013 #7
I agree that "malice" 2naSalit Oct 2013 #10
And for actual evidence... 2naSalit Oct 2013 #4
You can't criminalize legislators' actions in proposing or voting on a bill pinboy3niner Oct 2013 #6
And here is the definition which I quoted in my original thread Samantha Oct 2013 #9
I think the comments were made by 2naSalit Oct 2013 #12
I thought the individual I heard speak was referencing the NSA Samantha Oct 2013 #18
The only thing I could find 2naSalit Oct 2013 #24
I liked the words "betraying America" because that is exactly what they are doing Samantha Oct 2013 #25
I have no doubt that you are sincere pinboy3niner Oct 2013 #15
What we are 2naSalit Oct 2013 #17
Exactly (n/t) Samantha Oct 2013 #23
Of course you grant this same right for those that disagree with Dem policies, right? Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #40
Of course she would! Samantha Oct 2013 #54
"I believe she is currently tied up in the woods" Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #55
So in your opinion we citizens should sit quietly in the bleachers and say nothing but hope Samantha Oct 2013 #20
Of course we don't sit quietly, we aggressively OPPOSE them pinboy3niner Oct 2013 #22
While it is arguable that what the Repubs are doing is "equivalent" to treason, Nye Bevan Oct 2013 #8
I am not suggesting they could be arrested for the way they vote on a bill Samantha Oct 2013 #11
and that is 2naSalit Oct 2013 #13
Well, wait a minute Samantha Oct 2013 #21
Even if it is "collusion" its simply not illegal. onenote Oct 2013 #49
This is a very thoughtful post Samantha Oct 2013 #53
Another factor in this 2naSalit Oct 2013 #14
I looked back and found the reference to that article Samantha Oct 2013 #16
An important point at another thread 2naSalit Oct 2013 #19
I see this as the beginning of the second chapter of the civil war Tumbulu Oct 2013 #26
I would appear taht they 2naSalit Oct 2013 #28
Like you, I fear that this is far more serious than Tumbulu Oct 2013 #30
It very well could be Samantha Oct 2013 #29
Thank you for starting it- it is full of thought provoking Tumbulu Oct 2013 #31
Thank you for posting on our thread Samantha Oct 2013 #34
Yeah, and when we were fighting WW2 the Japanese printed all sorts of unflattering Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #41
Excellent post! Tumbulu Oct 2013 #27
Excellent thread, will return to this and the link post tomorrow. freshwest Oct 2013 #32
K&R thanks Sam! Cha Oct 2013 #33
Doesn't the PATRIOT Act say something G_j Oct 2013 #35
Hmmm 2naSalit Oct 2013 #36
there is also the issue of national security, G_j Oct 2013 #37
That's also a good point 2naSalit Oct 2013 #38
thanks for your efforts! nt G_j Oct 2013 #39
Oops, responded above before I saw this Samantha Oct 2013 #44
I thought it was an excellent question and planned to see what I could find as well Samantha Oct 2013 #43
So in the PATRIOT Act, as per Wiki... 2naSalit Oct 2013 #42
Kudos to 2naSalit Oct 2013 #45
Yes, very good Tumbulu Oct 2013 #46
That requires 2naSalit Oct 2013 #48
Thanks to another diligent 2naSalit Oct 2013 #47
Are you being serious? DragonBorn Oct 2013 #50
Welcome to Ignore (n/t) Samantha Oct 2013 #51
Wow! Just Wow! oldhippie Oct 2013 #52
Another thread that has some good info 2naSalit Oct 2013 #56
Treason Party Graphic ... napkinz Oct 2013 #57
Thank you so much for posting this - it is so appropriate Samantha Oct 2013 #59
Well thought out post! K&R B Calm Oct 2013 #58
Thank you - I am really glad you liked it Samantha Oct 2013 #60
This borders on legal quackery. dairydog91 Oct 2013 #61
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Economic Treason: The def...»Reply #49