# If you are carrying water for Donald Trump, even now - especially now - kindly go fuck yourself **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 16, 2017, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710 "2017-05-16T02:20:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/301 "2017-05-18T16:01:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I dream of a constitutional convention. > > Amendment 28: > > Sec 1: There are no penumbras or emanations. > > Sec 2: The words of the Constitution matter, even though they were written years ago by dead white men. > > Sec 3: Any judge who begins to push at this line must write, by hand, two thousand times, “I am sorry I tried to substitute my desired outcome for the text of the Constitution. I firmly resolve to never again do this.” Judges refusing the punishment are immediately removed from office. > > OK, it’s not a very likely dream. So while you predict that any impeachment will fail unless it includes an actual statutory violation, you must be unhappy with this state of affairs, given Sec. 2 above. (I presume you also stand on the principle that those words mean what they meant when they were written.) ---
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/302 "2017-05-18T16:33:50Z")
… ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/303 "2017-05-18T16:37:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Is there any moment when you stop and ask yourself why you oppose someone who is offering reasoned commentary and debate, and the only things you can manage are attempts at snark? > > If our positions were reversed, I’d be ashamed to be defending a position where the only thing I could offer amounted to snide, cutting remarks. > > But it obviously doesn’t bother you. You’re seemingly not the least bit upset that the merits of your position are so weak that you can only compete with these kind of tactics. > > So what I’m asking is: do you ever think about stuff like that? Or do you just sort of push it down in your mind? Turn it off, like a light switch? My position is that this is a thread about assholes who continue to carry water for Donald Trump and here _you_ are, front and center, soaked in a suspiciously rank fluid. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/304 "2017-05-18T16:39:30Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > So while you predict that any impeachment will fail unless it includes an actual statutory violation, you must be unhappy with this state of affairs, given Sec. 2 above. > > (I presume you also stand on the principle that those words mean what they meant when they were written.) I’m certainly very unhappy with this situation, because Trump is a clown. But I’m not unhappy for the specific reason you’re asking, because I would not want Sec 2 to only apply in certain situations. That’s why I (jokingly) proposed it as part of a Constitutional amendment. So in the present circumstance, I would not want Sec 2’s command obeyed here and ignored elsewhere. Sec 2 is a holistic cure. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/305 "2017-05-18T16:40:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Right, so going forward, you now acknowledge that you asked this: > > And you acknowledge that you’ve now gotten a different answer that explains correctly that there are many many acts that are illegal if the President does them, yes? > > It’s weird that on a message board devoted to fighting ignorance, you asked that question repeatedly and the only answer you ever got was that it’s not illegal when the President does it, so I’d like to explicitly confirm that now, finally, that misapprehension is put to rest. Not trying to be difficult, and I apologize if it seems I am being obtuse, but this is in fact a bit confusing to me. I appreciate your patience, even if it is tempered by frustration. > [@](#): > > No. > > As I explained above, there are plenty of actions that are illegal even if the President does them, and nuking L.A. for pay is one of them. But it wouldn’t be under the Emolument’s clause. I suppose nuking L.A. may be illegal in it’s own right, but I fail to see exactly what criminal statute he would be breaking by taking that action. To be fair, nuking L.A. is a bit extreme, but I also don’t see any law that he would break by doing so. We already know that giving away secrets is fine too, what if he didn’t nuke L.A. himself, but sold the codes to a third party who then launched them? > [@](#): > > It would still need Congress to impeach and convict, yes. But that’s a weakness of any law enforcement system. I can kidnap your neighbor, kill him, and roast his entrails on the Hibachi I stole from his garage, and it would not be punished if the prosecutor refused to prosecute me. That’s a double weakness of the impeachment process, as if there were evidence of your crimes against my neighbor, then it would not be a political action to prosecute you. It would not be up to your local city council on whether or not to prosecute you. If the president does the same thing, then it would be a political process to prosecute him, and if his party was in power, they could let him get away with it in a way that a prosecutor would not. The only thing a prosecutor should ask when charging someone is whether they have enough evidence to convince a jury. In this case, the jury is already picked, and the prosecutor has to decide if the accused has friends on the jury that would vote against conviction in light of any evidence. > [@](#): > > OK. > > Under Option 1, they wouldn’t. And if they did, then the constitution is amended to correct the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/306 "2017-05-18T16:41:16Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > My position is that this is a thread about assholes who continue to carry water for Donald Trump and here _you_ are, front and center, soaked in a suspiciously rank fluid. Sure, that’s another insult. I’m asking you if you ever let yourself think about why only one of us has only insults, and not factual debate, to support the ideas they’re advancing. Do you? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/307 "2017-05-18T16:46:10Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > But it wouldn’t be under the Emolument’s clause. I suppose nuking L.A. may be illegal in it’s own right, but I fail to see exactly what criminal statute he would be breaking by taking that action. Well, the murder of anyone immolated in the blast, for a start. > [@](#): > > We already know that giving away secrets is fine too, what if he didn’t nuke L.A. himself, but sold the codes to a third party who then launched them? Conspiracy to commit murder, and murder for hire. > [@](#): > > That’s a double weakness of the impeachment process, as if there were evidence of your crimes against my neighbor, then it would not be a political action to prosecute you. It would not be up to your local city council on whether or not to prosecute you. It would be up to another (usually) elected official: the prosecutor. Not sure where you are, but in Virginia, the Commonwealth Prosecutor for each county is an elected office. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/308 "2017-05-18T16:46:49Z")
“Not exactly doing anything illegal”. Yep-that is _precisely_ what I’m looking for in a President. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/309 "2017-05-18T16:50:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure, that’s another insult. I’m asking you if you ever let yourself think about why only one of us has only insults, and not factual debate, to support the ideas they’re advancing. > > Do you? Maybe because this is The BBQ Pit, where pissed-off people go to be pissed-off, Not Great Debates, where facts rule over emotions? edited to add: When you were practicing law, did you act the same way before the Bar as you did at a bar? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/310 "2017-05-18T16:53:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Is there any moment when you stop and ask yourself why you oppose someone who is offering reasoned commentary and debate, and the only things you can manage are attempts at snark? > > If our positions were reversed, I’d be ashamed to be defending a position where the only thing I could offer amounted to snide, cutting remarks. > > But it obviously doesn’t bother you. You’re seemingly not the least bit upset that the merits of your position are so weak that you can only compete with these kind of tactics. > > So what I’m asking is: do you ever think about stuff like that? Or do you just sort of push it down in your mind? Turn it off, like a light switch? Mockery is what people use to try to stay/keep pace in a debate, when they have no logic/reason to offer. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/311 "2017-05-18T16:53:30Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > My position is that this is a thread about assholes who continue to carry water for Donald Trump and here _you_ are, front and center, soaked in a suspiciously rank fluid. In this instance, and while there are those who are pro-trump defenders, I see bricker’s contribution being more along the lines of strengthening our argument against trump (or at least pointing out lines that fail the legal test), not actually outright defending him. It’s not a service that is pleasant to receive, I suppose, but it is actually more productive. Trump’s an ass and is bad for our country, and if we could wish him dragged away by a stampede of ponies (pretty pink princess ponies) then we would. Unfortunately, there are both legal and political realities that need to be addressed before the clod stomping may commence. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/312 "2017-05-18T17:03:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure, that’s another insult. I’m asking you if you ever let yourself think about why only one of us has only insults, and not factual debate, to support the ideas they’re advancing. > > Do you? You know perfectly well how to check my post history, if you’re interested in my more citation-based work. You’re not, of course, you’re just trying to provide cover for all the assholes carrying water for Donald. But I guess disingenuous motherfuckers gotta disingenuate. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/313 "2017-05-18T17:04:55Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > In this instance, and while there are those who are pro-trump defenders, I see bricker’s contribution being more along the lines of strengthening our argument against trump (or at least pointing out lines that fail the legal test), not actually outright defending him. Oh yeah, his doing it from the bottom of his water-logged heart. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/314 "2017-05-18T17:11:00Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > Oh yeah, his doing it from the bottom of his water-logged heart. No, he’s doing it to show off how much smarter he is. Doesn’t make him wrong. Doesn’t make his posts useless. ---
**Author:** ![brossa](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brossa/32/3040_2.png) [@brossa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brossa)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/315 "2017-05-18T17:40:13Z")
I’d still like to know whether the President can simply order the FBI to drop an investigation into whomever or whatever, on the grounds that he is the boss of them, without it being obstruction of justice. No ‘threats or force’, just “drop it.” Surely a variation of this happens all the time, for a variety of reasons both nefarious and benign. Maybe the new boss wants to focus on terrorism investigations rather than drug crimes. Maybe this year’s budget won’t stretch to cover all ongoing investigations. Maybe everyone involved is on the take. Whatever. Absent ‘threat or force’, is there _ever_ obstruction of justice? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/316 "2017-05-18T17:56:56Z")
> [@brossa](#): > > I’d still like to know whether the President can simply order the FBI to drop an investigation into whomever or whatever, on the grounds that he is the boss of them, without it being obstruction of justice. No ‘threats or force’, just “drop it.” The President’s motive matters. For example, let’s say the FBI is investigating a case of espionage. Joe Knucklehead has been passing secrets to the Chinese. The President could decide to let the Chinese have Joe in exchange for their release of Bruce Braveheart, our guy the Chinese arrested. But public revelation of the deal would cause the Chinese to shoot Bruce and bill his family for the bullet. If the President judges that the FBI investigation needs to stop for that reason, then it’s not obstruction of justice. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/317 "2017-05-18T17:57:07Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > No, he’s doing it to show off how much smarter he is. > > Doesn’t make him wrong. > > Doesn’t make his posts useless. Doesn’t make him any less the exact sort of asshole who’s being pitted in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/318 "2017-05-18T18:00:36Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The President’s motive matters. > > For example, let’s say the FBI is investigating a case of espionage. Joe Knucklehead has been passing secrets to the Chinese. The President could decide to let the Chinese have Joe in exchange for their release of Bruce Braveheart, our guy the Chinese arrested. But public revelation of the deal would cause the Chinese to shoot Bruce and bill his family for the bullet. > > If the President judges that the FBI investigation needs to stop for that reason, then it’s not obstruction of justice. What about _this_ case, where the President is a part of the case being investigated? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/319 "2017-05-18T18:01:29Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > You know perfectly well how to check my post history, if you’re interested in my more citation-based work. You’re not, of course, you’re just trying to provide cover for all the assholes carrying water for Donald. But I guess disingenuous motherfuckers gotta disingenuate. But the thread that’s under discussion is here. I’m sure you have dozens of threads in which you’ve made arguments, but which of those are the ones you want to refer to now? I’m sure you can see that if I ask you for factual debate and your response is, “I have done it in other places; look it up,” it doesn’t begin to address the specific things in play in this thread. But I did do a quick search on your posts. I didn’t see anything that was a case law or statute cite on the emoluments issue. Perhaps you could link the posts you feel serve that purpose? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2017, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710/320 "2017-05-18T18:04:18Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > What about _this_ case, where the President is a part of the case being investigated? Even then, the President’s motive matters – for the same reason as my prior example. My prior example showed a President whose permissible motive was obvious, but the point of the example was: the mere act of stopping an investigation, if that happened, is not tantamount of obstruction of justice. What would be necessary is to show a corrupt motive animating the order. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-you-are-carrying-water-for-donald-trump-even-now-especially-now-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/786710.md?page=17)