General Discussion

dairydog91

(951 posts)

211. Sigh.

Tue Oct 8, 2013, 08:09 PM

Oct 2013

You may pass any law which the Constitution authorizes you to pass. You may not pass any law which the Constitution forbids you to pass. Any law which the Constitution forbids you to pass is unenforceable in courts of the United States. An application of an otherwise valid law which is in conflict with the constitution is invalid, even if the rest of the law is enforceable.

You've passed from arguing a highly questionable interpretation of the PATRIOT Act to showing a complete lack of understanding of one of the most basic points of American constitutional law. This is not a debatable point. If applying the PATRIOT Act would be unconstitutional in this context, then the law cannot be applied.

I would support indicting any politician who willfully derailed an economy for their own sense of pride.

I would support any politician that went after the former with any legal means possible to bring that interloper to justice: even if it means setting a precedent.

There are no legal means, short of amending the Constitution.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

245 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sedition is against the law [View all] Playinghardball Oct 2013 OP

Republicans believe that they are above the law AZ Progressive Oct 2013 #1

Sedition requires force Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #2

No it does not. nt LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #6

Then why does it show up so often in the sedition statute? onenote Oct 2013 #7

They are forcing government shut down. nt LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #13

Ridiculous. onenote Oct 2013 #20

All of which raises the question as to whether constitutionally-elected officials can commit acts indepat Oct 2013 #204

Can the President veto a continuing resolution to fund the government? onenote Oct 2013 #205

The president sure as hell can if unrelated garbage (extortion) is attached thereto indepat Oct 2013 #238

This message was self-deleted by its author onenote Oct 2013 #239

The oath of office. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #212

what if that default occurs because the President vetoes a debt ceiling extension onenote Oct 2013 #240

Yep. I agree with this. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #243

Remember when all those anti-war groups tried to FORCE and end to the war? Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #46

We "Forced" the administration to listen to our demands. Covered under free speech from what I know. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #79

Congress can de-fund any law. There is no requirement they fund a program or war. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #80

Yeah, and they tried that what 40 times? Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #83

And they can try 40 times more. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #85

How about they just do what is good for the country and quit pissing around? Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #99

If dissension is sedition then democracy is sedition Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #137

Sound bite. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #222

Still true and you're stuck with that fact. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #236

You have GOT to be on the other side. You blast MY dissension and defend theirs. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #223

No one has come anywhere close to suggesting you should be prosecuted Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #234

Yes it does. It says so right there in the cited statute. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #9

Um...no it doesn't. LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #11

Oh good grief Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #15

Oh Geeze oh whiz... LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #16

OK, so what about the other 16 times that has happened in US history? Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #17

Oh Geeze. LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #34

So in other words Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #38

NO - What is different are people like the Koch Brothers being SO close to OWNING the Government. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #108

And some RWers see communists behind every tree Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #135

I'm talking about specific, behavior not a broad swath and McCarthy like persecution. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #219

MAYBE because the other 16 times it was for defensible reasons. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #107

Or maybe you're just raving up and down this thread. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #136

Says the guy who had 12 of the 78 posts before I ever got in on the discussion. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #220

I'm not a man Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #241

Which is not the same thing as "by force." NuclearDem Oct 2013 #18

yes it is. LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #37

No, it's not. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #40

Yes, it is LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #42

No, it's not. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #43

Yes it is. LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #45

No, it's not. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #51

Yes it is. LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #53

No, it's not. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #55

nt LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #56

..... sibelian Oct 2013 #61

lol BOG PERSON Oct 2013 #73

^^ THREAD WINNER RIGHT HERE Richardo Oct 2013 #203

Your understanding of the legal English is poor. GreenStormCloud Oct 2013 #29

Um...perhaps not LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #35

"We can let judges decide what 'by force' means." Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #41

No. Just let them decide, and not YOU. LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #44

They don't get to decide because congresscritters cannot be arrested and tried Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #49

Wow. This isn't them 'not giving us what we want' LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #50

You still can't have congresscritters arrested and tried every time you want something Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #60

There IS room in this law, you are just taking ONE word and defending their abuse of the process. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #118

That one word is the entire point. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #133

Tell that to Bill Clinton Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #116

When was Clinton arrested by the police and held for trial? Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #134

Are you so young that you don't remember White Water, Impeachment and Special Prosecutor Ken Starr? Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #221

Even if "by force" meant what you claim it means (and it doesn't), onenote Oct 2013 #59

see post #124. It's not wrong. But thanks. nt LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #149

So did Bill Clinton commit "sedition" when he vetoed a CR and "forced" a shutdown? onenote Oct 2013 #153

Hate to correct you, but it's U.S. Marshal's and as a member of that Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #158

I need a DU spell check!! onenote Oct 2013 #169

Total agreement, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #170

NO. He didn't premeditatively PLAN to use it as a tool and the veto is his right. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #228

Post title is false equivilancy. Post 35 doesn't define force-says let judges not a DU poster decide Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #226

Hate to break it to you: members of Congress can't be "recalled" onenote Oct 2013 #232

Against my better judgment, I am going to jump in here Samantha Oct 2013 #124

Thanks Samantha LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #148

DEFINITION OF FORCE - VERB #2 Make (someone) do something against their will. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #72

This Government was SHUT DOWN by force of willfulness of the extremists in Congress. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #75

By force means by force of arms. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #76

NO it does not say force of arms - it says force. Period. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #82

For the umpteenth time, abusing the power of the purse to exploit a completely arbitrary concept NuclearDem Oct 2013 #84

No, it doesn't. Nice try. Look up the word "sedition." n/t duffyduff Oct 2013 #91

He must be too busy Duff, I found some clarification Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #123

According to your post you're inciting sedition against the lawful authority of congress. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #139

Asking that people stop seditious behavior is sedition. Pointing out racisim is racist. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #224

They are using their constitutional authority no differently than previous congresses Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #235

with all due respect DonCoquixote Oct 2013 #77

Mass shootings? Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #81

??? What you live under a rock? Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #106

Which one of those was political, per the other poster's comment? Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #132

Yes, every one of these who are trying to scuttle Obamabcare are also advocating NO Gun Control. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #105

Sedition Act of 1918 --- YUP, the rethugs ARE DEEPLY seditious Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #86

The Sedition Act is no longer law, and it's almost certainly unconstitutional. dairydog91 Oct 2013 #88

Yeah, I said that. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #102

Oh my dear God. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #150

Never thought I would see this shit on DU. Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #154

Look, dear, ONLY when people take it to the exteme where it could actually topple the Government. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #225

And advocating jailing political opponents is against everything a liberal should stand for. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #3

Pretending a crime isn't a crime just because the perpetrator is your political opponent isn't, no LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #48

You still haven't proven criminal activity. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #58

Nice try defending fascists like the Kochs. duffyduff Oct 2013 #92

Someone breaks the law, they break the law. Sedition is against the law in it's current form. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #103

It seems Eric Holder's Department of Justice disagrees with you, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #104

Right, so Bush isn't a war criminal just because he got away with it. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #110

The bottom line is that no one in any position of authority is even talking sedition. Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #112

Listen 63 posts, stupid is just their act. They are a well organized wrecking crew. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #115

Now it's 64 posts. Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #117

You're new, maybe you don't know a lot of the history we've discussed here. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #120

And no court of law is even going to entertain a motion of sedition, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #122

Sure, 2014 is a given as long as we have enough Election Judges to watch for tampering. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #125

"63 posts"? Llewlladdwr Oct 2013 #217

Well, it was actually my way of giving they guy a break. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #218

How many of these stupid threads are going to be posted? onenote Oct 2013 #4

If you don't like them, don't read them. No one here is holding a gun to your head. nt Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #111

Thanks, but no thanks. I think I'll continue to respond to them onenote Oct 2013 #141

It is amazing how many DUers want to establish a dictatorship. GreenStormCloud Oct 2013 #5

What the repubs are doing is not politial liberty clydefrand Oct 2013 #8

So GOTV in 2014 Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #12

Yes, it is their political liberty. GreenStormCloud Oct 2013 #27

The political liberty of holding the nation hostage? AZ Progressive Oct 2013 #10

So you'd charge them with what--criminal metaphor? pinboy3niner Oct 2013 #19

I'd throw the book at them. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #22

*SNORT* pinboy3niner Oct 2013 #23

This is the law of the land...it is NOT establishing a dictatorship. nt LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #14

Except when you grotesquely distort the law for personal gain. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #21

WHAT personal gain? Preventing elected officials from abusing their power is our obligation. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #128

Concerning my sig line Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #138

I have been accused of being humorous on occasion Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #229

Clearly the republicans should be allowed to run the economy into the ditch...again. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #24

Jailing political opponents IS what dictatorships do. GreenStormCloud Oct 2013 #25

Conspiring to destroy an economy by shutting down the country is what criminals would do. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #28

The OP is trying to claim that they are guilty of sedition and should be jailed. GreenStormCloud Oct 2013 #30

Look at it this way, and no offense. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #47

Here's the problem onenote Oct 2013 #65

An amazingly lucid and well-thought out statement Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #68

I didn't know that we didn't like each other! onenote Oct 2013 #69

The only solution being put forward by the GOP is either suspend ACA or the economy gets it. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #70

Great... Use the patriot act to jail your political opponents... Decaffeinated Oct 2013 #130

WTF is going on here? R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #155

So take it to an intelligent "next level" Decaffeinated Oct 2013 #160

I disagree with your analysis. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #162

Right, didn't everyone here want the CEO Bailout Queens to go to jail for their crimes? Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #230

You really ARE clueless, aren't you? duffyduff Oct 2013 #93

Fascist jail their political opponents. GreenStormCloud Oct 2013 #98

I DO NOT have the Liberty to SHUT DOWN the Government. It's NO ONE's God given right. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #113

Not voting for something is NOT the use of force. MineralMan Oct 2013 #26

Yep. The Constitution protects us from stupid interpretations of the sedition law by courts onenote Oct 2013 #33

I guess I prefer accurate representations of things over overstatement. MineralMan Oct 2013 #36

I'm with you all the way! onenote Oct 2013 #54

That law should be repealed. It's been used as a political cudgel far too often. MNBrewer Oct 2013 #31

Actually, it's very, very rarely used. MineralMan Oct 2013 #39

The reason I think this discussion is important is because this is an INSIDE job. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #119

But the law against sedition doesn't 'get us there.' MineralMan Oct 2013 #147

Thank you for a reasonable opinion. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #244

And the reason it's so hard to prosecute is because sedition laws have been abused time and again. NuclearDem Oct 2013 #171

That's what so many are not understanding. MineralMan Oct 2013 #189

Post removed Post removed Oct 2013 #32

And those claiming the moral high ground shouldn't be standing in quick sand when they do it. nt LaydeeBug Oct 2013 #52

You mix an excellent metaphor... MineralMan Oct 2013 #57

When you start calling fellow DU posters "ignorant" you lose all creditability. nm rhett o rick Oct 2013 #62

I don't know. Seems like ignoring ignorance would be more damaging to one's credibility. onenote Oct 2013 #63

I feel that educating the ignorant is positive. Ignoring the ignorant is sometimes rhett o rick Oct 2013 #64

Personally, I've tried to avoid calling anyone ignorant or stupid. onenote Oct 2013 #66

I agree the idea promoted by the OP isnt a good idea. I dont mind if the idea rhett o rick Oct 2013 #67

Seeing how there appears to be enough DEM/GOP votes for a clean CR, but that the GOP leadership R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #71

Without the moral high ground, what makes you better than your opponents? Llewlladdwr Oct 2013 #74

We will have no moral high ground if the economy tanks and it could have been prevented. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #78

The PATRIOT Act is not the means. dairydog91 Oct 2013 #89

Good luck to you if the economy collapses. Really. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #156

What are you proposing? onenote Oct 2013 #87

Something. Anything. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #159

And what? Send the U.S. Marshal's in to arrest the repubs whom you deem to be committing Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #161

I love all the new posters here all of a sudden with the concernz for doing absolutely nothing. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #163

I'm not saying do nothing, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #164

Oaky, sure... R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #166

Well, Duh. Of course I understand, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #167

"opponents that we disagree with." R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #172

The hell it wouldn't be silencing those you disagree with. Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #173

I'm glad that you are on record for doing nothing unti 2014. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #178

That's right, I'm on record doing it within the constraints of the Constitution, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #179

I'm not a new poster onenote Oct 2013 #168

I've been here 8 years longer than you. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #174

Still waiting for you to describe exactly what should be done to force onenote Oct 2013 #175

My suggestion was to pin the GOP as financial terrorists, and go from there R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #181

How does that result in funding the government? onenote Oct 2013 #183

I have an idea for you. Do nothing. Consider nothing. That is about your speed. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #194

Never thought I would see this on DU, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #186

You have been here for 92 posts. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #196

And yet you want to use it in an unconstitutional way to get back at political opponents. Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #199

"And yet you want to use it in an unconstitutional way..." Sauce for the Goose. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #206

And perhaps, with your strategy, we can create a constitutional crises. Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #177

With your do nothing approach the economy gets a knife in the back. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #180

Oh I have an approach, one that's within the Constitution Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #182

"Oh I have an approach, one that's within the Constitution..." R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #190

And your approach would throw the govt into a Constitutional crises. Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #195

So you admit it. You would do nothing. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #198

I'm already on record as doing something within the constraints of the Constitution, Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #202

Good luck voting next year. Maybe the GOP will shut down government again right before the election. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #208

So your approach is to toss out the Constitution? onenote Oct 2013 #184

Is the PATRIOT act a law? R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #191

And of course once you have the leaders arrested on -- something -- Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #185

We should go with you plan B. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #192

Yes, you should. Arresting politicians acting lawfully within their constitutional purview Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #193

I will love to see your posts if it all falls apart. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #197

Go subverting the constitution by criminalizing political dissent and it will fall apart Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #201

The PATRIOT Act is the law of the land. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #207

It's a fairly basic point of American law that the Constitution trumps ANY federal law. dairydog91 Oct 2013 #209

You're a constitutionalist? Really? R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #210

Sigh. dairydog91 Oct 2013 #211

That's where you are wrong. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #213

In the race for crazy we are quickly pulling ahead. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #214

Good luck to you after the 17th. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #215

If all you want to do is punch first then punch first Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #216

I didn't ask for your luck so thanks. R. Daneel Olivaw Oct 2013 #242

It's harsh, but it's true. We have to call it what it really is. n/t duffyduff Oct 2013 #90

This is stupid and has more than a hint of fascism... Decaffeinated Oct 2013 #94

The Kochs aren't simply disagreeing. duffyduff Oct 2013 #96

So what do you want to do about it? Decaffeinated Oct 2013 #121

And the Kochs! Well, you're consistent. Dark n Stormy Knight Oct 2013 #245

Unfortunately.... Jeff In Milwaukee Oct 2013 #95

Yes, they are. This is not harmless disagreement. duffyduff Oct 2013 #97

I grasp it perfectly well... Jeff In Milwaukee Oct 2013 #100

It's funny, if the shoe were on the other foot Ranchemp. Oct 2013 #101

this is not a "failure to pass legislation" grasswire Oct 2013 #114

Has it occured to you Abq_Sarah Oct 2013 #129

a hella lotta people despised the laws abolishing slavery, too grasswire Oct 2013 #165

Not voting on a law you prefer is not the same as keeping slaves. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #188

This is precisely failure to pass legislation Jeff In Milwaukee Oct 2013 #140

What the tea bag group is doing might not be sedition or illegal. But, if they never back down, ladjf Oct 2013 #109

It takes 2 sides to have a stalemate. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #144

If the Dems capitulate every time the pubs pull this stunt, then there will ultimately have the ladjf Oct 2013 #151

That may be true but each side is still maintaining the stalemate for their own policial agenda Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #152

When treason doth prosper DonCoquixote Oct 2013 #126

Actually the author of that quote is John Harrington. onenote Oct 2013 #146

and to all the people who say "force has not been used" DonCoquixote Oct 2013 #127

What does that have to do with the government shutdown? onenote Oct 2013 #142

The admins need to start doing something to rein this nonsene in. Nuclear Unicorn Oct 2013 #145

political differences Niceguy1 Oct 2013 #131

Since Congress is who decides what the law is in the first place, this is kind of silly (nt) Recursion Oct 2013 #143

Yes, lets expand the term sedition to include all sorts of political speech. hughee99 Oct 2013 #157

It isn't just "NOT" voting that is seditious. Heck that's passive resistance DEMS are all over that. Tigress DEM Oct 2013 #231

Still not a crime pinboy3niner Oct 2013 #237

yup gopiscrap Oct 2013 #176

Sedition is against the law. Of course, no one has committed sedition. onenote Oct 2013 #187

A lot of blowhards pretend they believe in it. Rex Oct 2013 #200

I wish they staid out of this nadinbrzezinski Oct 2013 #227

Exactly what makes this the worst Constitutional crisis since Ft. Sumpter? onenote Oct 2013 #233