WHEN that idiot opens his mouth about Russia, I tend to listen VERY CAREFULLY what this ass-hat is saying!!!! AND you are MOST correct on the "covert move"!!!!!!
I expect something to happen in the coming weeks but it will be a surprise that NO ONE WAS EXPECTING!!!!!!!
Guerrilla Warfare is one of subterfuge and brawn and a lil' mis-direction thrown in!!!!!
I thought that this asshat only wants to make sure no one confuses him with for white hats. He wants to make sure he gets to Gitmo with all his friends.
That's exactly what it sounds like, Graham is siding with the enemy, just like we knew he would. Unless he is setting up all the other traitors for a trap.
I dont pay too much attention to the guy, but when I see his video now compared to what I remember from 2020, he looks different. Anyone else think so?
Agreed. Is this another mask or body double? Idk. But, yes, his face looks different. Maybe he is just drinking alcohol and eating fast food everyday. If so, it's taking a toll.
First off, I don’t think either Chamber can muster 2/3 of their members to override the President. They might be able to pass something, but if it’s vetoed, I don’t think they’ll be able to override it.
Second, as much as I dislike Graham, he could be playing a role here. President Trump posted a Truth four days ago saying he had been stopping really bad things from happening to Russia. Maybe it’s Graham’s role to reveal what those really bad things are.
As much as I dislike Graham, you toss out an idea that makes sense. I still don't trust him, though. To me he's a grandstanding individual who only sees his next election and will say anything to get votes.
I am 100% with you ArmyLady!!! I'm sick of Ukraine, I want $0 of my money (in ANY form, cash, weapons, pensions, etc) going to Ukraine. All we hear from is Zelensky, the dumbass. Hold a damn vote. What do the PEOPLE in UKRAINE want?
Ukraine has been all about subjugation of the Russian ethnicity within their borders, who should have been accorded all the considerations and safety of citizenship.
But NO! They had to kill and suppress them, inviting the Russian Bear to protect its cubs . . .
I'm with you there. I joined the army in 85 under Reagan, to help fight the Cold war. Never did I think I'd have more faith in Russia/ Putin than my own govt. But there ya have it.
Lindsey Graham is like my X-wife. He loves you to your face but screws around on you behind your back. I will be glad when he goes the way of his mentor No Name!
Just remember the horrors of child trafficking and harvesting that took, is taking place there. They might be after adrenochrome.... Also don't forget the biological research labs.
Not sure what Graham is up to because that depends on who is pulling his strings. He's been tied to NoName and human trafficking in the past.
Also, the DS has often stirred up military operations and war to launder money and hide / cover-up their covert operations. Graham could be pushing that, or exposing backroom chatter.
Also, wars have been used for the sole purpose of creating an orphan population and human trafficking. Which wasn't widely known before Q pointed it out and brought attention to it.
Basically Lindsay Graham is a fiscal war hawk (which loves war), and you can see it in his statements on any real issue. As far as Congress as a whole is concerned, Congress is not working for the people which could care less about Ukraine, but they pass legislation which allows the US Government to spend money it doesn't have to give to Ukraine as foreign aid. I think virtually every member of Congress hates Russia, and I think Congress will attempt to declare war against Russia.
In the past, Congress has passed aid for Ukraine, and the President of Ukraine has spoken before a few joint sessions of congress where members were waving Ukrainian flags in one while another had Speaker Nancy Pelosi unfurl a flag of Ukraine under the pleasing eyes of Kamala Harris.
Does anyone have a clue what he is talking about? Congress can declare war, but I think the President still has veto power over it. They can override his veto, but how are they going to make him conduct war if it has no cause? Interesting Constitutional question. Would failure to conduct such a war constitute treason? And then they could impeach him out? To get Vance? And go through the same process? To get Mike Johnson? Just thinking out loud. This has a smell...
CONgress can (and has) declared war without the President even asking. However, it doesn't matter. POTUS has the sole authority to command the military and he can just say no.
CONgress declared war for WW2. Then FDR directed the military to act. It was his job - not theirs. They declared, authorizing him to use military force, but they couldn't demand it.
Of course. Per the Constitution, only the Congress can declare war (though that point has been abused repeatedly in current generations). And the President is the Commander in Chief. My speculation was twofold: (1) As with any legislation, would the President have veto power over a declaration? (2) Would Presidential refusal to engage in a declared war constitute treason, per "aid and comfort to the enemy"?
On another, but related, thought: Would now be the time to expose those Congressmen who have covert investment and involvement with Ukraine? Being a Neocon would, in those cases, be not so much a principle as a pretext.
Yes - POTUS can veto but CONgress could override if it wasn't for the fact that they all hate each other.
Treason? They could try to impeach him with treason being a charge, but that is doubtful. The DOJ would be responsible (if he was impeached and expelled) for charging him but it would still be his appointed DOJ, and JD would be POTUS. I doubt he would change much if anything on the current DOJ, and I don't think they would charge Trump with treason.
I also don't think it could ever go through court because the POTUS could have highly classified reasons for not prosecuting WAR and it would take forever to get judges/lawyers/juries to even try a case. Honestly I'd worry more about some remaining DS people just taking him out. Regardless of what would happen I think the DS would finally get their civil war, and it would be big.
My original open-think was that Congress could override his veto.
Treason? Doubtful? This Congress---the Congress that Lindsey Graham thinks will play his tune? If they PASSED a Declaration of War? Congress is responsible for charges, not the DOJ. He would be indicted by the house (impeached) and tried by the Senate (removed, if found guilty). The Deep State has been insane to get Trump on anything (including Russiahoax and Perfect Phone Calls), and you "don't think" they would charge him with treason? I wonder where you've been for the past 12 years.
Issues of war and impeachment are entirely in the hands of Congress, not any court. Highly classified reasons are exactly why Congress has cleared security committees to be briefed accordingly. Either he spills the beans or he gets tossed. But far more likely is that there are no classified reasons for not going to war---only the totally unclassified fact that there is no casus belli. You must have a reason FOR going to war...not a reason not to. But reasons not-to are good.
Your 1st comment about CONgress overriding a Presidential veto - it wouldn't matter at all. They still can't prosecute a war. They would be in the same position they were before voting on a veto override.
I'm not sure you actually understand how this works. CONgress can't "charge" criminal charges against ANYONE. Impeachment is a political process - not a criminal process. They wouldn't need to "charge" him with treason - and in fact should not - because the bar is so high for a treason conviction. The House would "charge" him with all sorts of stuff that they feel they could get a conviction on in the Senate. Once the Senate convicts he is kicked out, and barred for life from holding office (that part may require another vote but if they kick him out they will vote to keep him out).
Then (after being kicked out) and only then can he be charged criminally. You know - by the DOJ via prosecutors.
CONgress can't do squat other than impeachment and sending nasty letters. As you said - I wonder where you've been for the past 12 years? The nasty letters are usually "referrals" to the DOJ for prosecution - which they often just trash. What's funny is you even gave examples of what he was impeached for his last term. Oh - they're Articles of Impeachment - not criminal charges.
Under Article II the President has the sole power to prosecute war. The CONgress can only declare it (or not), and fund it (or not). They have zero say in his methods or timing, again other than funding.
The most CONgress could do regarding refusal to go to war is Impeach him for "defying CONgress". Treason requires either a confession, or two witnesses to the act of treason against the USA, and the intent to help the enemy act against the USA. Since the President wouldn't have committed any actions against the USA, didn't help the enemy act against the USA, and clearly had no intent to do either (his intent would be to avoid another war) Treason articles in an impeachment would go nowhere. They would also go nowhere in a Federal court.
If CONgress attempts this it will absolutely be a constitutional crisis of the highest degree. They would be overreaching by setting foreign policy - which is an Executive Branch function through the State Department under the President. They would also be overreaching by trying to force the US Military - which is an Executive Branch function under the Commander-in-Chief - The President - to prosecute a war (solely an Article II function).
One other thing that nobody thinks about is CONgress would be trying to force a prosecution of war without an experienced Commander-in-Chief assuming he is in impeachment proceedings or has been convicted in the Senate and expelled. Sending a first-day President that just took over via the 25th would be a historically stupid choice. It would very likely get SCOTUS involved immediately. It would also make the USA very vulnerable with all the political turmoil, and a new POTUS that would not be able to prosecute the war without relying 100% on the Generals since the VP wouldn't likely know the war plans. If the Generals were some of the leftover woke people they could do whatever they want and the new POTUS wouldn't have a clue.
So yeah - I don't believe the House would even vote on advancing articles of impeachment to a floor vote if one of the mentally-challenged reps like that guy with the mop hair, or Hank Johnson, or AOC/Crockett/Waters/Ratskin tried to add Treason as one of the articles of impeachment in this case.
Just working through the chain of logic. But treason is an impeachable offense, so your discussion is beside the point. They could charge him with "something akin to treason," and it would be just as legitimate. Trial and conviction by the Senate would remove him as Commander-in-Chief. That is the only objective; what happens to him next is immaterial. They are now dealing with an installed replacement President, who either prosecutes the war---or they do it all over again, until they reach a willing tool.
Since we both agree that a specific charge of "treason" makes no difference, further discussion of that point is not meaningful.
Declaring War IS setting foreign policy, exclusive to Congress. And a dedicated Congress can work its way through any succession of uncooperative Presidents until it finds one who cooperates. And if he does, the SCOTUS has no door into the situation. Don't argue the unreasonableness of stupidity---when the present Deep State has been monumentally unreasonable and stupid. What would be the worst outcome? World War III? And what is the Deep State's objective? This would be a perfect match. Generals don't get to second guess a legitimate Congressional Declaration of War. (And, as we have seen, they certainly have not second-guessed an illegitimate non-declaration of war regarding Ukraine, so don't argue that we will be saved by the military in this case.) Political turmoil? What do you think the last 8 years were about? That is no deterrent to the Deep State.
So, your position is that, so long as they don't use "treason" as a charge, they can merrily impeach under "something akin to treason," and have their way. But the real question is what is behind Lindsey Graham's hint of drastic measures? We both doubt he can do anything to coerce Trump, so what is it?
Either menopause, or he knows Trump has found something out about him that he can't dodge anymore and he is trying to get out ahead of it by providing a distraction. Either one is plausible.
However - he is up for reelection in 2026 so it is his time to act tough again, then start defending Trump on everything, and then beg Trump to endorse him - just like last time.
If congress even tries to declare war it will trigger the largest, and fastest, nationwide recall elections for those members of congress in the history of this nation. And, they will all get flushed down the toilet.
"Are you feeling lucky Punk? Go ahead. Make my day."
There is no provision for a recall election in the Constitution. There are all sorts of statutory provisions (sadly) for emergency suspension of rights and liberties. I'm not sure you know where the toilet is.
De facto, Congress has already declared, funded, and prosecuted war on Russia for 10 years via the Deep State, and that never was a major election issue over the past 3 election cycles.
Congressional representatives are elected through state level election's and can be removed through state level recall elections. The US constitution cannot save their worthless asses from the wrath of the American people who will not participate in global atomic warfare against Russia, for piss-ant Zelensky, and Ukraine.
The elections are at the state level, but they are governed by the Constitution. The Constitution does not permit recall elections. State law does not apply. I have never heard of any Congressman removed by a "recall election." The citizen option is to not elect their Representative or Senator for a following term.
You depend much on "the wrath of the American people," but we had to wait until 2024 to get Trump elected by a simple majority. Hardly anyone complains about the war in Ukraine, or our role in it.
The United States Constitution does not provide for recall of any elected federal official. The option was considered during the drafting of the document in 1787, but was not included in the final version. Some state constitutions have stated the right of citizens to recall their members of the United States Congress, but whether it is constitutionally legal at the federal level has not been yet been ruled upon by the United States Supreme Court. One of the closest noted legal precedent is U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, in which the Supreme Court decided that states did not have the right to impose new terms, qualifications, or conditions of service on federal officials.[20]
Some states have released opinions and rulings on recall of members of the U.S. Congress. Attorneys general in Arkansas (2010), Louisiana (2009), Kansas (1994), Nevada (1978), and Oregon (1935) all issued opinions against the recall of federal officials. Conversely, the Attorney General of Wisconsin in 1979 gave an opinion that state administration could not reject a petition for recall of a member of the U.S. Congress. In 2010, the Supreme Court of New Jersey ruled against federal recall and the Supreme Court of North Dakota also upheld an opinion by the state's attorney general against federal recall. Michigan courts stopped a recall petition against a member of Congress in 2007. A federal court in 1967 dismissed a case from Idaho where petitioners hoped to require the state to accept petitions seeking recall of a U.S. Senator.[20]....
And secondly, powers not specifically granted by the US constitution are considered to be in the realm of state powers. The state's are overdue to assert their rights on this issue.
Butt the states have no power over how Congressmen are elected, except to elect them as specified in the Constitution. Even your citation shows up as being impotent on this point. The states cannot nullify the stipulations of the Constitution.
Oh please.... when can we expose the lying liars in the senate? Take out the trash. I know. Over-simplification. But so much hinges on getting rid of them. They act impervious... and I don't think they are as safe as they seem to think.
Remember, Graham and McCain helped to start this war in 2014. Kick backs anyone? We’ll give until the last Ukrainians die. Didn’t McCain say that along with Mitch?
It means the. neocons are finally making their overt moves.
It means we are getting closer to the end.
It's getting precipice(y)...
u/#q2254
This ⬆️
WHEN that idiot opens his mouth about Russia, I tend to listen VERY CAREFULLY what this ass-hat is saying!!!! AND you are MOST correct on the "covert move"!!!!!!
I expect something to happen in the coming weeks but it will be a surprise that NO ONE WAS EXPECTING!!!!!!!
Guerrilla Warfare is one of subterfuge and brawn and a lil' mis-direction thrown in!!!!!
I thought that this asshat only wants to make sure no one confuses him with for white hats. He wants to make sure he gets to Gitmo with all his friends.
Amen.
Doesn't make it less nerve-wracking, even being 100% sure God wins in the end!
That's exactly what it sounds like, Graham is siding with the enemy, just like we knew he would. Unless he is setting up all the other traitors for a trap.
I dont pay too much attention to the guy, but when I see his video now compared to what I remember from 2020, he looks different. Anyone else think so?
Agreed. Is this another mask or body double? Idk. But, yes, his face looks different. Maybe he is just drinking alcohol and eating fast food everyday. If so, it's taking a toll.
First off, I don’t think either Chamber can muster 2/3 of their members to override the President. They might be able to pass something, but if it’s vetoed, I don’t think they’ll be able to override it.
Second, as much as I dislike Graham, he could be playing a role here. President Trump posted a Truth four days ago saying he had been stopping really bad things from happening to Russia. Maybe it’s Graham’s role to reveal what those really bad things are.
https://truthsocial.com/users/realDonaldTrump/statuses/114580564427808609
As much as I dislike Graham, you toss out an idea that makes sense. I still don't trust him, though. To me he's a grandstanding individual who only sees his next election and will say anything to get votes.
Fair point. It could be part of a bigger plan
Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine. Blah Blah Blah.
Sick of this overblown little drama -- that is being used to threaten WW III !!
Stop it, just STOP IT! Esp. any aid from US . . .
I am 100% with you ArmyLady!!! I'm sick of Ukraine, I want $0 of my money (in ANY form, cash, weapons, pensions, etc) going to Ukraine. All we hear from is Zelensky, the dumbass. Hold a damn vote. What do the PEOPLE in UKRAINE want?
None of the war mongers care. Let it be bombed to the ground, just "win"?!?
The areas that Russia is occupying were of mostly Russian heritage, who were being brutally killed by the Ukraine Nazis.
Self-determination?!? Where is Woodward Wilson when he is needed? Except that he abrogated that promise for the peoples of Europe! Failure!
No self-determination, but enforcement of arbitrary borders of a ridiculous "nation state". WHY? That is not "democracy"?!?
Exactly
Ukraine has been all about subjugation of the Russian ethnicity within their borders, who should have been accorded all the considerations and safety of citizenship.
But NO! They had to kill and suppress them, inviting the Russian Bear to protect its cubs . . .
It's the base of operations for bioweapon development and for the pedovores. Our government has no business supporting it in any way. Never did.
NEVER DID!
The Russians are the good guys, we are the bad guys.
I grew up in the 80's and it is unbelievable for me to say this, but it is true.
So many of our leaders are captured by forces that have zero allegiance to our great nation.
To them?
Russia, like the Jews in WW2 are the new boogeyman.
Putin loves his country and it's people. Trump loves his country and it's people.
Good enough for me.
Both leaders are solid in my book.
Everyone that says otherwise?
Bad actors.
I'm with you there. I joined the army in 85 under Reagan, to help fight the Cold war. Never did I think I'd have more faith in Russia/ Putin than my own govt. But there ya have it.
Lot of card talk, I want to see the Trump Card played.
Yes!
Lindsey Graham is like my X-wife. He loves you to your face but screws around on you behind your back. I will be glad when he goes the way of his mentor No Name!
Just remember the horrors of child trafficking and harvesting that took, is taking place there. They might be after adrenochrome.... Also don't forget the biological research labs.
Can someone explain for us Non Americans what he is talking about and what he is up to?
Not sure what Graham is up to because that depends on who is pulling his strings. He's been tied to NoName and human trafficking in the past.
Also, the DS has often stirred up military operations and war to launder money and hide / cover-up their covert operations. Graham could be pushing that, or exposing backroom chatter.
Also, wars have been used for the sole purpose of creating an orphan population and human trafficking. Which wasn't widely known before Q pointed it out and brought attention to it.
Basically Lindsay Graham is a fiscal war hawk (which loves war), and you can see it in his statements on any real issue. As far as Congress as a whole is concerned, Congress is not working for the people which could care less about Ukraine, but they pass legislation which allows the US Government to spend money it doesn't have to give to Ukraine as foreign aid. I think virtually every member of Congress hates Russia, and I think Congress will attempt to declare war against Russia.
In the past, Congress has passed aid for Ukraine, and the President of Ukraine has spoken before a few joint sessions of congress where members were waving Ukrainian flags in one while another had Speaker Nancy Pelosi unfurl a flag of Ukraine under the pleasing eyes of Kamala Harris.
I would add that the DS has operations in Ukraine that they desperately want to protect and some in congress are directly tied to those operations.
Nobody "hates Russia"; it's just that the MIC hasn't any where else to go to beat the drums for war and profit. It's just business. Nothing personal
Neocon Graham pounding the war drums against Russia and carrying water for the globalist all at the same time. What's new?
Lindsay must have been buttrailed by a heck of a lot of Russian rentboys to be this desperate.
Hope this cabal POS will get justice for his crimes
Funny. Didn't Trump endorse Lindsey Graham a few months back?
https://x.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1905057984222568768
Who can keep up with the game. I know Trump's playing it well. But I seem to be all burnt out and straggling behind.
And why isn't he being water boarded at Girmo?
If the swamp were drained we wouldn't be going through this.
Accurate
Organized crime in broad daylight.. still no arrests for treason
F Linda
72-Hour Rule in effect
Does anyone have a clue what he is talking about? Congress can declare war, but I think the President still has veto power over it. They can override his veto, but how are they going to make him conduct war if it has no cause? Interesting Constitutional question. Would failure to conduct such a war constitute treason? And then they could impeach him out? To get Vance? And go through the same process? To get Mike Johnson? Just thinking out loud. This has a smell...
CONgress can (and has) declared war without the President even asking. However, it doesn't matter. POTUS has the sole authority to command the military and he can just say no.
CONgress declared war for WW2. Then FDR directed the military to act. It was his job - not theirs. They declared, authorizing him to use military force, but they couldn't demand it.
Of course. Per the Constitution, only the Congress can declare war (though that point has been abused repeatedly in current generations). And the President is the Commander in Chief. My speculation was twofold: (1) As with any legislation, would the President have veto power over a declaration? (2) Would Presidential refusal to engage in a declared war constitute treason, per "aid and comfort to the enemy"?
On another, but related, thought: Would now be the time to expose those Congressmen who have covert investment and involvement with Ukraine? Being a Neocon would, in those cases, be not so much a principle as a pretext.
Yes - POTUS can veto but CONgress could override if it wasn't for the fact that they all hate each other.
Treason? They could try to impeach him with treason being a charge, but that is doubtful. The DOJ would be responsible (if he was impeached and expelled) for charging him but it would still be his appointed DOJ, and JD would be POTUS. I doubt he would change much if anything on the current DOJ, and I don't think they would charge Trump with treason.
I also don't think it could ever go through court because the POTUS could have highly classified reasons for not prosecuting WAR and it would take forever to get judges/lawyers/juries to even try a case. Honestly I'd worry more about some remaining DS people just taking him out. Regardless of what would happen I think the DS would finally get their civil war, and it would be big.
My original open-think was that Congress could override his veto.
Treason? Doubtful? This Congress---the Congress that Lindsey Graham thinks will play his tune? If they PASSED a Declaration of War? Congress is responsible for charges, not the DOJ. He would be indicted by the house (impeached) and tried by the Senate (removed, if found guilty). The Deep State has been insane to get Trump on anything (including Russiahoax and Perfect Phone Calls), and you "don't think" they would charge him with treason? I wonder where you've been for the past 12 years.
Issues of war and impeachment are entirely in the hands of Congress, not any court. Highly classified reasons are exactly why Congress has cleared security committees to be briefed accordingly. Either he spills the beans or he gets tossed. But far more likely is that there are no classified reasons for not going to war---only the totally unclassified fact that there is no casus belli. You must have a reason FOR going to war...not a reason not to. But reasons not-to are good.
Your 1st comment about CONgress overriding a Presidential veto - it wouldn't matter at all. They still can't prosecute a war. They would be in the same position they were before voting on a veto override.
I'm not sure you actually understand how this works. CONgress can't "charge" criminal charges against ANYONE. Impeachment is a political process - not a criminal process. They wouldn't need to "charge" him with treason - and in fact should not - because the bar is so high for a treason conviction. The House would "charge" him with all sorts of stuff that they feel they could get a conviction on in the Senate. Once the Senate convicts he is kicked out, and barred for life from holding office (that part may require another vote but if they kick him out they will vote to keep him out).
Then (after being kicked out) and only then can he be charged criminally. You know - by the DOJ via prosecutors.
CONgress can't do squat other than impeachment and sending nasty letters. As you said - I wonder where you've been for the past 12 years? The nasty letters are usually "referrals" to the DOJ for prosecution - which they often just trash. What's funny is you even gave examples of what he was impeached for his last term. Oh - they're Articles of Impeachment - not criminal charges.
Under Article II the President has the sole power to prosecute war. The CONgress can only declare it (or not), and fund it (or not). They have zero say in his methods or timing, again other than funding.
The most CONgress could do regarding refusal to go to war is Impeach him for "defying CONgress". Treason requires either a confession, or two witnesses to the act of treason against the USA, and the intent to help the enemy act against the USA. Since the President wouldn't have committed any actions against the USA, didn't help the enemy act against the USA, and clearly had no intent to do either (his intent would be to avoid another war) Treason articles in an impeachment would go nowhere. They would also go nowhere in a Federal court.
If CONgress attempts this it will absolutely be a constitutional crisis of the highest degree. They would be overreaching by setting foreign policy - which is an Executive Branch function through the State Department under the President. They would also be overreaching by trying to force the US Military - which is an Executive Branch function under the Commander-in-Chief - The President - to prosecute a war (solely an Article II function).
One other thing that nobody thinks about is CONgress would be trying to force a prosecution of war without an experienced Commander-in-Chief assuming he is in impeachment proceedings or has been convicted in the Senate and expelled. Sending a first-day President that just took over via the 25th would be a historically stupid choice. It would very likely get SCOTUS involved immediately. It would also make the USA very vulnerable with all the political turmoil, and a new POTUS that would not be able to prosecute the war without relying 100% on the Generals since the VP wouldn't likely know the war plans. If the Generals were some of the leftover woke people they could do whatever they want and the new POTUS wouldn't have a clue.
So yeah - I don't believe the House would even vote on advancing articles of impeachment to a floor vote if one of the mentally-challenged reps like that guy with the mop hair, or Hank Johnson, or AOC/Crockett/Waters/Ratskin tried to add Treason as one of the articles of impeachment in this case.
Just working through the chain of logic. But treason is an impeachable offense, so your discussion is beside the point. They could charge him with "something akin to treason," and it would be just as legitimate. Trial and conviction by the Senate would remove him as Commander-in-Chief. That is the only objective; what happens to him next is immaterial. They are now dealing with an installed replacement President, who either prosecutes the war---or they do it all over again, until they reach a willing tool.
Since we both agree that a specific charge of "treason" makes no difference, further discussion of that point is not meaningful.
Declaring War IS setting foreign policy, exclusive to Congress. And a dedicated Congress can work its way through any succession of uncooperative Presidents until it finds one who cooperates. And if he does, the SCOTUS has no door into the situation. Don't argue the unreasonableness of stupidity---when the present Deep State has been monumentally unreasonable and stupid. What would be the worst outcome? World War III? And what is the Deep State's objective? This would be a perfect match. Generals don't get to second guess a legitimate Congressional Declaration of War. (And, as we have seen, they certainly have not second-guessed an illegitimate non-declaration of war regarding Ukraine, so don't argue that we will be saved by the military in this case.) Political turmoil? What do you think the last 8 years were about? That is no deterrent to the Deep State.
So, your position is that, so long as they don't use "treason" as a charge, they can merrily impeach under "something akin to treason," and have their way. But the real question is what is behind Lindsey Graham's hint of drastic measures? We both doubt he can do anything to coerce Trump, so what is it?
Either menopause, or he knows Trump has found something out about him that he can't dodge anymore and he is trying to get out ahead of it by providing a distraction. Either one is plausible.
However - he is up for reelection in 2026 so it is his time to act tough again, then start defending Trump on everything, and then beg Trump to endorse him - just like last time.
Come on South Carolina - do your job this time.
If congress even tries to declare war it will trigger the largest, and fastest, nationwide recall elections for those members of congress in the history of this nation. And, they will all get flushed down the toilet.
There is no provision for a recall election in the Constitution. There are all sorts of statutory provisions (sadly) for emergency suspension of rights and liberties. I'm not sure you know where the toilet is.
De facto, Congress has already declared, funded, and prosecuted war on Russia for 10 years via the Deep State, and that never was a major election issue over the past 3 election cycles.
Congressional representatives are elected through state level election's and can be removed through state level recall elections. The US constitution cannot save their worthless asses from the wrath of the American people who will not participate in global atomic warfare against Russia, for piss-ant Zelensky, and Ukraine.
The elections are at the state level, but they are governed by the Constitution. The Constitution does not permit recall elections. State law does not apply. I have never heard of any Congressman removed by a "recall election." The citizen option is to not elect their Representative or Senator for a following term.
You depend much on "the wrath of the American people," but we had to wait until 2024 to get Trump elected by a simple majority. Hardly anyone complains about the war in Ukraine, or our role in it.
And secondly, powers not specifically granted by the US constitution are considered to be in the realm of state powers. The state's are overdue to assert their rights on this issue.
Butt the states have no power over how Congressmen are elected, except to elect them as specified in the Constitution. Even your citation shows up as being impotent on this point. The states cannot nullify the stipulations of the Constitution.
All Lindsey Weathervane whichever way the wind blows Graham is referring to is Sanctions.
Let's have Graham join the front lines.
You its time for the people to ovwrrulet the congress and senate.
That smug little shit. He is so happy.
Oh please.... when can we expose the lying liars in the senate? Take out the trash. I know. Over-simplification. But so much hinges on getting rid of them. They act impervious... and I don't think they are as safe as they seem to think.
Rousing Russia before you leave NATO....saving Israel for last on the way out 🤔
Russia ain’t gonna be crippled.
if this is the game, write your congressman and senators now. some things DO work. this is one of them.
just did all 3, you can too. (congressman and 2 senators) go get them
This rump ranger is probably getting huge windfall from the Ukraine conflict. Follow the money!
And the true colors finally show
That means playing the Trump card draws near.
Remember, Graham and McCain helped to start this war in 2014. Kick backs anyone? We’ll give until the last Ukrainians die. Didn’t McCain say that along with Mitch?
Traitor.
Well if they're that serious about losing the midterms, this is definitely a way to go about it.
If hope Trump is glad he endorsed Linsey Graham.
That does not look or sound like Graham.