Posted on 05/10/2019 8:38:08 AM PDT by rottweiller_inc
I am writing this to , try to help , as far as I can, for the President to regain a balance with the House of Representatives.
It seems what that pack of dogs needs is a car to chase, with luck into cross traffic.
What I think needs to be done is to distract them from their shiny rubber ball.
It starts with setting up a debate, a narrative if you will by creating a type of virtual perpetual motion machine. The opposition seems to like a good dog and pony show (some enterprising representative might even bring an actual dog and pony to a hearing).
What I propose firstly, would be to set a overarching new threat that actually might be a (in reality)valid way to address current problems. Indeed it would be, but unfortunately it would never pass so we instead we use the idea of it, presenting it as a true specter, a boggy man, that fits with the types of behavior they expect the President to engage in. Instead you give them the expectation of their worst fears, and what they expect to find; well the appearance of it anyway.
Meanwhile they are attending their pretend child's' tea party while posing, preening and saying (supposedly)important things to their imaginary friends.
The initial vehicle to supply energy to our construct is to use an (allegedly)proposed change to the constitution, and adding one word to it. Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 which reads,i part; "...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
Interesting note; You Impeach Judges and Presidents, while the the word "arrest" is used for the House of Representatives. A vast potential exists to make the argument that the standard to remove a House member is lower than to remove a President or a Judge"(If you want to attempt to introduce it you could use these games they love so much by, say, when you are ready to introduce it, show up at the house with a crowd of medical personal "standing by" in case any house member faints because you are concerned for their welfare(just one possibility)).
What I propose is to add a single word, lying, to the list of 3 potential violations which would strip immunity(could be tweaked in several ways; if you want to menace, add something like And the elected Representative shall serve in a Federal Penitentiary no less than 10 and no more than 20 years, to be served in whatever penitentiary has the highest number of rapists and murderers, at the time of sentencing, in their populations(no more country club prisons).
The amended version would read like "...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony, Lying and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."
While introducing this as an amendment would work, what would be better is having it come to the press in the form of a (supposed)leak from a hyper-charged seeming partisan, who wants to save America from a President Trump "disaster" (that disaster being President Trump using too much hair gel) and there is something they think they can see that is hidden to be uncovered. Just what they were waiting to see, a crack in the "cover-up" surrounding President Trump, that preamble to President Trump assuming dictatorial powers that he, personally, would use to mow down forests nationwide and steal milk from cats, and before you know it the chattering magpies that sit in certain 3 lettered roosts will be chirping the news; enthusiastic and bird brained as usual.
This takes advantage of the tendency of the media not to vet their sources. Said someone in the white-house goes to them with this "information" and says they were horrified by the President Trump disaster.
Now the person from the White House would mean the disaster of Trump appearing with too much hair gel. But rather than check and see what was meant by disaster, they will assume the disaster towards America and run with it. All you are doing is (legally)taking advantage of their own tendencies not to check their sources and to make assumptions.
Send in enough "plants" and they may actually have to start investigating those who leak first.
Their outrage will disseminate the idea very nicely at the perceived violation of law,i.e. the start(in their own fears) of the "Trump Dictatorship" by changing the constitution(always nice to see people willing to work for you for free).
The goal isn't to defend any potential amendment, although the change is certainly a step towards addressing persistent problems in the House.
That is why appearing to be leak would be better, as you won't need to defend it as vigorously. Appearing to be a leak, ready to prove President Trumps' (supposed)readiness to unleash the dread totalitarian dogs of war to attack the left(one can always hope science will one day give us these wonderful sounding creatures) and that is what they are expecting to see.
What people expect to see is very powerful.
You use their own zeal to search for something, anything, to have the potential to be something worthy to be useful in tearing down President Trump.
If you go the leak route, I would not say anything until the hype and the crazy reaches a crescendo. Then quietly announce that it was leaked from a draft of your Presidential Memoirs(should get working on those) that was exploring possible solutions to problems in the country and whoever leaked it must have mistaken it for official policy papers.
The Representatives can make statements that break and law and attempt to compel the officials of the executive to deliberately break the law, so they can, in turn, use that breech to attempt to remove from office the one with the "gravitas"to act as trusted prosecutor in matters grave.
The House Leaders should be goaded to make the same inflammatory statements they are making on the floor; off the floor, to prove make they aren't afraid of the applicable(libel?) laws, without those immunity's; to prove they can say it without immunity's , i.e. that the statement are projected as truthful, apart from the immunity's enjoyed on the floor . This of course open up the front; "well if you aren't doing anything wrong..".
There could be another step to this where you actually arrest someone who has clearly violated the law. Best to apply the pack punishment principal where you beat one of the dogs in the pack while the other ones watch to teach the entire pack a lesson.
The reason this would work so well is the pump is primed right now. The potential energy to start the machine is already there with so many people hysterically believing something untrue and so ready to pounce anything new( and once the motion starts it's easier to give a small push at times(e.g. say a headline "Constitutional scholars say President Trumps' Constitutional change might work'), to keep the momentum of the merry-go-round going till all the kids are motion sick.
The media is also primed to get bad news out quick without considering the implications of what they are saying to get the news out rapidly and the appearance that someone leaked a draft of a constitutional amendment from the executive office, ostensibly, to reign in the current "constitutional crisis".
It seems just plausible enough, to make that dog lose interest in that shiny ball because that car is just begging to be chased, but you want the people to know that house members have this immunity that they are using a shield to hide behind while solicit people to commit criminal acts.
One final note: Beware what of D.A.R.P.A. just did. Ostensibly, showing video can be a high quality fake. I suspect this is the intelligence community setting up a way to deny video evidence.
Of course, I am just some kook and you should not listen to me.
uhhhhh....what?
Sorry - couldn’t make it through....All I could think of was this poor guy should be looking for something productive to do. I know we all have our thoughts that we like to expound on but I don’t know anyone who actually wants to hear them..
I am painting a word picture of a forest and you are looking at trees.
So as a "Participation Award" I will show you a forest; An out of power party gained unlawful investigatory powers, available only to elected officials via the democrat party-pack Muller investigation.
Guess I’ll have to repeat post #2....It doesn’t look like you have ANY audience! Enjoy your weekend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.