Round up all the treasonous Democrats and imprison them for life.

What is it with NPR and counting?
Two Truths and One Lie About the Mueller Report
Impeachment Just Got Less Likely and 6 Other Takeaways from the Barr Letter
Is their headquarters on Sesame Street?

Here's another: One Reason Democrats Are in Meltdown Again

Impeachment has never been likely. Trump's proclamation of a state of national emergency on the southern US border is a flagrant violation of the Constitution, and an impeachable offense, but the Democrats have repeatedly sought to avoid impeachment.

To quote Andre Damon, writer for the WSWS, "There is one clear and inescapable conclusion from the tortuous experience of the past two years: the struggle against the Trump administration cannot be based on the Democratic Party, the rotting corpse of American liberalism."

The law is clear that the President can do what it takes to secure the border.

Not true, but thanks for commenting.

The writers for the WSWS seem to lack individuality and intellectual independence. And the reason is that they must conform to Socialist Equality Party cult leader businessman David Green/North. He OWNS the SEP franchise just , I read from reliable sources , as he OWNS a prosperous non-union print shop.
The members of the SEP can be compared to the intelligent robot " Clears " in the notorious Church of Scientology. No THOUGHT CRIMES here !
I asked David North to EXPLAIN why I was BANNED FROM THE WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE ( not like being BANNED IN BOSTON ).
But a nobody PROLE like me can not ever see the Great Oz !

For one who seems to have a problem being slandered, you have no problem slandering others.

I have a right to retaliate with TRUTH after being SMEARED on your World Socialist Web Site as the " resident Catholic, anti-Semite, fascist ".
David North/Green, for example, is a CAPITALIST . My favorite Malcolm X quote : " Show me a capitalist and I will show you a blood sucker " .
This CAPITALIST ( and crypto-Zionist ? ) has turned a SOCIALIST party into a MAKE-A-BUCK swindle.
There are at least a few hundred of David North's dupes in HIS Socialist Equality Party . They are like " Clears " in the Church of Scientology. I will pray for them .

It is not truth if you cannot provide evidence for your accusations.

"Trump's proclamation of a state of national emergency on the southern US border is a flagrant violation of the Constitution"
You're about as good at this constitutional law thing as Obama was.
Congress decided to cede the authority to declare national emergencies to the president with the National Emergencies Act. Not an impeachable offense..

Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the Constitution reads, in part: “No
Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of
Appropriations made by Law …” This language has invariably been
understood to mean that the legislature possesses the “power of the
purse,” and that the executive branch (which includes the Treasury) may
spend money only as authorized by Congress.

So then his "proclamation of a state of national emergency on the southern US border" is NOT a "flagrant violation of the Constitution" contrary to what you stated earlier AND is therefore not "an impeachable offense"?

What's the impeachable offense then, Professor?
Discretionary spending of monies that are already "Appropriations made by Law "?

Trump is using the national emergency proclamation to appropriate funds which were otherwise not approved by Congress; he is circumventing Congress, in the fashion of a dictator. In 2014, congressional Republicans sued the Obama administration for similarly trying to use funds not authorized by Congress in relation to Obamacare. Although Congress had intended to authorize the payments, the language of their bill did not include this provision. The Republicans won, and Republican Representative Greg Walden from Oregon declared, "The principle there is separations of powers, constitutional authorities that Congress appropriates the money."

For all their posturing as "defenders of the Constitution," Republicans have no problem trampling it when it suits their interests.

Do you understand the concept of discretionary funds?
Do you understand the National Emergencies Act?
Do you ever tire of being wrong?

Asking me questions is not proving me wrong. Trump is using a false pretense in order to appropriate funds which were not authorized by Congress. There is no precedent for a president using discretionary funds against the will of Congress towards the fulfillment of a policy initiative.

As well, since Trump intends to use the military to construct his wall, he is violating the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the US military from engaging in law enforcement operations within the borders of the US.

Why do you value Donald Trump over the Constitution?

Asking you questions illustrates what you don't know.
It isn't a "policy initiative", it's national security.
The military works on construction projects ALL OF THE TIME.

What do you care about the constitution, you're a socialist? Fraud.

I think it demonstrates what you do not know. You have not addressed the points I made, you have not provided an argument for how Trump's proclamation falls within the scope of the NEA, and you have not shown how Trump's proclamation is not a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

It is most certainly a policy initiative. Trump made a campaign promise to build the wall, and he is simply trying to fulfill that promise--not address any perceived national security concern. If it were truly a national security issue, he would have no doubt received resounding bi-partisan congressional support.

What do you care about the constitution, you're a socialist? Fraud.

Aside from the fact that this is clearly a deflection from my previous question, you are once again demonstrating that you have no idea what socialism is. Any genuine socialist values the Constitution because it enshrines very basic democratic (although bourgeois democratic) rights. The point of socialism is to take these basic democratic rights and to open them up and transform them from bourgeois democratic rights into democratic rights in the purest sense.

This is my second exchange with you and here's what I gathered from both encounters --
You do not make "points", you make declarative statements that are your suppositions or your beliefs but have no relation to fact. Your only citation has been to your socialism website...YAWN
You ignore fact seemingly because you think it bolsters your argument --it does not.

Here are the facts for you to review:
Trump has declared a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act. That emergency has to do with the flood of illegals over the southern border.
Congress has already appropriated billions of dollars to the construction of sections of wall on the southern border. FOR BORDER SECURITY
Trump has moved discretionary funds from other projects into the wall project...he's allowed to do that at his discretion--thus the term.
The military routinely works on civil construction projects. The Army even has a branch dedicated to that very task, USACE.
You framing their mission as "law enforcement" does not make it so.
Trump has requested state militias to enforce the immigration laws. Some states have complied others have not.
Nothing Trump has done with regard to the southern border is impeachable as you suggested in your initial post.

As far as socialism goes YOU are the one who is in denial or are lying about what you know socialism to be. Socialism is the same evil it was during the years of the Soviet Union. I don't think any rational human looks at those years with a sense of nostalgia.

This is my second exchange with you and here's what I gathered from both encounters --
You
do not make "points", you make declarative statements that are your
suppositions or your beliefs but have no relation to fact. Your only
citation has been to your socialism website...YAWN
You ignore fact seemingly because you think it bolsters your argument --it does not.

Let us take just this exchange as an example. I made the point that Trump is violating the Constitution; I reinforced that point by quoting the relevant section of the Constitution. I even provided supplementary evidence, in which Republicans accused Obama of doing the exact same thing Trump is doing. I also made the point that he is violating the Posse Comitatus Act, and gave a basic summary of that law. In both instances I provided factual evidence to reinforce my points.

Trump did declare a national emergency, he did do so through the NEA, no one is disputing that. What is disputed is the constitutionality of this declaration.

Congress did appropriate some funds, but not the total amount Trump is seeking. Now he is circumventing Congress to appropriate funds, a violation of the Constitution. How he appropriates these funds--either discretionary or otherwise--does not change this simple fact.

The building of the wall is not a civil engineering project, it is a law enforcement project. It is meant to help enforce capitalist laws of immigration. Trump is using military funds and the military to construct the wall, which violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the military from engaging in law enforcement within the borders of the US.

Again, why do you value Donald Trump more than the Constitution?

"I reinforced that point by quoting the relevant section of the Constitution."
Like every "constitutional law expert " I've ever encountered, you quote a sentence and interpret what it means (to fit your needs) without regard to the context OR consideration of standing legal precedent.

"I even provided supplementary evidence, in which Republicans accused Obama of doing the exact same thing Trump is doing."
"supplementary evidence" ROTFLMAO
Don't understand politics now do you?

In your normal style you've moved the goal posts.
Your original post was that Trump committed an impeachable offense by declaring a national emergency...He did not.
At worst Trump left room for a legal challenge to his declaration.

"Now he is circumventing Congress to appropriate funds, a violation of the Constitution". Again, open for legal challenge. Not an impeachable offense.

"The building of the wall is not a civil engineering project, it is a law enforcement project", etc. Again, your "expert" interpretation. Not law. Not impeachable.

I couldn't give a rat's behind about Trump but I agree wholeheartedly with his effort to secure the southern border.

The portion of the Constitution I quoted lays out that Congress has the "power of the purse." Do you agree or disagree?

My "normal style?" What are you talking about? I have been reiterating the same points I have been making. They have not changed. Flouting the Constitution is an impeachable offense.

If what Trump is doing is "open for a legal challenge" then whether or not it is impeachable has not been decided. I am arguing that it is for the aforementioned reasons.

How is the wall not a law enforcement project? How is Trump using the military to build it not a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act?

By supporting Trump trampling the Constitution to fulfill a campaign promise, you demonstrate you do not value the Constitution. Or, like Republicans and Democrats, you only value it when it suits your particular interests. What will you do when the Democrats use the precedent Trump is setting for their own purposes? What if they declare the climate crisis a national emergency and facilitate the implementation of the Green New Deal, or something similar?

You keep repeating the same thing over and over as if THAT will change the fact that you are wrong.
Look up the word discretionary and see if you can understand how it relates to this issue.
I know you'd like me to agree with you but I will not because then we'd both be wrong.

If you are so sure of your position why are you evading my questions?

I have not evaded your questions.
Every question is based on a flawed premise; that I've pointed out numerous times.
I don't know how else to say it:Nothing Trump did with regard to this issue is impeachable.

Not answering is evading.

My first question dealt with the premise that Congress holds the "power of the purse." If you think that premise is flawed, then you disagree that Congress holds the "power of the purse."

My second question--how is the wall not a law enforcement project--was not addressed in any of your comments. You merely disagreed with me, but did not provide anything to support your argument.

The military is building the wall. How is this not a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act? You never say.

What are the flawed premises of my questions concerning the precedent Trump is setting and what you will do when Democrats use this precedent for their own ends? If Trump is not setting a precedent, then what other president has used the NEA to appropriate funds which were not approved by Congress?

Jesus buddy, pay close attention:

"power of the purse." Discretionary spending. I've said this repeatedly. If the congress thinks the funds he's using are not discretionary they can sue to stop him but they cannot impeach him.

"How is this not a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act?" It is a public works project just the same a levee building.
Are contractors who build jails enforcing laws? NO. This is absolutely no different. Not impeachable.

Bad precedent? Maybe but STILL NOT IMPEACHABLE as you claimed in your original post.

Trump cannot use discretionary funds for whatever he wishes, only in manners that have been approved by Congress. Congress explicitly denied Trump the funding he sought for the wall, and so now he is circumventing the will of Congress who holds the "power of the purse" as granted by the Constitution, an impeachable offense.

The two statutory provisions Trump is invoking are 10 U.S.C. 2808 and 33 U.S.C. 2293. Section 2808 relies on the southern border to be considered a military battlefield for it to be applicable. The southern border is not a battlefield, therefore it is a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. Section 2293 only allows discretionary funds to build "authorized civil works, military construction, and civil defense projects that are essential to the national defense" (emphasis added). In this context, "authorized" means "authorized" by Congress.

A public works project? The statutes Trump is invoking are treating it as a military operation construction.

What is the function of the wall? Furthermore, contractors are not building it. The military is.

Maybe? It either is, or it is not. Which is it?

NOT IMPEACHABLE

Thanks for trying, take care!

He does not get tired of being wrong about " Radical Ron ". He AGREES that I was the " resident Catholic, anti-Semite, fascist " on his World Socialist Web Site.
How does Catholic = fascist = anti-Semite ?
Even his Socialist Equality Party does not equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. But why am I now on the side of Hitler ?

Will you provide evidence of where I agreed? It should not be difficult. Your Disqus feed will have our entire exchange on record.

I have more than 3000 UP votes on my Disqus feed. No perceived neo-Nazi would get that much " approval ". Once again, why can't SEP cult leader David North / Green send me a brief explanation why not this or that comment was REMOVED from the World Socialist Web Site ( more than 1000 have been published ) but why old Democratic Socialist ( my blog goes back to 1997 ) Ron Ruggieri is permanently BANNED FROM THE WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE ? By the way, I can function just fine without the blessing of nearly deranged Trotskyist sects of which there are more than a few . The real SOCIALIST movement can breathe freer without crackpot partisan misleaders. The real Socialist is NOT inspired by the soul-less New Atheism ( sponsored by secular Zionist Jews or crypto-Zionists ). Nowhere on the planet do these pretentious Trotskyist sects LEAD the working class in ANY struggle. What a sick delusion that THEY are the VANGUARD of a coming socialist revolution.
One SENTENCE from the Great Oz David North can conclude this controversy. What does he fear ? An INDEPENDENT voice on his World Socialist Web Site ?

Once again, why can you not reach out to the WSWS?

You are not banned from viewing and reading the WSWS, you are banned (allegedly) from commenting on the WSWS.

Right out of North Korea ! I have the right to LISTEN to the minions of the Great Oz, David North , but no FREE SPEECH rights on his puffed up WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE .
Do you think working class Americans welcome another " socialist " tyranny ?

Because you violated the commenting guidelines, which are very basic and easy to adhere to.

Why are you not able to reach out the WSWS?

Why on earth should I want to read there after it is exposed as a racket ? Why can't the GREAT OZ, David North reach out to me ? He can just COMMENT right here .
Is this how business man David Green/ North treats his HELP at the prosperous NON-UNION print shop ?

If you do not want to read the WSWS, why are you so concerned with being able to comment there?

SEP CULT BLOCKHEAD : other readers also might want an explanation why Ron Ruggieri was BANNED FROM THE WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE .
Other honest socialists have warned me - from their long experience - that I am dealing here ( David North's SEP ) with political gangsters and goons.

If they do, they can reach out to you, but I doubt they will as you are clearly unhinged, shouting into the nether and harassing me, rather than reaching out to either the WSWS directly or the SEP member who contacted you.

What on earth forbids the Great Oz David North from a courteous explanation why ANYBODY's FREE SPEECH rights are cancelled on the World Socialist Web Site ? In numerous articles David North complained of social media ( led by Mark Zuckerberg ) CENSORSHIP of his World Socialist Web Site.
Why don't you GUESS why I was banned on the World Socialist Web Site.
So corrupt is this cult leader David North/ Green that I would not be surprised if he is soon arrested for financial fraud , accused by his own pathetic SEP followers .
Come clean, Mr. North !

My guess is that you were banned from commenting on the WSWS because you violated the general discussion guidelines, as I have stated ad nauseum.

Stupid, after two thousand comments NOT REMOVED the lackeys of Chairman North decide SUDDENLY that Ron Ruggieri " violated discussion guidelines " and must be immediately BANNED FROM THE WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE ?
I think your intellectual dishonesty - that of an old fashioned STALINIST COMMUNIST - is more evident here than my being " unhinged " .
The working class American people do not like STALINIST bullies and liars . You reek of North Korea not of " Trotsky in Exile ".
Militant atheism leads not to Permanent Revolution but too Permanent Madness.

Two thousand comments were within the guidelines, and then you violated them. Perhaps if you link to the article that you had the exchange with "Joe Williams" (who has not written an article since 2016) I could assess your accusations.

Ronald, I am not bullying or lying. The burden of proof is on you, and if anyone is bullying it is yourself with your persistent harassment.

Why were not those one or two " offensive " ( to whom ? ) comments just REMOVED ? Instead I was suddenly BANNED BY THE WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE . What comments were so objectionable ( they are all recorded on Radical Ron's Blog Spot ) that they demanded being BANNED ?
I think any reader of this back n' forth will get my point . I suspect that you are fronting for David North - in the manner of zombie like " Clear " for the Church of Scientology .
Is the Great Oz too busy organizing a " socialist " revolution to respond to " Radical Ron " ? Does the working class have any say in his future " socialist " Utopia - supervised by the " Society of the Godless " ?

Provide me the link to the article in which you had an exchange with "Joe Williams"

Here is your congenial comrade " Joe Williams " . His obnoxious comments on me PUBLISHED -and not removed - on David North World Socialist Web Site .

" LOL, yes Ron, we all know you think that anti-semitism has a rational explanation. That is one thing you have managed to articulate very clearly. Please articulate it at Breitbart and Stormfront, where it belongs. "

"And since many people have suggested that he[ Ron Ruggieri ] may be a conscious fascist who poses as a confused person here just to sew divisions and disorientation, it's worth pointing out that, as the crisis of capitalism has deepened, his attempts to scapegoat Jews for the crimes of the US and capitalism have gotten much more frequent and intense. "

' [Hi Emerson, you must be new here. Ron is our resident antisemite and catholic/fascist apologist. Look through his past posts on this website to find some of his greatest hits like "Henry Ford and Jack Kennedy supported the Nazis because they were classic American pacifists," "Socialists need to reach out to the Catholic Church," and "Jews are an inherently reactionary group, while Italians are naturally artistic and progressive." ] '

" His invocation of a handful of "good" Jews at the beginning of his comment here is, in his mind anyway, a rebuttal to the constant criticisms he receives.'

Does not " Joe Williams " here sound like a STALINIST prosecutor in days of the infamous Moscow Trials ?

Published where? Provide a link to the article. How do you know Joe Williams is a member of the SEP and not simply a commenter? How do you know that you were banned for comments and not banned because you were mistaken for a spam bot? Either way, you can easily resolve your issue by reaching out to the WSWS.

Also, is NOT the SEP in control of its own web site ? Why should my typing out my blog address ( Radical Ron's Blog Spot ) get me " mistaken for a spam bot " ? There must be a SHADOW GOVERNMENT in control of the World Socialist Web Site. Before you people ever get to lead any " socialist " revolution you display nightmare bureaucratic traits worthy of a Franz Kafka novel . Ron Ruggieri = " Joseph K ".
The world does not need more TOTALITARIAN bully dictators - dictators OVER the proletariat . Thank God you still have no MASS APPEAL !

Disqus has its own algorithm for policing spam. I have had comments mistaken for spam on the WBUR website. Beyond that, I have no idea about the inner workings of the WSWS. Rather than spouting off suppositions and allegations, why not just reach out to the WSWS?

Russian television’s Trotsky serial: A degraded spectacle of historical falsification and anti-Semitism
By Fred Williams and David North
19 December 2018
Trotsky, the Russian mini-series about Leon Trotsky, is now available on Netflix. The WSWS posted this comment on the slanderous eight-part series in November 2017.
Russian television marked the hundredth anniversary of the October Revolution with the broadcast of an eight-part serial titled Trotsky. The series is an exhibition of the political, intellectual and cultural depravity of all those involved in the sponsorship and production of this grotesque falsification of history. No excuses can be made for anyone—the producers, director, scriptwriters, actors and assorted technical personnel—who participated in this mixture of lies, pornography, anti-communism and blatant anti-Semitism]