Rand says Amash wrong to call for Trump's impeachment.

[phill4paul]

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) says Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) was wrong to suggest that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice and should be impeached for it.

Amash over the weekend became the first Republican in the House to support impeachment proceedings for Trump based on special counsel Robert Mueller’s report. He accused his party of abandoning its principles to accommodate Trump by ignoring evidence of the president’s obstruction of justice.

“President Trump has engaged in impeachable conduct,” Amash tweeted on Saturday.

The Michigan congressman, who has first elected during the 2010 Tea Party wave, has also toyed with the idea of abandoning the GOP to run for president as a Libertarian.

But Paul, a libertarian-leaning senator from Kentucky who has grown close with Trump, said Amash got it all wrong. He called the Mueller report the “antithesis of libertarianism.”

“I actually think the libertarian position on the investigation is ― you know, libertarians, we’ve been very, very critical of the intelligence community having too much power, including congressman Amash has said, you know, really you should have to get a warrant before you get an American’s records,” Paul told HuffPost

in a brief interview on Wednesday.

Paul said he believed the Mueller investigation was “an abuse of intelligence power consistent with what libertarians have been complaining about for a long time.” He further said he supported an amendment offered by Amash in the House “which says you have to have a warrant before you target Americans because foreign intelligence warrants have a lower standard.”

The conservative House Freedom Caucus, which Amash helped found, even voted to condemn his remarks.

Paul did not answer a reporter’s question on Wednesday whether he agreed with the House Freedom Caucus’ decision to censure Amash.

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/justi...223525828.html

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Amash's strategically ill-advised blunder might be good for Rand.

[Schifference]

To use one of Rand's most used lines, "the interesting thing is," Rand's remarks should show this forum that opinions differ. Rand just said Amash was wrong. Okay. Some members here chastise people for saying Amash was wrong. Maybe Ron will go on record saying Amash was right. So when two lovers of liberty disagree, who is right? Is that when chaos and civil wars break out?

[goldenequity]

https://twitter.com/russian_market/s...16652057780227

[PAF]

To use one of Rand's most used lines, "the interesting thing is," Rand's remarks should show this forum that opinions differ. Rand just said Amash was wrong. Okay. Some members here chastise people for saying Amash was wrong. Maybe Ron will go on record saying Amash was right. So when two lovers of liberty disagree, who is right? Is that when chaos and civil wars break out?

This reminds me of a favorite quote that I invented and still repeat often, up to and including Tampa convention, hoping adults would make the correct choice back in the 2012 election. It goes like this:

Vote the Record, Not the Rhetoric

[nobody's_hero]

To use one of Rand's most used lines, "the interesting thing is," Rand's remarks should show this forum that opinions differ. Rand just said Amash was wrong. Okay. Some members here chastise people for saying Amash was wrong. Maybe Ron will go on record saying Amash was right. So when two lovers of liberty disagree, who is right? Is that when chaos and civil wars break out?

ALERT ALERT! GET ME THE PURITY KIT, STAT!

I think we're gonna have to drop you in the water to see if you float. That is blasphemous talk, sir.

EDIT: Seriously, I think Ron Paul has called this whole investigation thing a farce from day one. It would be really hard for me to imagine him saying this was a good move by Amash.



Objectivity. Gotta love it.

[juleswin]

Rand Paul is the convenient libertarian, he turns that ideology on and off as it suits him. Regardless, Amash is more of a constitutionalist that a libertarian so it is consistent with his MO to call for impeachment when he think a president has committed high crime. I don't agree with him in this instance, just wish he would up his threshold to bigger crimes like starting unauthorized wars.

[ATruepatriot]

Rand Paul is the convenient libertarian, he turns that ideology on and off as it suits him. Regardless, Amash is more of a constitutionalist that a libertarian so it is consistent with his MO to call for impeachment when he think a president has committed high crime. I don't agree with him in this instance, just wish he would up his threshold to bigger crimes like starting unauthorized wars.

Something I have observed over the years is that Libertarianism is pretty ironic in true practice. While preaching individualism and liberty, anyone who deviates from 100% rank and file lock step with the doctrine principles is stoned and persecuted as not worthy, even to the point of wanting excommunication from the public square. While the principles are sound, the true example in practice is hypocritical and anti-individualism. It's just like the Constitutional party claiming they "support Constitutional freedom of religion" just as long as it is a "recognized form of Christianity".

[Superfluous Man]

Rand is right about the intelligence community. But as far as I've seen, in none of Amash's statements has he said anything approving of the intelligence community. It's possible to oppose them, including their actions with respect to the Trump investigation, and still believe that Trump behaved himself improperly.

[enhanced_deficit]

Anybody can be wrong on anything and good people can differ on things details for which not in full view yet. In an Amash vs MAGA evaluation, one key metric would be who has track record of having pro-liberty principles and direction. Overall Amash appears much more pro-liberty than Israel-First pro-war neoconservative funded GOP-Adelson wing and the neocons cabal it is surrounded by.

[juleswin]

Something I have observed over the years is that Libertarianism is pretty ironic in true practice. While preaching individualism and liberty, anyone who deviates from 100% rank and file lock step with the doctrine principles is stoned and persecuted as not worthy, even to the point of wanting excommunication from the public square. While the principles are sound, the true example in practice is hypocritical and anti-individualism. It's just like the Constitutional party claiming they "support Constitutional freedom of religion" just as long as it is a "recognized form of Christianity".

Ron Paul, Rand Paul and even Justin Amash have deviated from the libertarian philosophy and all are still beloved by libertarians. I think you run into problems when your ideology in totality threatens the individual freedoms of those libertarians. And who would blame them for reacting to the loss of their freedom. Also just because individuals react in a certain way to certain behaviour doesn't make em the mobs. Tigers for example are very individualistic and they all react the same way to someone pulling their tails.

Not ironic or hypocritical when u really think about it.

[nobody's_hero]

Something I have observed over the years is that Libertarianism is pretty ironic in true practice. While preaching individualism and liberty, anyone who deviates from 100% rank and file lock step with the doctrine principles is stoned and persecuted as not worthy, even to the point of wanting excommunication from the public square. While the principles are sound, the true example in practice is hypocritical and anti-individualism. It's just like the Constitutional party claiming they "support Constitutional freedom of religion" just as long as it is a "recognized form of Christianity".

I've found that people who espouse a belief in the Non-Aggression principle are often some of the most passive-aggressive people you'll ever meet.

[ATruepatriot]

Ron Paul, Rand Paul and even Justin Amash have deviated from the libertarian philosophy and all are still beloved by libertarians.

And they are only given a pass for imperfection because they are useful tools to further one's own personal interests. Everyone else is held to a strict non-individualistic doctrine checklist when being judged by the "individuals". As soon as these representatives are no longer useful to further self interest they will be stoned, persecuted, and excommunicated just like everyone else impure.

I think you run into problems when your ideology in totality threatens the individual freedoms of those libertarians. And who would blame them for reacting to the loss of their freedom. Also just because individuals react in a certain way to certain behaviour doesn't make em the mobs. Tigers for example are very individualistic and they all react the same way to someone pulling their tails.

Sure... Because these Tigers are only concerned about threats to their own tails, they could care less about other Tigers or even the future survival of the species it's self.

[ATruepatriot]

I've found that people who espouse a belief in the Non-Aggression principle are often some of the most passive-aggressive people you'll ever meet.

I see that too, so many violent physical threats over the years from those who do believe in it.

[juleswin]

And they are only given a pass for imperfection because they are useful tools to further one's own personal interests. Everyone else is held to a strict non-individualistic doctrine checklist when being judged by the "individuals". As soon as these representatives are no longer useful to further self interest they will be stoned, persecuted, and excommunicated just like everyone else impure.



Sure... Because these Tigers are only concerned about threats to their own tails, they could care less about other Tigers or even the future survival of the species it's self.

Remember when Ron tried to use the UN to get his domain back? he got an earful from the faithful for trying that. I think for the most part many libertarians are very supportive when he does something in line with that principle, fairly silent when he deviates a little and fairly angry when he deviates a lot. Which I think is very normal for even a individualist group like libertarians.

[juleswin]

Passive aggression is not that different from microaggression. Its annoying but doesn't violate the NAP. Maybe we can create a safe zone for people that can't handle a little passive aggression

[angelatc]

But Paul, a libertarian-leaning senator from Kentucky who has grown close with Trump, said Amash got it all wrong. He called the Mueller report the “antithesis of libertarianism.”

“I actually think the libertarian position on the investigation is ― you know, libertarians, we’ve been very, very critical of the intelligence community having too much power, including congressman Amash has said, you know, really you should have to get a warrant before you get an American’s records,” Paul told HuffPost

The position that the intelligence community abused their power does not contradict the position that Trump attempted to obstruct the investigation

[nikcers]

The position that the intelligence community abused their power does not contradict the position that Trump attempted to obstruct the investigation

The investigation started from a lie and lies were used in order to circumvent people's constitutional rights. Its like Trump was getting attacked by a giant boot and he tried to defend himself from it. There is no way someone who is for limited government would approve of the government boot being used to stamp people out it disagrees with.

[angelatc]

Anybody can be wrong on anything and good people can differ on things details for which not in full view yet. In an Amash vs MAGA evaluation, one key metric would be who has track record of having pro-liberty principles and direction. Overall Amash appears much more pro-liberty than Israel-First pro-war neoconservative funded GOP-Adelson wing and the neocons cabal it is surrounded by.

This. I don't agree with anybody on everything. But I did not file for divorce the first time my husband and I voted for different candidates. I certainly don't understand abandoning Amash over his opinion here. But people are gonna people I guess

[PierzStyx]

“I actually think the libertarian position on the investigation is ― you know, libertarians, we’ve been very, very critical of the intelligence community having too much power, including congressman Amash has said, you know, really you should have to get a warrant before you get an American’s records,” Paul told HuffPost

How would he know? According to his own words he is not a libertarian.

Pure libertarians, [Rand Paul] says, believe the market should dictate policy on nearly everything from the environment to health care. Paul has lately said he would not leave abortion to the states, he doesn't believe in legalizing drugs like marijuana and cocaine, he'd support federal drug laws, he'd vote to support Kentucky's coal interests and he'd be tough on national security.

"They thought all along that they could call me a libertarian and hang that label around my neck like an albatross, but I'm not a libertarian," Paul says between Lasik surgeries at his medical office, where his campaign is headquartered, with a few desks crammed between treatment rooms.

http://content.time.com/time/politic...#ixzz1yjNZ8V8Q

I don't for a minute believe that a guy who believes in supporting the national-security deep state, supports the War on Drugs -which is really a war on basic liberty- who believes the government has the right to tell you what medications you can or cannot use and then beat, cage, or kill you for using them without Big Brother's permission, who wants to use the national government to extend socialized privileges to major corporations using funds extorted form the public, who has lovingly pledged his loyalty to Party over principle, who himself has denied he is a libertarian, I doubt such a person even knows what the libertarian position on anything is. It isn't surprising though, Rand has always put his political career ahead of supporting basic ideals of liberty and freedom.

[angelatc]

The investigation started from a lie and lies were used in order to circumvent people's constitutional rights. Its like Trump was getting attacked by a giant boot and he tried to defend himself from it. There is no way someone who is for limited government would approve of the government boot being used to stamp people out it disagrees with.

It can be said 100 different ways, but I see two different issues. One is that the investigation should not have happened. But it did, and Congress authorized it.

The second issue is if Trump tried to interfere with that investigation.

He won't get a pass on the second matter no matter what happened on the first. Watergate and the Lewinsky scandal are evidence of that.

Amash is not some anti-liberty trojan horse because he believes in the rule of law.

[Superfluous Man]

The investigation started from a lie and lies were used in order to circumvent people's constitutional rights. Its like Trump was getting attacked by a giant boot and he tried to defend himself from it. There is no way someone who is for limited government would approve of the government boot being used to stamp people out it disagrees with.

Can you quote Amash approving of what you're calling the government boot?

[juleswin]

The investigation started from a lie and lies were used in order to circumvent people's constitutional rights. Its like Trump was getting attacked by a giant boot and he tried to defend himself from it. There is no way someone who is for limited government would approve of the government boot being used to stamp people out it disagrees with.

Its not like getting attacked with a boot. The result would have been exactly the same if no obstruction happened. Sadly to say I will bring up this saying into the conversation "but if one is innocent, there is nothing to hide". I believe wholeheartedly that he did not collude with Russia and being threatened with a boot should not cause him to obstruct justice.

Lemme say it again, he was being investigated and not hunted down with a boot to be beaten with. Looking at the end result, it seems like his actions to "defend" himself ended up making things worse for himself.

[donnay]

If Amash wants justice how come he is not concerned with the democrats obstruction, the FBI, the CIA or better yet, Hillary Clinton's obstruction?

[PursuePeace]

It isn't surprising though, Rand has always put his political career ahead of supporting basic ideals of liberty and freedom.

[juleswin]

How would he know? According to his own words he is not a libertarian.



I don't for a minute believe that a guy who believes in supporting the national-security deep state, supports the War on Drugs -which is really a war on basic liberty- who believes the government has the right to tell you what medications you can or cannot use and then beat, cage, or kill you for using them without Big Brother's permission, who wants to use the national government to extend socialized privileges to major corporations using funds extorted form the public, who has lovingly pledged his loyalty to Party over principle, who himself has denied he is a libertarian, I doubt such a person even knows what the libertarian position on anything is. It isn't surprising though, Rand has always put his political career ahead of supporting basic ideals of liberty and freedom.

I think Rand has been playing a balancing act between principles and party. I wish he would side more with principle but then again but I fear his goal is to win in politics and that would collapse that goal of his.

[nikcers]

Can you quote Amash approving of what you're calling the government boot?

The whole call for impeachment using this investigation as the reason. Anything born from this fake 35 million dollar investigation should automatically be considered unconstitutional and because of all the constitutional games they played they belong in jail.

[ATruepatriot]

Remember when Ron tried to use the UN to get his domain back? he got an earful from the faithful for trying that. I think for the most part many libertarians are very supportive when he does something in line with that principle, fairly silent when he deviates a little and fairly angry when he deviates a lot. Which I think is very normal for even a individualist group like libertarians.

Only because they were concerned for their own tails and strict doctrine of self interest above even Ron Paul and trust in his wisdom. This is exactly what I observe.

[Superfluous Man]

The whole call for impeachment using this investigation as the reason. Anything born from this fake 35 million dollar investigation should automatically be considered unconstitutional and because of all the constitutional games they played they belong in jail.

Anything? So because of the impropriety of the investigation Trump has a blank check to do anything at all, no matter what it is, and as long as it's a result of this investigation it's automatically ok?

Can't you consider the possibility that Amash could both oppose the "government boot" that you see at work in this investigation and also oppose Trump's response to it without any inconsistency?

[jon4liberty]

How would he know? According to his own words he is not a libertarian.



I don't for a minute believe that a guy who believes in supporting the national-security deep state, supports the War on Drugs -which is really a war on basic liberty- who believes the government has the right to tell you what medications you can or cannot use and then beat, cage, or kill you for using them without Big Brother's permission, who wants to use the national government to extend socialized privileges to major corporations using funds extorted form the public, who has lovingly pledged his loyalty to Party over principle, who himself has denied he is a libertarian, I doubt such a person even knows what the libertarian position on anything is. It isn't surprising though, Rand has always put his political career ahead of supporting basic ideals of liberty and freedom.

Good luck advancing liberty. One term, no allies, no advancement of liberty would be your political results.