SR 106-07: Censuring and condemning Chief Justice Windjammer.... (Failed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

tbf impeachment WAS discussed in the immediate aftermath of the decision, so I don't think "Nobody was plotting to overthrow you" is exactly accurate.

I guess if I misunderstood the difference between "constitutional impeachment" and "coup d'état" as Windjammer seems to, I would be confused, too.

An impeachment for the sake of "effecting a desired ruling" is while not a coup, certainly would qualify as an attack on the independence of the judiciary branch of government.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

tbf impeachment WAS discussed in the immediate aftermath of the decision, so I don't think "Nobody was plotting to overthrow you" is exactly accurate.

I guess if I misunderstood the difference between "constitutional impeachment" and "coup d'état" as Windjammer seems to, I would be confused, too.

An impeachment for the sake of "effecting a desired ruling" is while not a coup, certainly would qualify as an attack on the independence of the judiciary branch of government.

I'm not sure where that language is coming from, but I certainly never once advocated for that or a similar position. Regardless, if people want to follow a constitutional procedure to remove someone for whatever reason, let them try. If the case is weak or perceived as biased or as being pursued for the wrong reason, it will fail. Now if someone were to try to remove Windjammer through illegal means, he would certainly have legitimate grounds for his many, many, complaints. But nobody has done or has even contemplated doing that to my knowledge.

This censure is all about Windjammer's conduct, and I certainly believe he has, himself, built an airtight case that he deserves reproach for his bizarre outbursts and behavior unbecoming of someone in his position.
He should apologize to Atlasia and should promise not to utilize Discord leakers again to attempt to find dirt on his perceived enemies. If he does that, I will drop the issue.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

tbf impeachment WAS discussed in the immediate aftermath of the decision, so I don't think "Nobody was plotting to overthrow you" is exactly accurate.

I guess if I misunderstood the difference between "constitutional impeachment" and "coup d'état" as Windjammer seems to, I would be confused, too.

An impeachment for the sake of "effecting a desired ruling" is while not a coup, certainly would qualify as an attack on the independence of the judiciary branch of government.

I'm not sure where that language is coming from, but I certainly never once advocated for that or a similar position. Regardless, if people want to follow a constitutional procedure to remove someone for whatever reason, let them try. If the case is weak or perceived as biased or as being pursued for the wrong reason, it will fail. Now if someone were to try to remove Windjammer through illegal means, he would certainly have legitimate grounds for his many, many, complaints. But nobody has done or has even contemplated doing that to my knowledge.

This censure is all about Windjammer's conduct, and I certainly believe he has, himself, built an airtight case that he deserves reproach for his bizarre outbursts and behavior unbecoming of someone in his position.
He should apologize to Atlasia and should promise not to utilize Discord leakers again to attempt to find dirt on his perceived enemies. If he does that, I will drop the issue.

I believe Dwarven Dragon was saying so publicly with regards to impeachment for a results oriented justification. In terms of what Windjammer perceived as such, with this filtering out and around, even if it not from you, it is not unreasonable to be of a mind that there was a direct threat against the independence of the judiciary during that period.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

tbf impeachment WAS discussed in the immediate aftermath of the decision, so I don't think "Nobody was plotting to overthrow you" is exactly accurate.

I guess if I misunderstood the difference between "constitutional impeachment" and "coup d'état" as Windjammer seems to, I would be confused, too.

An impeachment for the sake of "effecting a desired ruling" is while not a coup, certainly would qualify as an attack on the independence of the judiciary branch of government.

I'm not sure where that language is coming from, but I certainly never once advocated for that or a similar position. Regardless, if people want to follow a constitutional procedure to remove someone for whatever reason, let them try. If the case is weak or perceived as biased or as being pursued for the wrong reason, it will fail. Now if someone were to try to remove Windjammer through illegal means, he would certainly have legitimate grounds for his many, many, complaints. But nobody has done or has even contemplated doing that to my knowledge.

This censure is all about Windjammer's conduct, and I certainly believe he has, himself, built an airtight case that he deserves reproach for his bizarre outbursts and behavior unbecoming of someone in his position.
He should apologize to Atlasia and should promise not to utilize Discord leakers again to attempt to find dirt on his perceived enemies. If he does that, I will drop the issue.

I believe Dwarven Dragon was saying so publicly with regards to impeachment for a results oriented justification. In terms of what Windjammer perceived as such, with his filtering out and around, even if it not from you, it is not unreasonable to be of a mind that there was a direct threat against the independence of the judiciary during that period.

Maybe, but I'm not really concerned about piecing together the puzzle of Windjammer's thoughts and emotions. The only thing material to this case is his actions. As I said, I would accept the aforementioned apology and promise to refrain from illicit Discord activity as a possible resolution.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

tbf impeachment WAS discussed in the immediate aftermath of the decision, so I don't think "Nobody was plotting to overthrow you" is exactly accurate.

I guess if I misunderstood the difference between "constitutional impeachment" and "coup d'état" as Windjammer seems to, I would be confused, too.

An impeachment for the sake of "effecting a desired ruling" is while not a coup, certainly would qualify as an attack on the independence of the judiciary branch of government.

I'm not sure where that language is coming from, but I certainly never once advocated for that or a similar position. Regardless, if people want to follow a constitutional procedure to remove someone for whatever reason, let them try. If the case is weak or perceived as biased or as being pursued for the wrong reason, it will fail. Now if someone were to try to remove Windjammer through illegal means, he would certainly have legitimate grounds for his many, many, complaints. But nobody has done or has even contemplated doing that to my knowledge.

This censure is all about Windjammer's conduct, and I certainly believe he has, himself, built an airtight case that he deserves reproach for his bizarre outbursts and behavior unbecoming of someone in his position.
He should apologize to Atlasia and should promise not to utilize Discord leakers again to attempt to find dirt on his perceived enemies. If he does that, I will drop the issue.

I believe Dwarven Dragon was saying so publicly with regards to impeachment for a results oriented justification. In terms of what Windjammer perceived as such, with his filtering out and around, even if it not from you, it is not unreasonable to be of a mind that there was a direct threat against the independence of the judiciary during that period.

No? The thread I created was to urge the Senate to undertake impeachment proceedings. Impeachment is a constitutional process, and I still support the Senate using said process. While I did initially support impeaching WJ as a means of changing the ruling, once it became clear the ruling was unanimous my position became impeaching him over his threats, a position I still hold. Regardless of the reasoning however, the impeachment would be constitutional:

to impeach the President, Vice President, Justices and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, and other officers of this government for high crimes and gross negligence.;

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the Republic of Atlasia, shall be removed from office on Impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

The constitution does not provide a comprehensive definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" or "high crimes and gross negligence", therefore the Senate is left to define such terms and can impeach for any reason it sees fit, including "gross negligence" in letting a probable criminal get away with their actions or the "high crime" of threats from the bench.


-----

However, I do find the censure proposal to be a fair compromise to provide action and closure on the issue given the relative lack of support for impeachment and therefore would support censure if I were a Senator.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

I endorse a Nay vote on this very ridiculous anti-LT resolution. The pro-LT vote is a Nay vote.

[fhtagn]

While Windjammer and I have always had our disagreements, I don't think I can think of any obvious situations in which he should be condemned as Chief Justice, and it's pretty shameful that he's being unfairly smeared in this manner.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

While Windjammer and I have always had our disagreements, I don't think I can think of any obvious situations in which he should be condemned as Chief Justice, and it's pretty shameful that he's being unfairly smeared in this manner.

This is the post at issue: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=467201.msg8297364#msg8297364

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I endorse a Nay vote on this very ridiculous anti-LT resolution. The pro-LT vote is a Nay vote.

Ah the unrepentant criminal shows his face. Quite frankly I shudder to think of what crime you will commit next, given whatever it is, WJ will advocate pardoning you of it, as he has shown he is no longer impartial.

[fhtagn]

While Windjammer and I have always had our disagreements, I don't think I can think of any obvious situations in which he should be condemned as Chief Justice, and it's pretty shameful that he's being unfairly smeared in this manner.

This is the post at issue: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=467201.msg8297364#msg8297364

I still don't really see too much of an issue. This is just dumb Atlasia drama.

[Pericles]

windjammer is a credit to the Supreme Court and Atlasia, and the only type of resolution I'd support is one thanking him for his service. Let's take out this trash.

[OBD]

I endorse a Nay vote on this very ridiculous anti-LT resolution. The pro-LT vote is a Nay vote.

brb voting aye

In all seriousness, though, this has gotten pretty ridiculous. The simple fact of the matter is that 1) Windjammer acted impartially and 2) Windjammer did not act alone. To cast aspersion on Atlasia's one nonpartisan institution because they didn't rule your way is completely inappropriate, and seeing how WJ's opponents grasp at straws for reasons to scapegoat him makes me understand why he reacted the way he did (though ofc that was entirely inappropriate and merits an apology). Can we get over this hissyfit and back to work lmao

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

tbf impeachment WAS discussed in the immediate aftermath of the decision, so I don't think "Nobody was plotting to overthrow you" is exactly accurate.

I guess if I misunderstood the difference between "constitutional impeachment" and "coup d'état" as Windjammer seems to, I would be confused, too.

An impeachment for the sake of "effecting a desired ruling" is while not a coup, certainly would qualify as an attack on the independence of the judiciary branch of government.

I'm not sure where that language is coming from, but I certainly never once advocated for that or a similar position. Regardless, if people want to follow a constitutional procedure to remove someone for whatever reason, let them try. If the case is weak or perceived as biased or as being pursued for the wrong reason, it will fail. Now if someone were to try to remove Windjammer through illegal means, he would certainly have legitimate grounds for his many, many, complaints. But nobody has done or has even contemplated doing that to my knowledge.

This censure is all about Windjammer's conduct, and I certainly believe he has, himself, built an airtight case that he deserves reproach for his bizarre outbursts and behavior unbecoming of someone in his position.
He should apologize to Atlasia and should promise not to utilize Discord leakers again to attempt to find dirt on his perceived enemies. If he does that, I will drop the issue.

I believe Dwarven Dragon was saying so publicly with regards to impeachment for a results oriented justification. In terms of what Windjammer perceived as such, with his filtering out and around, even if it not from you, it is not unreasonable to be of a mind that there was a direct threat against the independence of the judiciary during that period.

No? The thread I created was to urge the Senate to undertake impeachment proceedings. Impeachment is a constitutional process, and I still support the Senate using said process. While I did initially support impeaching WJ as a means of changing the ruling, once it became clear the ruling was unanimous my position became impeaching him over his threats, a position I still hold. Regardless of the reasoning however, the impeachment would be constitutional:

to impeach the President, Vice President, Justices and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, and other officers of this government for high crimes and gross negligence.;

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the Republic of Atlasia, shall be removed from office on Impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

The constitution does not provide a comprehensive definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" or "high crimes and gross negligence", therefore the Senate is left to define such terms and can impeach for any reason it sees fit, including "gross negligence" in letting a probable criminal get away with their actions or the "high crime" of threats from the bench.


-----

However, I do find the censure proposal to be a fair compromise to provide action and closure on the issue given the relative lack of support for impeachment and therefore would support censure if I were a Senator.

I think you have made my point though, "until I learned it was unanimous", at the time that Windjammer made his comments, that was prior to the unanimous aspect being disclosed by ILV and BK in public.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

tbf impeachment WAS discussed in the immediate aftermath of the decision, so I don't think "Nobody was plotting to overthrow you" is exactly accurate.

I guess if I misunderstood the difference between "constitutional impeachment" and "coup d'état" as Windjammer seems to, I would be confused, too.

An impeachment for the sake of "effecting a desired ruling" is while not a coup, certainly would qualify as an attack on the independence of the judiciary branch of government.

I'm not sure where that language is coming from, but I certainly never once advocated for that or a similar position. Regardless, if people want to follow a constitutional procedure to remove someone for whatever reason, let them try. If the case is weak or perceived as biased or as being pursued for the wrong reason, it will fail. Now if someone were to try to remove Windjammer through illegal means, he would certainly have legitimate grounds for his many, many, complaints. But nobody has done or has even contemplated doing that to my knowledge.

This censure is all about Windjammer's conduct, and I certainly believe he has, himself, built an airtight case that he deserves reproach for his bizarre outbursts and behavior unbecoming of someone in his position.
He should apologize to Atlasia and should promise not to utilize Discord leakers again to attempt to find dirt on his perceived enemies. If he does that, I will drop the issue.

I believe Dwarven Dragon was saying so publicly with regards to impeachment for a results oriented justification. In terms of what Windjammer perceived as such, with his filtering out and around, even if it not from you, it is not unreasonable to be of a mind that there was a direct threat against the independence of the judiciary during that period.

No? The thread I created was to urge the Senate to undertake impeachment proceedings. Impeachment is a constitutional process, and I still support the Senate using said process. While I did initially support impeaching WJ as a means of changing the ruling, once it became clear the ruling was unanimous my position became impeaching him over his threats, a position I still hold. Regardless of the reasoning however, the impeachment would be constitutional:

to impeach the President, Vice President, Justices and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, and other officers of this government for high crimes and gross negligence.;

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the Republic of Atlasia, shall be removed from office on Impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

The constitution does not provide a comprehensive definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" or "high crimes and gross negligence", therefore the Senate is left to define such terms and can impeach for any reason it sees fit, including "gross negligence" in letting a probable criminal get away with their actions or the "high crime" of threats from the bench.


-----

However, I do find the censure proposal to be a fair compromise to provide action and closure on the issue given the relative lack of support for impeachment and therefore would support censure if I were a Senator.

I think you have made my point though, "until I learned it was unanimous", at the time that Windjammer made his comments, that was prior to the unanimous aspect being disclosed by ILV and BK in public.

Fair, but there is no excuse for a judge to violate their oath of impartiality, and in making his threats I believe windjammer did just that.

[Sestak]

[windjammer]

I do appreciate the support from across the aisle.

Let's be honest, the problem isn't my "actions" but fundamentally Cranehusband's.


He's fundamentally a high school bully who sh**ttalks people behind their backs, is always in denial about his actions and viciously attacks any perceived opposition to him.

Crane, you have been making a ton of vicious personal against me or on discord, calling me some kind of mental psycho, and now accusing me of doxxing people. I have dealt with many bullies like you in my long atlasian career and all of them are gone, I am still standing. You're going to lose progressively all your friends by your self-imploding and unrepentant personality.

So continue to use the senate to make these pointless situations if that reassures your ego. "Oh Windjammer has been mean to me, ouin ouin ouin,...". For someone who wants portray himself as some kind of tough revolutionaries, this is really hilarious to watch.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

I do appreciate the support from across the aisle.

Let's be honest, the problem isn't my "actions" but fundamentally Cranehusband's.


He's fundamentally a high school bully who sh**ttalks people behind their backs, is always in denial about his actions and viciously attacks any perceived opposition to him.

Crane, you have been making a ton of vicious personal against me or on discord, calling me some kind of mental psycho, and now accusing me of doxxing people. I have dealt with many bullies like you in my long atlasian career and all of them are gone, I am still standing. You're going to lose progressively all your friends by your self-imploding and unrepentant personality.

So continue to use the senate to make these pointless situations if that reassures your ego. "Oh Windjammer has been mean to me, ouin ouin ouin,...". For someone who wants portray himself as some kind of tough revolutionaries, this is really hilarious to watch.

Words, words, and more words. I'm glad you've found a few people in this thread who prefer the status quo to having competent and emotionally sound officeholders in Atlasia. I note that one of them, who recommended your latest delusional screed, is the very person who you tried your hardest to help avoid consequences for his alleged actions. Your threats mean nothing. In fact, I welcome them. It's just more evidence that you are unable to respond to criticism with anything but that. Make no mistake: in the future, I'll be making sure anyone unlucky enough to be involved in a case under your purview knows about your past behaviors and actions and how they may pervert the course of justice. Lastly, you should know it wasn't even me who wrote this bill, I elected to sponsor it. So there are more people than you may realize who are fed up with your style. Perhaps this can be a wake-up call. Or you can just keep arguing in this thread until the end of time.

[windjammer]

I do appreciate the support from across the aisle.

Let's be honest, the problem isn't my "actions" but fundamentally Cranehusband's.


He's fundamentally a high school bully who sh**ttalks people behind their backs, is always in denial about his actions and viciously attacks any perceived opposition to him.

Crane, you have been making a ton of vicious personal against me or on discord, calling me some kind of mental psycho, and now accusing me of doxxing people. I have dealt with many bullies like you in my long atlasian career and all of them are gone, I am still standing. You're going to lose progressively all your friends by your self-imploding and unrepentant personality.

So continue to use the senate to make these pointless situations if that reassures your ego. "Oh Windjammer has been mean to me, ouin ouin ouin,...". For someone who wants portray himself as some kind of tough revolutionaries, this is really hilarious to watch.

Words, words, and more words. I'm glad you've found a few people in this thread who prefer the status quo to having competent and emotionally sound officeholders in Atlasia. I note that one of them, who recommended your latest delusional screed, is the very person who you tried your hardest to help avoid consequences for his alleged actions. Your threats mean nothing. In fact, I welcome them. It's just more evidence that you are unable to respond to criticism with anything but that. Make no mistake: in the future, I'll be making sure anyone unlucky enough to be involved in a case under your purview knows about your past behaviors and actions and how they may pervert the course of justice. Lastly, you should know it wasn't even me who wrote this bill, I elected to sponsor it. So there are more people than you may realize who are fed up with your style. Perhaps this can be a wake-up call. Or you can just keep arguing in this thread until the end of time.

This will be my final statement until the vote:

You are a cry baby and a high school bully trying portray yourself as some kind of tough guy.


 

[fhtagn]

I love me some sassy windjammer

[Never Made it to Graceland]

I do appreciate the support from across the aisle.

Let's be honest, the problem isn't my "actions" but fundamentally Cranehusband's.


He's fundamentally a high school bully who sh**ttalks people behind their backs, is always in denial about his actions and viciously attacks any perceived opposition to him.

Crane, you have been making a ton of vicious personal against me or on discord, calling me some kind of mental psycho, and now accusing me of doxxing people. I have dealt with many bullies like you in my long atlasian career and all of them are gone, I am still standing. You're going to lose progressively all your friends by your self-imploding and unrepentant personality.

So continue to use the senate to make these pointless situations if that reassures your ego. "Oh Windjammer has been mean to me, ouin ouin ouin,...". For someone who wants portray himself as some kind of tough revolutionaries, this is really hilarious to watch.

Words, words, and more words. I'm glad you've found a few people in this thread who prefer the status quo to having competent and emotionally sound officeholders in Atlasia. I note that one of them, who recommended your latest delusional screed, is the very person who you tried your hardest to help avoid consequences for his alleged actions. Your threats mean nothing. In fact, I welcome them. It's just more evidence that you are unable to respond to criticism with anything but that. Make no mistake: in the future, I'll be making sure anyone unlucky enough to be involved in a case under your purview knows about your past behaviors and actions and how they may pervert the course of justice. Lastly, you should know it wasn't even me who wrote this bill, I elected to sponsor it. So there are more people than you may realize who are fed up with your style. Perhaps this can be a wake-up call. Or you can just keep arguing in this thread until the end of time.

This will be my final statement until the vote:

You are a cry baby and a high school bully trying portray yourself as some kind of tough guy.


 

Your only answer to allegations of misconduct is personal threats and whining about how persecuted you are. You're the last person who has room to call anybody else a crybaby or bully. As I said earlier in the thread, you obviously lack the reflective and emotional capacity to admit any wrongdoing, and we are now well into the second page of proof for that claim.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Windjammer on his threats rn:


It's shameful that some senators apparently consider that to be an acceptable excuse.

[Continential]

Windjammer on his threats rn:


It's shameful that some senators apparently consider that to be an acceptable excuse.

It's a shame that people ignore Spark's behavior towards women and you telling Jews that they will burn in hell.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

This thread is turning about as well as I predicted.

Anyway, it is the Senate's job to consider resolutions and not mine. I will reiterate my confidence in the Chief Justice, as someone who's had my fair share of encounters with LT. I do not believe he used appropriate language on the bench, but I also don't believe this warrants a censure.

[WD]

Let’s turn the page on this, motioning for a final vote.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Yeah, not a senator but for the love of God bring this to a final vote. This conversation is not going to end well.