Cable Forum - U.S Election 2020

Page 25 of 26

« First

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - U.S Election 2020 (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33709208)

1andrew1

11-01-2021 12:11

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36066184)

Earth to planet Andrew. Pointless getting into a debate with you if that's your starting point.

That's my analysis of the evidence.

papa smurf

11-01-2021 12:16

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066181)

Eh? The Democrats ensured a smooth handover and attended Trump's inauguration.

The Democrats have not done everything they possibly could to remove a democratically elected president. Far from it. You only have to look at Trump's call for a march on Capitol Hill and phone calls to find votes to understand what everything possible looks like.

Yes, they've held Trump to account and impeached him but thy would be negligent not to have done so. That's a world apart from Trump's efforts.

---------- Post added at 11:45 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------

Playing the man and not the ball?

---------- Post added at 11:46 ---------- Previous post was at 11:45 ----------

Exactly. False equivalence.

stating a fact.

Mad Max

11-01-2021 12:16

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Playing the man and not the ball?

Did he say the same thing about the BLM rioters?

1andrew1

11-01-2021 12:25

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36066190)

Did he say the same thing about the BLM rioters?

Why should Arnie criticise Trump for encouraging a march on Capitol Hill by the BLM when Trump didn't do such a thing. That would be daft.

papa smurf

11-01-2021 12:35

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066191)

Why should Arnie criticise Trump for encouraging a march on Capitol Hill by the BLM when Trump didn't do such a thing. That would be daft.

Playing the fool not the ball?

Mick	11-01-2021 12:42

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36066166)

They introduced a false idea, spreading it by every available means (Fox, Twitter, etc.). Then, once people are talking about it, and some believe it, they cited its prevalence as evidence that it might be true - this is the trick by which the propaganda and lies they spread validates itself.

I don’t remember before Trump’s inauguration the losing Candidate refusing to accept the result, or gee-ing up her supporters to march on Congress?

No, she just and the DNC cooked up a fake Russian dossier to get Trump, after he was in office. You have a poor or selective memory Hugh. :rolleyes:

Carth

11-01-2021 12:50

Re: U.S Election 2020

Sometimes American politicians excel themselves and make that Kim Jon Uggboots feller look honest ;)

I find it quite amusing to be honest, and think Mothercare could make a fortune with some shops over there :D

Mr K	11-01-2021 12:52

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066193)

No, she just and the DNC cooked up a fake Russian dossier to get Trump, after he was in office. You have a poor or selective memory Hugh. :rolleyes:

Honest question Mick, do you actually believe any of this ? Where do you get your information from ? Please post links to your links/evidence from sites, as is customary in the current affairs forum. I'd be most interested to see your sources.

Strange how 'crooked' Hillary was never locked up, charged or arrested for anything. It's almost as if she was innocent except for maybe bad choice of spouse...

Mick	11-01-2021 12:57

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066181)

Eh? The Democrats ensured a smooth handover and attended Trump's inauguration.

The Democrats have not done everything they possibly could to remove a democratically elected president. Far from it. You only have to look at Trump's call for a march on Capitol Hill and phone calls to find votes to understand what everything possible looks like.

Yes, they've held Trump to account and impeached him but thy would be negligent not to have done so. That's a world apart from Trump's efforts.

---------- Post added at 11:45 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------

Playing the man and not the ball?

---------- Post added at 11:46 ---------- Previous post was at 11:45 ----------

Exactly. False equivalence.

I cannot believe you wrote this utter bullshit.

The DNC and Crooked Hillary, in 2016, paid for a fake Russian dossier, in the sole aim of sparking an FBI Investigation to get Trump after he has entered office, to get him out of office. They almost succeeded. You should not paint the Democrats in good light, because they are rotten to the core. They reap what they sow, they started this in 2016 by never accepting the Trump win. So wtf should we accept these Democrat *******s now?

As I said much earlier on, I’m playing from their stinking rule book.

---------- Post added at 12:57 ---------- Previous post was at 12:52 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36066195)

Honest question Mick, do you actually believe any of this ? Where do you get your information from ? Please post links to your evidence from sites as is customary in the current affairs forum. I'd be most interested to see your sources.

Strange how 'crooked' Hillary was never locked up, charged or arrested for anything. It's almost as if she was innocent except for maybe bad choice of spouse...

Yes I do believe it, because Senate Intelligence Committee released a long report detailing the crookedness of the DNC and Hillary, they paid for that fake Russian intelligence document.

1andrew1

11-01-2021 12:59

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066196)

I'm not painting anyone in a good light, I'm stating the simple fact that the Democrats did not do all they could to win the 2016 election and your post does not speak to this point. Did the Democrats phone up asking for more votes to be found? No. Did they encourage their supporters to march on Capitol Hill? No. Did Hillary Clinton Tweet before and after the 2016 election that it was stolen from her? No.

Mick	11-01-2021 13:03

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066199)

But instead her crookedness decided to try get Trump after he entered office...

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/us...ssier.amp.html

1andrew1

11-01-2021 13:08

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36066195)

Certainly, questions have to be asked of Trump and WikiLeaks. Who apart from Trump supporters can forget the infamous Trump-Putin Helsinki press conference in 2018 at which Mr Trump sided with Mr Putin over his own intelligence community, denying Russia’s involvement in the WikiLeaks about Hillary Clinton?

jfman

11-01-2021 13:12

Re: U.S Election 2020

I'm curious as to how America steps back from this madness where such distrust exists between both sides. Since when in a democracy were people you simply disagreed with the enemy?

Let's be honest most political parties are elites and to some extent corporate shills. They might nudge the dial slightly left or slightly to the right. Tax might go up the odd penny here or there. Or come down. What the state should do, or not do, is the basis for democracy - when does that become framed as eroding freedom? In four years time (two in the House) people get to go to the ballot box and change the dynamics all over again if they disagee.

1andrew1

11-01-2021 13:12

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066200)

But instead her crookedness decided to try get Trump after he entered office...

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/us...ssier.amp.html

That report was indeed laughable! But it was paid for by a Republican donor who did not like Trump. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/u...elligence.html

Mick	11-01-2021 13:14

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066201)

But not in this thread. This has been covered at the time in several Trump topics. Stop diluting the topic. [Yes this is an instruction].

papa smurf

11-01-2021 13:46

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066199)

yes she did

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a9122986.html

Hugh	11-01-2021 14:00

Re: U.S Election 2020

Anyway, back to more current events...

https://gizmodo.com/every-deleted-pa...dat-1846032466

Quote:

Every Deleted Parler Post, Many With Users' Location Data, Has Been Archived

In the wake of the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol by scores of President Trump’s supporters, a lone researcher began an effort to catalogue the posts of social media users across Parler, a platform founded to provide conservative users a safe haven for uninhibited “free speech” — but which ultimately devolved into a hotbed of far-right conspiracy theories, unchecked racism, and death threats aimed at prominent politicians.

The researcher, who asked to be referred to by their Twitter handle, @donk_enby, began with the goal of archiving every post from January 6, the day of the Capitol riot; what she called a bevy of “very incriminating” evidence. According to the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, among others, Parler is one of a number of apps used by the insurrections to coordinate their breach of the Capitol, in a plan to overturn the 2020 election results and keep Donald Trump in power.

pip08456

11-01-2021 14:04

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36066207)

yes she did

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a9122986.html

Can you link to the tweet?

papa smurf

11-01-2021 14:12

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36066210)

Can you link to the tweet?

I can link your pedantry.

Mick	11-01-2021 14:32

Re: U.S Election 2020

BREAKING: German Chancellor, Angela Merkel calls Trump's permanent Twitter ban 'problematic' and says freedom of opinion is a fundamental right According to Daily Mail U.S

Mr K	11-01-2021 14:41

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066218)

BREAKING: German Chancellor, Angela Merkel calls Trump's permanent Twitter ban 'problematic' and says freedom of opinion is a fundamental right According to Daily Mail U.S

Yeah but she's part of the EU Superstate crooked conspiracy, we wouldn't want start listening to her would we ? ;)

1andrew1

11-01-2021 14:42

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066218)

BREAKING: German Chancellor, Angela Merkel calls Trump's permanent Twitter ban 'problematic' and says freedom of opinion is a fundamental right According to Daily Mail U.S

If someone important doesn't follow the rules of an influential social media platform, then if those rules aren't enforced then there's no point in having them.

The problematical issue is who decides the rules have been broken. If it's not the site owners, who is it?

He still access to the POTUS account though.

Chris

11-01-2021 14:48

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36066220)

Yeah but she's part of the EU Superstate crooked conspiracy, we wouldn't want start listening to her would we ? ;)

She’s East German, so she has lived experience of censorship as well as the awkward family history shared with all her compatriots. It doesn’t necessarily make her right, but it means we should listen very carefully.

Mick	11-01-2021 16:18

Re: U.S Election 2020

Twitter shares market value down 10% after banning Trump

---------- Post added at 14:55 ---------- Previous post was at 14:54 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36066220)

Yeah but she's part of the EU Superstate crooked conspiracy, we wouldn't want start listening to her would we ? ;)

Stop trolling Mr K. I’m not playing your stupid bullshit games.

---------- Post added at 16:18 ---------- Previous post was at 14:55 ----------

WIRE: Quick passage of Democrat plan on Trump removal blocked by House GOP

Chris

11-01-2021 16:23

Re: U.S Election 2020

I’m not sure they ever expected that to get through quickly. It looks like a ruse to force Republicans to protect Trump. The real strategy seems to be to take their time, let Biden get his feet under the table and do his first 100 days thing, then move on impeachment after that. They can’t eject him from office obviously, but if they succeed they can disqualify him from running again.

Damien

11-01-2021 16:41

Re: U.S Election 2020

Biden himself seems lukewarm on the idea as well. I don't think he wants it intruding on his Presidency.

The best idea seems to be a censure on his behaviour over the election results and then move on.

Mick	11-01-2021 16:48

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36066232)

They won't be able to do that either, it is a further judgement "after" impeachment conviction in the Senate, a conviction requires two thirds majority in the Senate, there isn't the numbers there.

---------- Post added at 16:48 ---------- Previous post was at 16:42 ----------

Twitter has lost $2.5 Billion in value on the stock exchange today.

1andrew1

11-01-2021 16:51

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36066236)

Would it be good strategically for the Democrats to let the pro-Trump and anti-Trump factions in the Republican Party fight each other on who will contest the 2024 election?

Barring Trump from standing for office via swift impeachment would only unify the Republican Party and enable it to rally around a non-Trump candidate.

If they do have another go at impeaching Trump, the closer to 2024 the better I would think, in order to cause maximum inconvenience to the Republican Party.

Mick	11-01-2021 17:10

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066240)

They cannot ban Trump running for office again they would have to succeed impeachment and only after then, make an additional judgment on banning him, it just won't happen without a heap of Republicans siding with the Democrats.

---------- Post added at 17:10 ---------- Previous post was at 17:02 ----------

BREAKING: @FBI now reports in a bulletin "Armed protests are being planned at all 50 state capitols from 16 January through at least 20 January, and at the US Capitol from 17 January through 20 January,” Source ABC.

1andrew1

11-01-2021 17:13

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066241)

Right, the 100-day wait but no longer makes sense then.

Try and impeach Trump once he's been selected would only unite the Republican Party behind him.

Mick	11-01-2021 17:34

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066241)

BREAKING: @FBI now reports in a bulletin "Armed protests are being planned at all 50 state capitols from 16 January through at least 20 January, and at the US Capitol from 17 January through 20 January,” Source ABC.

I think we're now heading towards civil war territory :erm:

---------- Post added at 17:34 ---------- Previous post was at 17:18 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066237)

Twitter has lost $2.5 Billion in value on the stock exchange today.

Twitter stock is down because banning Trump can show how much unprecedented power and overreach they have, they have certainly ensured that every country outside the US, (In the US, they have Section 230 protections) is going to potentially and severely regulate or replace them.

How do we fancy in the UK, allowing an ideological San Francisco company to control the BBC.

Would India be ok with Twitter having authority to completely de-platform Modi?

Damien

11-01-2021 17:47

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066244)

I think we're now heading towards civil war territory :erm:

Pretty much all the elements of the state are united against this including the GOP Senate. The FBI can put this to an end pretty quickly. They're already quite efficiently working though the suspects from last week and many of them are being arrested and being put on no fly lists.

I think this particular madness will end soon.

A metaphorical civil war within the GOP between the GOP establishment and the Trumpers is going to be more interesting.

1andrew1

11-01-2021 17:49

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066244)

I t
Twitter stock is down because banning Trump can show how much unprecedented power and overreach they have, they have certainly ensured that every country outside the US, (In the US, they have Section 230 protections) is going to potentially and severely regulate or replace them.

How do we fancy in the UK, allowing an ideological San Francisco company to control the BBC.

Would India be ok with Twitter having authority to completely de-platform Modi?

Twitter stock is down because Trump had 81m followers and was a voracious Tweeter and there's likely fewer active users since his personal account was closed. The huge number of followers and Tweets is probably Twitter overlooked his misdemeanours for so long.

Some want the BBC privatised and wouldn't mind who purchased it. The debate has been conducted many times on this and other forums.

Re banning Mundi from Twitter. If you have terms and conditions then someone has to decide if they've been breached. If not the site owners, then who?

---------- Post added at 17:49 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36066247)

Agreed.

Mick	11-01-2021 18:21

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36066247)

It won’t end because Trump folk won’t ever accept Biden as president and why should they when Democrats and their followings never accepted Trump’s win. Swings and roundabouts.

Damien

11-01-2021 19:07

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066256)

It won’t end because Trump folk won’t ever accept Biden as president and why should they when Democrats and their followings never accepted Trump’s win. Swings and roundabouts.

Whatever, they can not accept his win. It'll prove as fruitless as when people said 'Trump's not my President' when he so evidently was. They just can't be violent about it or off to jail for them.

jfman

11-01-2021 19:10

Re: U.S Election 2020

The early 2020s remoaners. It'll be a long 4 years.

1andrew1

11-01-2021 19:17

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066256)

It won’t end because Trump folk won’t ever accept Biden as president and why should they when Democrats and their followings never accepted Trump’s win. Swings and roundabouts.

As long as they don't break the law it's a non-issue.

Hugh	11-01-2021 19:20

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066270)

As long as they don't break the law it's a non-issue.

Yeh - about that...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

BREAKING: @FBI now reports in a bulletin "Armed protests are being planned at all 50 state capitols from 16 January through at least 20 January, and at the US Capitol from 17 January through 20 January,” Source ABC.

1andrew1

11-01-2021 22:23

Re: U.S Election 2020

Sad to see how this post-9/11 hero is going from hero to zero.

Quote:

New York State Bar Association considers removing Giuliani for telling MAGA rally crowd to use 'trial by combat' before they stormed Capitol

Donald Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani could face expulsion from the New York State Bar Association.

NYSBA announced Monday it is launching a probe into Giuliani's words inciting a crowd to use 'trial by combat' before it stormed the Capitol on Wednesday.

In condemning the riots, the NYSBA wrote in a statement 'the president did not act alone' and put part of the onus on Giuliani for 'inciting' the attack.

It also said they received hundreds of complaints regarding Giuliani's remarks and legal actions casting doubt on the integrity of the 2020 elections.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...al-combat.html

pip08456

12-01-2021 00:50

Re: U.S Election 2020

Armed group planning ‘huge uprising’ in DC if Trump removed by 25th amendment, according to report.

Quote:

The FBI believes an armed group is planning a “huge uprising” in Washington DC if Donald Trump is removed by the 25th amendment, according to a report.

Investigators have been told that if "Congress attempts to remove POTUS via the 25th Amendment a huge uprising will occur," says an FBI daily bulletin obtained by ABC News.

The FBI has also received information that pro-Trump extremists are also calling for the “storming” of state, federal and local government buildings and courthouses of the president is removed before Joe Biden’s inauguration.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1785617.html

Sephiroth

12-01-2021 13:14

Re: U.S Election 2020

Biden's view on gun control?

E.G:

Quote:

Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one.

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

The USA is one effed up country.

1andrew1

12-01-2021 13:22

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36066316)

Armed group planning ‘huge uprising’ in DC if Trump removed by 25th amendment, according to report.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1785617.html

I'm not sure the Democrats will want to be seen to be pandering to terrorists.

Hugh	12-01-2021 18:41

Re: U.S Election 2020

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...6d6_story.html

Quote:

FBI report warned of ‘war’ at Capitol, contradicting claims there was no indication of looming violence

A day before rioters stormed Congress, an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit internal warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and “war,” according to an internal document reviewed by The Washington Post that contradicts a senior official’s declaration the bureau had no intelligence indicating anyone at last week’s pro-Trump protest planned to do harm.

A situational information report approved for release the day before the U.S. Capitol riot painted a dire portrait of dangerous plans, including individuals sharing a map of the complex’s tunnels, and possible rally points for would-be conspirators to meet up in Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and South Carolina and head in groups to Washington.

“As of 5 January 2021, FBI Norfolk received information indicating calls for violence in response to ‘unlawful lockdowns’ to begin on 6 January 2021 in Washington. D.C.,” the document says. “An online thread discussed specific calls for violence to include stating ‘Be ready to fight. Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in, and blood from their BLM and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled. Get violent. Stop calling this a march, or rally, or a protest. Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die. NOTHING else will achieve this goal.”

Mick	12-01-2021 19:14

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066368)

I'm not sure the Democrats will want to be seen to be pandering to terrorists.

Why not - some of them did nothing while others championed the destruction and torching of many businesses during BLM protests in Portland and other cities, usually in their own districts, you see Democrat run cities are a crime ridden disgrace. What has happened to New York is depressing under Democrat rule. No worry, the next 4 years of Democrat control will see America get considerably worse.

---------- Post added at 19:14 ---------- Previous post was at 19:08 ----------

Oh and about that Facebook & Twitter banning Trump thing....

Uganda Government just blocked Facebook and Whatsapp and other social media sites in the country:

Quote:

@KagutaMuseveni
: ‘About the social platforms that blocked @NRMOnline users; these platforms should be used equitably, if you want to take any parts, then you can't operate in Uganda, because Uganda is our country, we can't accept them to decide who is good and who is bad.

Government of Uganda @GovUganda 28m ago
I apologize that @GovUganda has closed @Facebook in Uganda, this is very unfortunate but inevitable. If they are to operate here, they have to be equitable.’ #M7Address

Government of Uganda @GovUganda 32m ago
The President warns that if the social media channels like
@Facebook and @Twitter are not being friendly and equitable to some of the Ugandans, then there is no reason as to why we should have them operate here. @OfwonoOpondo #M7Address

Paul	12-01-2021 22:18

Re: U.S Election 2020

Well.... yes, but perhaps not for the reason you might think.

Quote:

The government of Uganda banned WhatsApp and Facebook, along with other social media platforms, to enforce a tax on the use of social media. Users are to be charged 200 shilling per day to access these services according to the new law set by parliament.

pip08456

12-01-2021 23:20

Re: U.S Election 2020

Senator Mitch McConnell, has told associates he believes President Trump committed impeachable offenses and that he is pleased that Democrats are moving to impeach him, believing that it will make it easier to purge him from the party!

Damien

13-01-2021 07:10

Re: U.S Election 2020

There are also rumours of more to come out with it becoming clear 'in the comes days/weeks'.

Mick	13-01-2021 07:43

Re: U.S Election 2020

Far stretch that McConnell said any of this at all. Fake News. Like other political pundits have said. I believe it when I see it. Siding with Democrat ****, would be costly to Republicans in the longer term.

---------- Post added at 07:43 ---------- Previous post was at 07:15 ----------

During Brett Kavanaugh hearing protests on Capital Hill were hot tempered and Democrat talk at the time, sounded no different to how Trump spoke last week. In 2018, Democrat Vice President-elect, Harris, summarised the protests:

Quote:

“It can be summarized as no rules, no decorum, no respect. And what we will do is make our case to the American people because they will rise up. The American people are on our side.”

Surely this was incitement to insurrection by Dems during Kavanaugh hearings?

Quote:

“This is a failure of this body to do what it has always said it is about which is be deliberative,” said Harris, widely considered a potential 2020 Democratic presidential contender.

Sephiroth

13-01-2021 09:03

Re: U.S Election 2020

The only "****" I've seen has been rioting at the Capitol a few days ago.

Chris

13-01-2021 09:39

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066458)

McConnell’s comments are reported in the NY Times. He’s well within his rights to demand a retraction or threaten a libel action - or even just issue a denial by press release - if their report does not in fact represent his views. I don’t think he will, because I think the NY Times is only publishing what it’s sure of.

Dick Cheney’s daughter, who is House GOP, will vote to impeach (as will several others). The NY Times believes 20 GOP senators would vote to convict Trump if he was impeached. Only 17 need do so to secure the 67% support required to convict.

The prize for moderate republicans appears to be the Senate’s ability to punish Trump by barring him from office. There are those who want to move on from Trump who believe the party will be unable to do so as long as he continues to threaten to run in 2024.

---------- Post added at 09:39 ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 ----------

YouTube becomes the latest to put the boot in to Trump:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55643774

His account is suspended for a minimum of 7 days for inciting violence contrary to their T&Cs.

Damien

13-01-2021 09:48

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36066465)

The Washington Post backed it up.

It's clearly McConnell 'letting it be known' without formally committing to it.

1andrew1

13-01-2021 10:13

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36066463)

The only "****" I've seen has been rioting at the Capitol a few days ago.

I don't think it's accurate to call anyone ****. The armed insurgents clearly felt they had a case to do what they did. They were wrong and were misled by fake news perpetuated by Trump and his media mates.

Unfortunately, there seems to be an issue in identifying what is fake news and what isn't, but it doesn't make them ****.

---------- Post added at 10:13 ---------- Previous post was at 10:12 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36066470)

The Washington Post backed it up.

It's clearly McConnell 'letting it be known' without formally committing to it.

Absolutely.

Sephiroth

13-01-2021 10:26

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066476)

There you go again, Andrew. Just as with Brexit, you're taking the other side's viewpoint. A thug is a thug, whether or not misled by Trump. And thugs are ****. Those invading the Capitol were largely **** - there might have been some weak minded individuals who might be described as "running dogs".

I note you didn't pull Mick up who called the Democrats "****".

TheDaddy

13-01-2021 10:28

Re: U.S Election 2020

I think the democrats are blinded by their hatred for donny, he'll be an open sore for the republican party that they should just allow to fester and rot

jfman

13-01-2021 10:34

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36066481)

In some respects I agree with Seph here. Part of me would welcome trouble around the inauguration as the fools will only self incriminate on social media, running around massless then they can all be rounded up and imprisoned. That way wider society would be better off than have a poisonous underbelly spreading disinformation for the next 4 years only to have to face up to fascism anyway.

1andrew1

13-01-2021 10:49

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36066481)

It's dehumanising to label any group **** whoever uses the label, be it you or Mick. My previous post said "call anyone" which covers Democrats and Republicans. When you start to dehumanise your opponents, you're on a slippery slope. "Dehumanization is one technique in incitement to genocide.[ It has also been used to justify war, judicial and extrajudicial killing, slavery, the confiscation of property, denial of suffrage and other rights, and to attack enemies or political opponents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization

I have no issue in describing the armed insurgents as thugs.

---------- Post added at 10:49 ---------- Previous post was at 10:48 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 36066483)

I think the democrats are blinded by their hatred for donny, he'll be an open sore for the republican party that they should just allow to fester and rot

Agreed. They should let the pro and anti Trump factions fight it out whilst they focus on recovering the country.

Sephiroth

13-01-2021 10:53

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066489)

It's dehumanising to label any group **** whoever uses the label, be it you or Mick. And when you start to dehumanise your opponents, you're on a slippery slope. "Dehumanization is one technique in incitement to genocide.[ It has also been used to justify war, judicial and extrajudicial killing, slavery, the confiscation of property, denial of suffrage and other rights, and to attack enemies or political opponents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization

I have no issue in describing the armed insurgents as thugs.
<SNIP>

You're way off beam there, Andrew.

1andrew1

13-01-2021 11:01

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36066491)

You're way off beam there, Andrew.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. ;)

pip08456

13-01-2021 13:30

Re: U.S Election 2020

1 Attachment(s)

Pence refuses to invoke 25th amendment.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...0&d=1610544552

Hugh	13-01-2021 14:31

Re: U.S Election 2020

1 Attachment(s)

Message to the Army Community from Army Chief of Staff, General James C. McConville, about recent events at the Capitol.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1610548266

1andrew1

13-01-2021 18:22

Re: U.S Election 2020

Trump's not going to have many supporters left if arrests continue at their current rate!

Quote:

US Capitol riots: Investigators warn that hundreds of people are expected to be charged

More than 160 FBI cases have been opened, and 70 people have been charged so far.

More than 170 individuals are being investigated over their involvement in last week's riot at the US Capitol - and 70 have been charged.

Washington DC's top federal prosecutor says investigators are working towards charging people with assault and seditious conspiracy.

The number of people who are charged over the deadly unrest is expected to rise into the hundreds.

Acting US attorney Michael Sherwin said: "The Capitol grounds outside and inside are... a crime scene."

A counter-terrorism investigation has also been launched in connection with the two pipe bombs found outside the headquarters of the Democratic and Republic parties.

While many of the criminal cases filed so far involve people whose photos went viral on social media, Mr Sherwin warned more serious charges are coming - and a grand jury has been reviewing the cases.

https://news.sky.com/story/us-capito...arged-12186318

Hugh	13-01-2021 19:13

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066546)

Trump's not going to have many supporters left if arrests continue at their current rate!

Quote:

US Capitol riots: Investigators warn that hundreds of people are expected to be charged

More than 160 FBI cases have been opened, and 70 people have been charged so far.

More than 170 individuals are being investigated over their involvement in last week's riot at the US Capitol - and 70 have been charged.

Washington DC's top federal prosecutor says investigators are working towards charging people with assault and seditious conspiracy.

The number of people who are charged over the deadly unrest is expected to rise into the hundreds.

Acting US attorney Michael Sherwin said: "The Capitol grounds outside and inside are... a crime scene."

A counter-terrorism investigation has also been launched in connection with the two pipe bombs found outside the headquarters of the Democratic and Republic parties.

While many of the criminal cases filed so far involve people whose photos went viral on social media, Mr Sherwin warned more serious charges are coming - and a grand jury has been reviewing the cases.

https://news.sky.com/story/us-capito...arged-12186318

Some more information on that - they are also looking at cases of "Public Corruption" related to the riots at the Capitol.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-capi...investigation/

Quote:

Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin said Tuesday a "strike force" of senior national security and public corruption prosecutors within his office are investigating charges related to the "most heinous" acts that occurred at the Capitol. Sherwin said the team is investigating whether rioters coordinated and planned their assault, combing through travel records, financial information and communications.

FBI

Quote:

Overview
The Bureau’s Public Corruption program focuses on:

Investigating violations of federal law by public officials at the federal, state, and local levels of government;
Overseeing the nationwide investigation of allegations of fraud related to federal government procurement, contracts, and federally funded programs;
Combating the threat of public corruption along the nation’s borders and points of entry in order to decrease the country’s vulnerability to drug and weapons trafficking, alien smuggling, espionage, and terrorism.
Addressing environmental crime, election fraud, and matters concerning the federal government procurement, contracts, and federally funded programs.

Paul	13-01-2021 19:36

Re: U.S Election 2020

Seems like a few heads are going to roll.

Hugh	13-01-2021 19:53

Re: U.S Election 2020

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/0...ol-riot-458975

Quote:

House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy called on President Donald Trump to “accept his share of responsibility” for the violence that overtook the U.S. Capitol last week and urged Republicans to accept that Joe Biden is the next leader of the nation.

“The president bears responsibility for Wednesday's attack on Congress by mob rioters,” McCarthy said on the House floor. “He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding. These facts require immediate action by President Trump."

Dave42

13-01-2021 21:25

Re: U.S Election 2020

Trump impeached now goes to trial

1andrew1

13-01-2021 21:32

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36066576)

Trump impeached now goes to trial

He got his two terms...of impeachment!

Dave42

13-01-2021 21:39

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066577)

He got his two terms...of impeachment!

yep 232 to impeach 197 against 10 republicans voted to impeach him

5 people did not vote at all

1andrew1

13-01-2021 21:43

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36066579)

yep 232 to impeach 197 against 10 republicans voted to impeach him 5 did not vote at all

The sooner he's behind bars and I'm being served in one, the better. ;)

Mick	13-01-2021 22:57

Re: U.S Election 2020

BREAKING: McConnell says Senate can't finish impeachment trial before Biden takes office.

Chris

13-01-2021 23:04

Re: U.S Election 2020

I think that’s a given. The attraction for republicans is that they now have the chance to bar Trump from running again. At this point that’s worth a heap more than symbolically ejecting him from office a week before he goes anyway.

Sephiroth

13-01-2021 23:07

Re: U.S Election 2020

Much as I dislike Trump the person, I think that the impeachment proceedings as being played out now, are a mistake. Trump is clearly unfit for office but a political move like this is highly divisive; it was more or less passed on the nod.

Trump is in considerable disgrace - he leaves office shortly and the FBI can then investigate whether or not he has committed any crimes. In other words, due process.

Chris

13-01-2021 23:19

Re: U.S Election 2020

For a sitting president, this is due process. Impeachment is political but the Senate trial isn’t - at least not in the same narrow tribal sense. The bar to conviction must be set high, and a two-thirds majority of a chamber that includes political allies is only going to be won over by the most egregious behaviour. A Senate may acquit on political grounds but a conviction represents a broad consensus that the president is indeed guilty.

Dave42

13-01-2021 23:21

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36066587)

there was a attempt coup there making a statement to deter other trying to do same

Mick	13-01-2021 23:28

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36066590)

there was a attempt coup there making a statement to deter other trying to do same

Yes because Dems have never incited anything in the last four years - Do you actually know what you write?

This will not deter folk or calm things down, this will fire up Trump's base even more - Dems reap what they sow, that is if they are actually any good at that, seeing as they are crap at governing.

Chris

13-01-2021 23:34

Re: U.S Election 2020

It will fire up his core support for sure. However the Republican Party is split down the middle and the non-Trump half now has an opportunity to ensure he can’t run in 2024 - can’t even promote speculation about running in fact, because he will be barred. If there are enough anti-Trump republicans in the Senate, they may well feel their best chance of taking the White House in 2024 is to lance the Trump boil now and hope the party moves on.

Mick	13-01-2021 23:46

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36066592)

It will fire up his core support for sure. However the Republican Party is split down the middle and the non-Trump half now has an opportunity to ensure he can’t run in 2024 - can’t even promote speculation about running in fact, because he will be barred. If there are enough anti-Trump republicans in the Senate, they may well feel their best chance of taking the White House in 2024 is to Lance the Trump boil now and hope the party moves on.

The Republican party is not split down the middle at all Chris.

And from all indications - I count just 7 Republican Senators that might go all in for conviction, that isn't anywhere near half, only 10 House Republicans sided with the Dems, 197 or so voted nay. This is not a party split in the middle by any means.

Chris

13-01-2021 23:57

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066593)

This Republican pollster says it is:

Quote:

Republican pollster Frank Luntz says the most "amazing statistic" to him is the fact that half of Trump's voters want him to keep fighting over election 2020.

"They want him to continue to fight right up to the inauguration," he told the BBC.

He says this passion, even in the face of evidence, explains what happened during the riot last week.

Luntz also warns that "there's a danger that the Republican party actually splits in half" post-Trump - and as things stands, at the moment, "there are more people who'd go with Trump".

From BBC live, at 22:46.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/worl...anada-55645957

Granted he thinks the Trump supporting half is bigger, but he clearly sees a risk in the party splitting “in half”.

Mick	14-01-2021 00:05

Re: U.S Election 2020

Most interestingly and this is in the Washingtonpost of all places, a legal expert opinion says once Trump leaves office his Senate trial cannot continue because doing so would be Unconstitutional.

Quote:

Opinion by J. Michael Luttig
Jan. 12, 2021 at 10:42 p.m. GMT
J. Michael Luttig served as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit from 1991 to 2006.

It appears that even if the House of Representatives impeaches President Trump this week, the Senate trial on that impeachment will not begin until after Trump has left office and President-Elect Biden has become president on Jan. 20. That Senate trial would be unconstitutional.

On Sunday, House Majority Whip James E. Clyburn (D-S.C.) said that, while House Democrats would take up articles of impeachment this week against President Trump, the House might delay sending to the Senate any articles passed by the House until after President-elect Biden’s first 100 days in office. Biden proposed an alternative, under which the new Senate would immediately begin working on his legislative agenda and confirming his Cabinet appointments in the mornings and conduct the impeachment trial in the afternoon.

The sequencing of the House impeachment proceedings before Trump’s departure from office and the inauguration of the new president, followed by a Senate impeachment trial, perhaps months later, raises the question of whether a former president can be impeached after he leaves office.

The Constitution itself answers this question clearly: No, he cannot be. Once Trump’s term ends on Jan. 20, Congress loses its constitutional authority to continue impeachment proceedings against him — even if the House has already approved articles of impeachment.

Therefore, if the House of Representatives were to impeach the president before he leaves office, the Senate could not thereafter convict the former president and disqualify him under the Constitution from future public office.

The reason for this is found in the Constitution itself. Trump would no longer be incumbent in the Office of the President at the time of the delayed Senate proceeding and would no longer be subject to “impeachment conviction” by the Senate, under the Constitution’s Impeachment Clauses. Which is to say that the Senate’s only power under the Constitution is to convict — or not — an incumbent president.

The purpose, text and structure of the Constitution’s Impeachment Clauses confirm this intuitive and common-sense understanding.

The very concept of constitutional impeachment presupposes the impeachment, conviction and removal of a president who is, at the time of his impeachment, an incumbent in the office from which he is removed. Indeed, that was the purpose of the impeachment power, to remove from office a president or other “civil official” before he could further harm the nation from the office he then occupies.

The plain text of the Constitution’s several Impeachment Clauses confirms this understanding of this limit on Congress’ impeachment power. For example, Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution reads, “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” In the same constitutional vein, Article I, Section 3 provides in relevant part: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.”

It has been suggested that the Senate could proceed to try the former president and convict him in an effort to disqualify him from holding public office in the future. This is incorrect because it is a constitutional impeachment of a president that authorizes his constitutional disqualification. If a president has not been constitutionally impeached, then the Senate is without the constitutional power to disqualify him from future office.

Some constitutional scholars take support for their view that the Congress can impeach a former president from two instances in which early Congresses impeached “civil officials” after they had resigned their public offices — the impeachments of Sen. William Blount in 1797 and the impeachment of Secretary of War William Belknap in 1876.

These congressional impeachment cases provide some backing for the argument that Congress can conclude that it has the power under the Constitution to impeach a former president. And Congress’s understanding of its constitutional powers would be a weighty consideration in the ultimate determination whether the Congress does possess such authority. When and if the former president goes to court to challenge his impeachment trial as unconstitutional, Congress is sure to make its argument based on these congressional precedents, as well as others, a case that would almost certainly make its way to the Supreme Court.

In the end, though, only the Supreme Court can answer the question of whether Congress can impeach a president who has left office prior to its attempted impeachment of him. It is highly unlikely the Supreme Court would yield to Congress’s view that it has the power to impeach a president who is no longer in office when the Constitution itself is so clear that it does not.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...achment-trial/

Chris

14-01-2021 08:41

Re: U.S Election 2020

There’s no doubt it would end up in the Supreme Court regardless. The Trump campaign has not been shy of pursuing legal action since November. Without being a constitutional expert however, I’m not convinced by the retired judge’s argument even based on the parts he quotes.

Trump has already been constitutionally impeached, within the last 24 hours, while still in office. If the only judgment then available was removal from office then proceedings would by definition have to end when he leaves office anyway, but the constitution doesn’t limit judgment to that. Disqualification is also provided for.

The judge’s argument amounts to word play - effectively, “aaah, but these clauses apply to the president, and he’s not the president any more, is he?” He appeals to the “plain reading” of the text but that’s not the reading he’s offering. The two legal precedents for officials being barred from future office after already having left it, will be significant should this get to the Supreme Court.

heero_yuy

14-01-2021 09:32

Re: U.S Election 2020

1 Attachment(s)

National Guard on high alert for Biden's inauguration.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...2&d=1610616679

:D

Attachment 28852

Hom3r

14-01-2021 11:31

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 36066607)

National Guard on high alert for Biden's inauguration.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...2&d=1610616679

:D

Attachment 28852

they are resting, the rest are outside with M16s waitng for armed troublemakers

Hugh	14-01-2021 11:42

Re: U.S Election 2020

On that point...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/n...iden-df8spwvld

Quote:

The US army and secret service is carrying out background checks on the national guard troops due to protect Washington during Joe Biden’s inauguration next Wednesday.

The forces, alarmed by reports that active-duty and reserve military personnel may have been involved in the assault on the Capitol last week, have begun a combined inspection of the 15,000 part-time soldiers.

Any hint that a national guardsman has political sympathies for the rioters is likely to mean an immediate withdrawal from the force, which is being prepared to line the capital city’s streets on January 20.

jonbxx

14-01-2021 11:49

Re: U.S Election 2020

John Sopel on the BBC made a point that there are currently more soldiers in Washington DC right now than in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yikes!

Chris

14-01-2021 12:26

Re: U.S Election 2020

The idea seems to be to persuade anyone thinking about a repeat performance to stop even thinking about it. There's also a fairly obvious intended symbolism in having that many guardsmen camping inside the Capitol, and reminding everyone that the last time soldiers were billeted inside the building was to protect it during the civil war.

Mick	14-01-2021 12:44

Re: U.S Election 2020

The House Resolution to force Vice President, Mike Pence to invoke 25th Amendment was unconstitutional as is the 1st and Second impeachment of Donald Trump. That’s not me saying it, it’s a Constitutional expert, Alan Dershowitz, he is no political supporter of President Trump, he voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. In his show, he explains at length his arguments. I trust his views over anyone else’s here because every one on here, is not a Constitutional expert and has not put any viewpoints across which validates, what congress has done is Constitutional, they have argued a plenty that Trump is not above the law, well, neither is Congress....

1andrew1

14-01-2021 12:57

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066622)

None of what this hard-working octogenarian Democrat says is going to change the two successful impeachments, though is it?

Damien

14-01-2021 13:00

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066622)

The House Resolution to force Vice President, Mike Pence to invoke 25th Amendment was unconstitutional as is the 1st and Second impeachment of Donald Trump. That’s not me saying it, it’s a Constitutional expert, Alan Dershowitz, he is no political supporter of President Trump, he voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. In his show, he explains at length his arguments. I trust his views over anyone else’s here because every one on here, is not a Constitutional expert and has not put any viewpoints across which validates, what congress has done is Constitutional, they have argued a plenty that Trump is not above the law, well, neither is Congress....

He was however Trump's lawyer during the last impeachment.

Although I largely agree I don't think the 25th Amendment was there for that cause. More of a moral observation than a legal one.

---------- Post added at 13:00 ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 ----------

I think with Trump, it's less than a week now, just let it be. This time next week he'll no longer be President.

If he has done anything he is legally at risk for then let that play out in the courts as it should.

Mick	14-01-2021 13:10

Re: U.S Election 2020

Being his lawyer does not equal political support.

Sephiroth

14-01-2021 13:27

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36066620)

Trojan horse?

Chris

14-01-2021 14:01

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36066627)

Trojan horse?

Highly unlikely. The troops mobilised for this operation are coming from almost all the states - they're not the DC ones who are under Trump's direct control (I doubt they'd obey an order to rebel anyway). The only ones allowed to be armed are MPs or others with police experience. The operation is being run by the Pentagon which has already put out a letter reminding personnel what oath they've sworn. Plus the FBI and the Secret Service are vetting all those deployed to make sure none of them frequent the sort of websites that have been fuelling the unrest.

https://www.npr.org/sections/congres...=1610632644814

Damien

14-01-2021 14:21

Re: U.S Election 2020

The FBI aren't messing around either. It'll be interesting to see if anything comes out of all these sites, messages and phones call of the suspects they're investigating, there have been suggestions these people knew where to go.

Mick	14-01-2021 15:01

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066623)

None of what this hard-working octogenarian Democrat says is going to change the two successful impeachments, though is it?

Erm, were you blind or living under a rock during the 1st impeachment process Andrew?

1st Impeachment FAILED in the Senate so how can it be successful?

A successful Impeachment is removal from office, he was not removed from office, thus, the Democrats failed the first time and they will fail this time, thus they are unsuccessful as well as acting in an unconstitutional manner, ******* democrats are not above the law so the rest of your ridiculous assertion is a moot point. :rolleyes:

Chris

14-01-2021 15:11

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066640)

No - impeachment is the equivalent of indictment, that is, he has been found to have a case to answer. Impeachment is the House's job. They have impeached him, successfully, twice. The Senate's job is to hear the case, debate it and pass judgment. That process is not impeachment.

True the word 'impeachment' is often carelessly used to refer to the entire two-stage process but Andrew is technically and constitutionally correct.

Mick	14-01-2021 15:31

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36066643)

Wrong - I am sticking to my definition which is the correct assertion.

A successful impeachment is removal from office, Trump has not been removed from office so it was not successful. Nor was it constitutional as per Constitutional experts analysis, Alan Dershowitz.

Hugh	14-01-2021 16:20

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066640)

During the first Impeachment process, the the President's lawyer said they couldn't impeach this close to an Election, and it should be left up to the voters - when it was left up to the voters, the Republicans didn't accept that either...

Quote:

Yet the president’s defense lawyers also zeroed in on this November’s election, arguing that voters, and not senators, should be the ones to decide whether Trump stays in office or not.

“We put our faith in the Senate because we know that you will put your faith in the American people,” White House counsel said Pat Cipollone in his closing arguments. “You will leave this choice to them where it belongs,” he said. “We believe that they should choose the president.”

1andrew1

14-01-2021 16:30

Re: U.S Election 2020

According to Sky News today:

Quote:

What is impeachment?
A misconception about impeachment is that it refers to the removal of a president from office.

In fact, it refers only to the House of Representatives, the lower chamber of Congress, bringing charges that a president engaged in a "high crime or misdemeanour".

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-tr...-time-12186887

Hugh	14-01-2021 16:35

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066662)

According to Sky News today:

Quote:

What is impeachment?
A misconception about impeachment is that it refers to the removal of a president from office.

In fact, it refers only to the House of Representatives, the lower chamber of Congress, bringing charges that a president engaged in a "high crime or misdemeanour".

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-tr...-time-12186887

Interesting point from ABC News.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/impe...ry?id=51202880

Quote:

Where does the Senate come in?
The Senate is tasked with handling the impeachment trial, which is presided over by the chief justice of the United States. To remove a president from office, two-thirds of the members must vote in favor – at present 67.

If the Senate fails to convict, a president is considered impeached but is not removed, as was the case with both Clinton in 1998 and Andrew Johnson in 1868. In Johnson’s case, the Senate fell one vote short of removing him from office on all three counts.

While the Senate trial has the power to oust a president from office, and ban him or her from running for future office, it does not have the power to send a president to jail. Disqualification from holding office, a separate process, requires a simple majority vote, according to the Congressional Research Service.

I did not know that.

Mick	14-01-2021 16:52

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36066662)

According to Sky News today:

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-tr...-time-12186887

But it is still not a successful impeachment that you implied - the ultimate reason for impeachment is removal from office, this was the Democrats goal, it failed as well as it being unconstitutionally applied by Congress, as per Dershowitz legal and constitutional expert opinion and I'll take a legal experts opinion over your non-legal expert opinion, any day.

We could argue all day, but we're not going to.

Time to move on. [Yes an instruction].

Mad Max

14-01-2021 17:01

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 36066612)

they are resting, the rest are outside with M16s waitng for armed troublemakers

Really......:D

Hom3r

14-01-2021 17:30

Re: U.S Election 2020

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36066640)

From watching CNN last night the second impeachment has a better chance as the senate will be democrat controlled, the last was republican.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:00.

Page 25 of 26

« First

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page