US Politics Thread 2021-24

[Skybird]

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...im-ncna1257092


https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...ty-ncna1256982


https://us.cnn.com/2021/02/08/opinio...rey/index.html

[Sonicfire1981]

Originally Posted by Skybird

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...im-ncna1257092
[...] An honest Senate verdict based on the evidence of Trump's conduct in provoking the mob's invasion of the Capitol — which endangered the lives of senators, Vice President Mike Pence, House members and others — surely would result in a conviction,[...]

That makes me angry. It wasn't only the endangerment, in my view first and foremost, people died. at least a half sentence would have been nice.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...ty-ncna1256982


https://us.cnn.com/2021/02/08/opinio...rey/index.html

[u crank]

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...im-ncna1257092
[...] An honest Senate verdict based on the evidence of Trump's conduct in provoking the mob's invasion of the Capitol — which endangered the lives of senators, Vice President Mike Pence, House members and others — surely would result in a conviction,[...]

And this is where a lack of understanding comes in. An impeachment and the Senate trial that follows is not a legal proceding. It is a political proceding. Only one impeachment attempt in my lifetime has succeeded. And it never went to trial in the Senate. When Nixon was told by those close to him that enough GOP Senators would likely vote guilty, he resigned. And whether we like it or not that is the only way to proceed. Few if any Senators are going to change their minds by hearing stuff that they have already heard repeated over and over. Without consensus before hand it is just Kabuki theatre. I couldn't bear to watch a second of it.

And if you need a refresher course on just how it works ... here you go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeac...f_Bill_Clinton

[Sonicfire1981]

Originally Posted by u crank

And this is where a lack of understanding comes in. An impeachment and the Senate trial that follows is not a legal proceding. It is a political proceding. Only one impeachment attempt in my lifetime has succeeded. And it never went to trial in the Senate. When Nixon was told by those close to him that enough GOP Senators would likely vote guilty, he resigned. And whether we like it or not that is the only way to proceed. Few if any Senators are going to change their minds by hearing stuff that they have already heard repeated over and over. Without consensus before hand it is just Kabuki theatre. I couldn't bear to watch a second of it.

And if you need a refresher course on just how it works ... here you go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeac...f_Bill_Clinton

That's perfectly understood, I asure you. Just - sitting idly by and hoping that the ex-president would do the right thing, the thing even nixon had the decency to do, won't cut it. Hoping, that the signal that such behaviour is not okay would come from a narcisist is a bit like expecting a junky to stop using drugs because "in the end, he's the one that has to quit."

The thing to understand here that the constitution was written with politicians in mind that had believes and values. That they would take their office seriously, they they would honor the constitution and, well, some basic principles of decency.
On that behalf the german constitution is much better, because there are failsafe mechanisms installed because of historical reasons.

[mapuc]

During former Presidents Presidency a friend said that he was a disease.

Well if this is true then it can only be a case of after-effects we see.

Markus

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Sonicfire1981

The thing to understand here that the constitution was written with politicians in mind that had believes and values. That they would take their office seriously, they they would honor the constitution and, well, some basic principles of decency.

That was the principle behind it but it is applied to a group of people who for the most part have little intention of following it. Politicians usually do the wrong thing every time.

[Sonicfire1981]

Originally Posted by u crank

That was the principle behind it but it is applied to a group of people who for the most part have little intention of following it. Politicians usually do the wrong thing every time.

We agree on that on the spot. who would have thought. Those that don't must be held accountable. given you want to live in a democracy.

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Sonicfire1981

We agree on that on the spot. who would have thought. Those that don't must be held accountable. given you want to live in a democracy.

Not sure about anyone else I most certainly do not want a democracy. Given the choice, I'd prefer a benevolent dictatorship with me at the top, but I'll settle for a constitutional republic like we currently are supposed to have.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by 3catcircus

Not sure about anyone else I most certainly do not want a democracy. Given the choice, I'd prefer a benevolent dictatorship with me at the top, but I'll settle for a constitutional republic like we currently are supposed to have.

[Skybird]

Formally the us is best described as a representative democracy.

Not that the GOP and its nemesis care.

I see western political systems as individual career generators and lobby mechanisms.



None of the concepts behind democracy or republic make sure that competence and integrity rule. By overwhelming empirical outcome, they always seem to acchieve right the opposite.

The only way I see to limit damage from politicians, is to limit the size of the playing fields on which their egos can play. Local small governments, no nations, no supernational organizations. That is why i have become zero state follower and private rights society follower. The relation in power between state and citizen is too disadvantageous and at the cost of the citizen, always.

[Sonicfire1981]

It has begun.

[Skybird]

^

https://abcnews.go.com/US/fulton-cou..._live_hero_hed

The district attorney's office in Fulton County, Georgia, has formally launched a criminal probe into former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn his election loss in the state, after Trump was heard in a January phone call pleading with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to help him "find 11,780 votes," the exact number he needed to win Georgia.

(...) election law experts argued Trump could have violated as many as three separate state laws.

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

^

https://abcnews.go.com/US/fulton-cou..._live_hero_hed

The district attorney's office in Fulton County, Georgia, has formally launched a criminal probe into former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn his election loss in the state, after Trump was heard in a January phone call pleading with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to help him "find 11,780 votes," the exact number he needed to win Georgia.

(...) election law experts argued Trump could have violated as many as three separate state laws.

Will they use edited media like the fools in Congress?

The full audio makes it abundantly clear Trump wasn't asking anyone to manufacture ballots, but to seek out all the ones reported to have been discarded because they were for him and to throw out all of the ones that weren't legal.

The danger is that a politically-motivated judge could easily suppress exculpatory evidence, even knowing that his ruling would be thrown out on appeal - because that appeal wouldn't come until *after* the 2024 primaries.

[Buddahaid]

The audio makes it abundantly clear that Trump rejected the certified results and was asking for that to be changed. In other words, alter the results.

[Texas Red]

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-ne...021/index.html

I think that Trump could get his incitement charge upgraded to treason, if you scroll down to the "House manager claims Trump knew rioters were planning the Capitol attack online months in advance" headline you will see evidence that he knew that this would happen and yet did not attempt to stop it. And the other articles say that the Republican National Committee is doing very little to defend him because they can't find any evidence that says that he didn't incite the insurrection, and everyone wants this to be done with.

House impeachment manager Stacey Plaskett claimed former President Trump and his social media team were aware of people planning the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol on social media sites and online forums, adding that the administration ignored warnings from the FBI that the violent threats were credible.

"They posted exact blueprints of the attack openly, loudly, proudly – and they did this all over public forums," Plaskett said during her remarks. "These were not just hidden posts and dark websites that Trump would not have seen. Quite the opposite. We know President Trump monitored these websites. We know this because his advisers confirm it," she said.

She pointed out that before the riot on Jan. 6 several media outlets, including Fox News, reported that there were hundreds of these violent posts online. She said city leaders and the FBI also issued warnings.

"The day before the rioters stormed the Congress an FBI office in Virginia also issued an explicit warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and, quote, war, according to internal reports," she said.

Plaskett ended her argument by saying Trump spent months calling his supporters to an event that had a specific time and place.

"Leading up to the event there were hundreds, hundreds of posts online showing that his supporters took this as a call to arms to attack the Capitol," Plaskett said. "There were detailed posts of plans to attack online. Law enforcement warned that these posts were real threats and even made arrests days leading up to the attack."

I think that this can get incitement upgraded to treason, correct me if I am wrong.