US political crisis

[mack341]

I'm talking about sending a tweet or coming to tv-cameras right away and telling them to stop when he saw the mob attacking Capitol Hill.

yes he probably could have done, not sure if it would have made a difference at that point, if that was why he should be impeached then the dems widened the goal posts:

 

[Playford7]

The god emperor can’t be taken down

 

[mack341]

A point I overlooked last night regarding impeachment and going by a simple majority, is if a party controlled both houses they could abuse the process to remove individuals they perceived as political threats, or bring pressure on individuals to vote certain ways.

A very interesting article here, regarding trump in fact requesting extra support prior to the day

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[Kroffe]

Yeah, imagine if someone were to abuse their powers in the senate.
Good thing the majority rule is in place stopping anything like that from happening.



What the backward rules does is allow the minority to sabotage what the majority of the senate&population wants.
Because the senate and house works as an extension of the people that vote.

I bet you would have called foul if brexit didnt happen because of the minority that voted stay.
But when it suits your own views, the minority getting to decide is just fine.

 

[mack341]

Yeah, imagine if someone were to abuse their powers in the senate.
Good thing the majority rule is in place stopping anything like that from happening.

View attachment 150594

What the backward rules does is allow the minority to sabotage what the majority of the senate&population wants.
Because the senate and house works as an extension of the people that vote.

I bet you would have called foul if brexit didnt happen because of the minority that voted stay.
But when it suits your own views, the minority getting to decide is just fine.

You're mixing first past the post voting, and referendums with an impeachment process aimed at removing people from office, three different things.

The founding fathers put in place safeguards for similar reasons:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

People often refer to the United States as a democracy, but technically speaking, that’s not true. It’s a republic.

Big deal, you say? If you care about your rights, it is. The Founding Fathers knew their history well, so they knew better than to establish the U.S. as a democracy.

In a democracy, of course, the majority rules. That’s all well and good for the majority, but what about the minority? Don’t they have rights that deserve respect?

Of course they do. Which is why a democracy won’t cut it. As the saying goes, a democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.

The Founders were determined to forestall the inherent dangers of what James Madison called “the tyranny of the majority.” So they constructed something more lasting: a republic. Something with checks and balances. A system of government carefully balanced to safeguard the rights of both the majority and the minority.

That led, most notably, to the bicameral structure of our legislative branch. We have a House of Representatives, where the number of members is greater for more populous states (which obviously favors those states), and the Senate, where every state from Rhode Island and Alaska to California and New York have exactly two representatives (which keeps less-populated states from being steamrolled).

Being a republic, we also don’t pick our president through a direct, majority-take-all vote. We have an Electoral College. And a lot of liberals don’t like that.

Their attacks on the College are nothing new, but the defeat of Hillary Clinton in 2016 renewed their fury. After all, as they never tire of pointing out, Mrs. Clinton captured more of the popular vote than Donald Trump did. They see the Electoral College as an impediment to their political victories, therefore it’s got to go.

Were it not for the Electoral College, presidential candidates could act as if many Americans don’t even exist. They could simply campaign in a small handful of states with big populations. Who would care what the people in Iowa think? Or Wyoming? Or any number of other states with smaller populations?

The people in “flyover country” don’t get enough attention as it is, but without the Electoral College, they’d be completely at the mercy of the majority.

 

[Steviedoo]

A point I overlooked last night regarding impeachment and going by a simple majority, is if a party controlled both houses they could abuse the process to remove individuals they perceived as political threats, or bring pressure on individuals to vote certain ways.

A very interesting article here, regarding trump in fact requesting extra support prior to the day

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

interesting. Except. Why didn’t the president call up the national guard? Why would it be up to Nancy Pelosi. She has no authority to call up the national guard. And neither does the mayor have the power.

The governor can call the National Guard into action during local or statewide emergencies, such as storms, fires, earthquakes or civil disturbances. In addition, the President of the United States can activate the National Guard for participation in federal missions.

 

[mack341]

interesting. Except. Why didn’t the president call up the national guard? Why would it be up to Nancy Pelosi. She has no authority to call up the national guard. And neither does the mayor have the power.

The governor can call the National Guard into action during local or statewide emergencies, such as storms, fires, earthquakes or civil disturbances. In addition, the President of the United States can activate the National Guard for participation in federal missions.

wasn't there something about in a disputed election, nancy would take control, perhaps it would require her blessing, and maybe some thought/were wary trump wanted the 10,000 national guardsmen there in order to carry out a coup?

 

[Kroffe]

You're mixing first past the post voting, and referendums with an impeachment process aimed at removing people from office, three different things.

The founding fathers put in place safeguards for similar reasons:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

People often refer to the United States as a democracy, but technically speaking, that’s not true. It’s a republic.

Big deal, you say? If you care about your rights, it is. The Founding Fathers knew their history well, so they knew better than to establish the U.S. as a democracy.

In a democracy, of course, the majority rules. That’s all well and good for the majority, but what about the minority? Don’t they have rights that deserve respect?

Of course they do. Which is why a democracy won’t cut it. As the saying goes, a democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.

The Founders were determined to forestall the inherent dangers of what James Madison called “the tyranny of the majority.” So they constructed something more lasting: a republic. Something with checks and balances. A system of government carefully balanced to safeguard the rights of both the majority and the minority.

That led, most notably, to the bicameral structure of our legislative branch. We have a House of Representatives, where the number of members is greater for more populous states (which obviously favors those states), and the Senate, where every state from Rhode Island and Alaska to California and New York have exactly two representatives (which keeps less-populated states from being steamrolled).

Being a republic, we also don’t pick our president through a direct, majority-take-all vote. We have an Electoral College. And a lot of liberals don’t like that.

Their attacks on the College are nothing new, but the defeat of Hillary Clinton in 2016 renewed their fury. After all, as they never tire of pointing out, Mrs. Clinton captured more of the popular vote than Donald Trump did. They see the Electoral College as an impediment to their political victories, therefore it’s got to go.

Were it not for the Electoral College, presidential candidates could act as if many Americans don’t even exist. They could simply campaign in a small handful of states with big populations. Who would care what the people in Iowa think? Or Wyoming? Or any number of other states with smaller populations?

The people in “flyover country” don’t get enough attention as it is, but without the Electoral College, they’d be completely at the mercy of the majority

Do you seriously think the minority being able to decide on things as who becomes president makes more sense?
Just because billy-bob lives in Wyoming, his vote carries more weight than 3 people from California.

What rules are in place to stop the tyranny of the minority?
Makes even less sense when you look at education levels in rural vs urban areas.
Basically the uneducated minority have votes that carry more weight, which imo does not seem like the best idea.

And of course Gop is scared electoral college will be removed, since they wouldnt stand a chance in elections without it.

 

[mack341]

Do you seriously think the minority being able to decide on things as who becomes president makes more sense?
Just because billy-bob lives in Wyoming, his vote carries more weight than 3 people from California.

What rules are in place to stop the tyranny of the minority?
Makes even less sense when you look at education levels in rural vs urban areas.
Basically the uneducated minority have votes that carry more weight, which does not seem like the best idea.

It's all in that article, the alternative has far more potential to be worse.

 

[Kroffe]

It's all in that article, the alternative has far more potential to be worse.

Big surprise, an article from a conservative promoting page argues that the electoral college, which is the only thing keeping gop in the game, is a good thing.

Maybe ive missed something, but the elections seem to be 100% focused on just a couple of swing states, the very scenario the electoral college is supposed to prevent, no?
Also, there is no balance. Small rural states wield way more influence than big urban ones do.

We will have to agree to disagree, i think its a shit system.
Its great if you are among the minority since your vote carries more weight, but its such a shitty deal for the majority of the population, which i dont think makes any sense.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[slotplayer]

They can embrace him as kingmaker, maga 2024, what else can they offer the voters, the mormon bloke or another bush?

The system of 2/3s majority is what it is, I don't think it's a bad thing entirely for these types of trials, a jury trial often has to be minimum 11 out of 12 majority, would you be happy to hang someone if 7 out of twelve said guilty and the other 5 said not guilty?

edit putting aside you probably don't agree with capital punishment full stop, but a serious case perhaps with consequences.

The framers anticipated partisan political witch hunts and made it a 2/3 super majority for that very reason instead of a simple majority. If it was a simple majority the Senate is currently 50/50 with Karmala Harris the tie breaker.

Hamilton warned of the “greatest danger” that the decision to move forward with impeachment will “be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties than the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” He worried that the tools of impeachment would be wielded by the “most cunning or most numerous factions” and lack the “requisite neutrality toward those whose conduct would be the subject of scrutiny.”

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

The 1787 convention debate is interesting and a short read.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[Steviedoo]

wasn't there something about in a disputed election, nancy would take control, perhaps it would require her blessing, and maybe some thought/were wary trump wanted the 10,000 national guardsmen there in order to carry out a coup?

This wasn’t a disputed election. This was disputed election in the mind of trump cuz he is who he is. Biden was declared the winner. Certified by all states. What was happening at the capital with the electoral votes was a dog and pony show. pageantry.

nancy Pelosi had no power to do so.
The only person who could have called the national guard that day was the president. Which he failed to do. And the governor. And there is talk that the governor was blocked from doing so

 

[geordiecolin]

Now that Trump has been exonerated on impeachment charges twice I suspect he is free to start exert a lot of damage if he wishes too.
Whatever. It has been an awful week for the Dems both internally and worldwide.

 

[Playford7]

Now that Trump has been exonerated on impeachment charges twice I suspect he is free to start exerting a lot of damage if he wishes too.
Whatever. It has been an awful week for the Dems both internally and worldwide.

And I hope the god emperor does exactly that after his appalling treatment during his tenure.

 

[cncas2123]

This wasn’t a disputed election. This was disputed election in the mind of trump cuz he is who he is. Biden was declared the winner. Certified by all states. What was happening at the capital with the electoral votes was a dog and pony show. pageantry.

nancy Pelosi had no power to do so.
The only person who could have called the national guard that day was the president. Which he failed to do. And the governor. And there is talk that the governor was blocked from doing so

How can it even be considered a disputed election, no cases were presented to any court that would have merited that description.
All this was was a wannabe dictator finding that more than half of the American voters didnt want to give him a second term.
Its really strange how not a single down ballot vote is being queried, particularly when these were for Republicans with the Presidential vote was for Biden. Was there nothing suspicious about these votes?
So blind are those who don't want to open their eyes.

 

[geordiecolin]

And I hope the god emperor does exactly that after his appalling treatment during his tenure.

I do question the basic sensibilities of those that do not see the partisan way that people are directed by one side of the political/ social debate over recent times.
I am happy to sit back and watch how things pan out for the most part. And I do not mean in just this extremely limited forum,but in my life regarding the issues that are seemingly most important in life with the posters in this forum.
Life is for living because we are long dead

 

[geordiecolin]

And I hope the god emperor does exactly that after his appalling treatment during his tenure.

Simply for the sake of democracy we need a excepting America of their democracy in our lives.But in all honesty I think that all aspects of American politics is controlled. That includes Trump and all that it entails. We can argue specifics until the cows come home.

 

[slotplayer]

You can go fact check it as I don't have time but I believe Washington DC does not have a Governor as its not a State.

 

[sufferinsilence]

You can go fact check it as I don't have time but I believe Washington DC does not have a Governor as its not a State.

Correct, it's a federal district.

It was the Governor of Maryland who tried to deploy the National Guard but was told he lacked the authority to do so. Then 2 hours later he got a request from the federal government to deploy them.

 

[Kroffe]

You can go fact check it as I don't have time but I believe Washington DC does not have a Governor as its not a State.

Not a state yet,

But i doubt GOP will let the people there get the representation in the government they deserve, since it would almost certainly be a state that voted for the democrats.
I think its called "taxation without representation" and is a pretty crappy deal for the people living there.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

This wasn’t a disputed election. This was disputed election in the mind of trump cuz he is who he is. Biden was declared the winner. Certified by all states. What was happening at the capital with the electoral votes was a dog and pony show. pageantry.

nancy Pelosi had no power to do so.
The only person who could have called the national guard that day was the president. Which he failed to do. And the governor. And there is talk that the governor was blocked from doing so

Sure it was trump leading the claims, pushing for audits etc...but it wasn't like everyone else felt the results were 100% legitimate, the application to the supreme court was backed by at least 17 states, then you had all the various witnesses testifying under oath.

From my brief reading of articles this evening, the capitol police could have requested additional support and the sergeants at arms from the congress, also the pentagon's chief had a big say.

according to wikipedia:

On January 3, 2021, all ten living former defense secretaries raised alarm in an open letter against a military coup to overturn the election results, warning officials who would participate and specifically naming Miller, that they would face grave consequences if they violated the constitution

That kind of links to my earlier post, was the deployment of the national guard blocked for fear of this potential?

edit: I put a question mark there but really I am past caring now, I am at ease at myself for not feeling the need to rage at trump, I won't be manipulated by the lamestream press into doing so either. I recognise he has faults, name a billionaire who doesn't. If biden is successful on the basic measurements of performance for a country he'll get a thumbs up from me.

 

[slotplayer]

Well Monday is the federal holiday, Presidents Day, lol

 

[Steviedoo]

You can go fact check it as I don't have time but I believe Washington DC does not have a Governor as its not a State.

Yes. You are correct. in all other states the governor calls up the national guard. But Washington DC is special. No governor etc.

I think in the end it was mike pence who ordered the national guard.

Doesn’t matter. The capitol got stormed.
Trump is off the hook.

hopefully the Dems will move on. And we won’t have to hear about trump. But as you know trump is a big money maker for the media companies. So we will continue to hear about him.

But Everyone needs to move on. Country needs to get back to normal. With politics and covid.

Especially covid.
I miss my family and friends. I miss charleston.

 

[Steviedoo]

Sure it was trump leading the claims, pushing for audits etc...but it wasn't like everyone else felt the results were 100% legitimate, the application to the supreme court was backed by at least 17 states, then you had all the various witnesses testifying under oath.

From my brief reading of articles this evening, the capitol police could have requested additional support and the sergeants at arms from the congress, also the pentagon's chief had a big say.

according to wikipedia:

On January 3, 2021, all ten living former defense secretaries raised alarm in an open letter against a military coup to overturn the election results, warning officials who would participate and specifically naming Miller, that they would face grave consequences if they violated the constitution

That kind of links to my earlier post, was the deployment of the national guard blocked for fear of this potential?

edit: I put a question mark there but really I am past caring now, I am at ease at myself for not feeling the need to rage at trump, I won't be manipulated by the lamestream press into doing so either. I recognise he has faults, name a billionaire who doesn't. If biden is successful on the basic measurements of performance for a country he'll get a thumbs up from me.

tiresome to have to repeat the same things on here. The election was won fair and square until proven otherwise. And we have yet to see any proof. These witnesses you claim....where are they, why weren’t they presented in all those court cases that were lost....


...activating the national guard had nothing to do with a military coup...I think you are confused ....


the national guard was needed to keep peace/order...

 

[mack341]

tiresome to have to repeat the same things on here. The election was won fair and square until proven otherwise. And we have yet to see any proof. These witnesses you claim....where are they, why weren’t they presented in all those court cases that were lost....


...activating the national guard had nothing to do with a military coup...I think you are confused ....


the national guard was needed to keep peace/order...

I'll tell you what is tiresome, looking at my alerts and seeing a quoted reply from yourself when I've just stated I am past caring debating this bs.

Then when I read it, that wearisome reaction I had felt was warranted, another cheap shot and more strawman stuff.

However I will not abide an uncivil, cheap shot from you without responding further - and it's in a long line of little cheap shots fired by you in my direction, the casual reader won't be aware of that, so might think I'm overreacting here.

I stated many people, including the people in control of 17 states, do not believe the election was won fair and square. The witnesses appeared at the various state hearings to give evidence, also provided affidavits to the various court cases. [this was in reply to you saying " This was disputed election in the mind of trump cuz he is who he is"]

I was speculating why somebody blocked the deployment of the national guard...I didn't see it mentioned as part of the impeachment case, that trump or someone under his control had deliberately blocked it.
I quoted wikipedia that 10 former defense secretaries had written an open letter raising the alarm about a potential military coup by trump.

NPR:
The former chief of U.S. Capitol Police says security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed his early requests to call in the National Guard ahead of a demonstration in support of President Trump that turned into a deadly attack on Congress.

Former chief Steven Sund -- who

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

last week after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for him to step down -- made the assertions in an interview with

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

published Sunday.

Sund says he requested assistance six times ahead of and during the attack on the Capitol. Each of those requests was denied or delayed, he says.