The Real Maroonblood Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 4 minutes ago, Cade said: GOP members of Congress now refusing en masse to wear masks in the chamber. Feckin children. God will save them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maple Leaf Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 4 minutes ago, Cade said: GOP members of Congress now refusing en masse to wear masks in the chamber. Feckin children. The pandemic is a media hoax, dontcha know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Z Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 2 hours ago, Justin Z said: God is worth a follow, as is Jesus. I woke up to the notification that Satan follows me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 (edited) 14th amendment: "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State" "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability." So all these politicians that took part can be barred from office. And voting. And owning a gun. Edited January 8, 2021 by Cade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Jimbo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 CNN have obtained a draft copy of the article of impeachment of President Trump charging him with 'Incitement of Insurrection'. It could be presented to the house as early as Monday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said: CNN have obtained a draft copy of the article of impeachment of President Trump charging him with 'Incitement of Insurrection'. It could be presented to the house as early as Monday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Jimbo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 (edited) Remember this guy, he's Richard Barnett from Arkansas, well the FBI arrested him this morning and have charged him various offences. Strangely he wasn't smiling in his police mugshot I wonder why. https://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2021/01/08/arkansas-man-arrested-after-seen-sitting-speaker-pelosis-office-nbc-reports/ Edited January 8, 2021 by Jambo-Jimbo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Lisa Murkowski (Alaskan senator) calls for Trump to resign and questions her future in the Republican Party. She was probably one of the three or four most likely Republican Senators to do this but still nice to see a Republican Senator finally go this far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 3 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said: Lisa Murkowski (Alaskan senator) calls for Trump to resign and questions her future in the Republican Party. She was probably one of the three or four most likely Republican Senators to do this but still nice to see. 4 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said: By the way, I don't buy all this impeachment guff with only 12 days to go. Either Donald Trump did something criminal with respect to the riots at the Capitol, or he did not. Other people involved in the riots are being investigated and will presumably be charged where appropriate. The same should happen to Donald Trump, whether under D.C. or federal law. Impeachment proceedings at this stage would be performative at best, and could impede a proper criminal investigation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 2 minutes ago, Ulysses said: By the way, I don't buy all this impeachment guff with only 12 days to go. Either Donald Trump did something criminal with respect to the riots at the Capitol, or he did not. Other people involved in the riots are being investigated and will presumably be charged where appropriate. The same should happen to Donald Trump, whether under D.C. or federal law. Impeachment proceedings at this stage would be performative at best, and could impede a proper criminal investigation. It’s been said up there that if he’s impeached again he can’t run in 2024 so that might well be the ultimate aim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFK-1 Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 5 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said: You have to love the sheer stupidity. They were like bank robbers executing a heist while leaving a business card with their name and photo. This stupid bitch is a prime example. Apparently since then there's been a rush to try and delete all the photos of themselves attacking a government building which at the time they quickly posted on Facebook etc. We're storming the Capitol, it's a Revolution! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 3 minutes ago, Ulysses said: By the way, I don't buy all this impeachment guff with only 12 days to go. Either Donald Trump did something criminal with respect to the riots at the Capitol, or he did not. Other people involved in the riots are being investigated and will presumably be charged where appropriate. The same should happen to Donald Trump, whether under D.C. or federal law. Impeachment proceedings at this stage would be performative at best, and could impede a proper criminal investigation. Got to disagree here. If impeachment proceedings send a message to Trump and future would-be autocrats, it will be worth it. Congress can’t rely on the Justice Department coming down on Trump with criminal charges, and Biden shouldn’t - and I’m pretty sure wouldn’t - interfere with the Justice Department’s decisions in this regard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 3 minutes ago, JFK-1 said: You have to love the sheer stupidity. They were like bank robbers executing a heist while leaving a business card with their name and photo. This stupid bitch is a prime example. Apparently since then there's been a rush to try and delete all the photos of themselves attacking a government building which at the time they quickly posted on Facebook etc. We're storming the Capitol, it's a Revolution! What an utter cretin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Jimbo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 4 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: It’s been said up there that if he’s impeached again he can’t run in 2024 so that might well be the ultimate aim. That's the way I see it, it's to stop him from holding any high office ever again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said: It’s been said up there that if he’s impeached again he can’t run in 2024 so that might well be the ultimate aim. 1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said: That's the way I see it, it's to stop him from holding any high office ever again. To be banned from running again he would have to be impeached by the House, and for the Senate to vote to both remove him from office and ban him from running again. But we already know that impeachment proceedings won't get that far, even in the unlikely event that there were 67 favourable votes in the Senate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 3 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said: Got to disagree here. If impeachment proceedings send a message to Trump and future would-be autocrats, it will be worth it. Congress can’t rely on the Justice Department coming down on Trump with criminal charges, and Biden shouldn’t - and I’m pretty sure wouldn’t - interfere with the Justice Department’s decisions in this regard. What penny-ante tuppenny-ha'penny message does it send if the House vote to impeach (which it will, purely on political grounds) and the Senate either says no or doesn't try the case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 4 minutes ago, Ulysses said: What penny-ante tuppenny-ha'penny message does it send if the House vote to impeach (which it will, purely on political grounds) and the Senate either says no or doesn't try the case? The House will vote to impeach, but it won't be on 'purely political' grounds (at least in the sense of party politics). If the Senate doesn't proceed it will be another stain on McConnell's record. If the Senate says no then shame on the Senate. At least we'll know each Senator's position. And in America we don't deal with tuppenny-ha'penny messaging - we rely on common cents. I trust that clarifies matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beni Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 50 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said: Remember this guy, he's Richard Barnett from Arkansas, well the FBI arrested him this morning and have charged him various offences. Strangely he wasn't smiling in his police mugshot I wonder why. https://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2021/01/08/arkansas-man-arrested-after-seen-sitting-speaker-pelosis-office-nbc-reports/ 👆 How it started 👆 👇 How it's going 👇 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 If there is a more uneducated populace than that of the USA on earth, I've yet to hear of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 6 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said: The House will vote to impeach, but it won't be on 'purely political' grounds (at least in the sense of party politics). If the Senate doesn't proceed it will be another stain on McConnell's record. If the Senate says no then shame on the Senate. At least we'll know each Senator's position. And in America we don't deal with tuppenny-ha'penny messaging - we rely on common cents. I trust that clarifies matters. The House will vote to impeach because it is dominated by Democrats, not because of the existence of evidence of wrongdoing. The Senate will not vote for the impeachment because it isn't sufficiently dominated by Democrats, not because of reasonable doubts about wrongdoing. Alternatively, the Senate will not try the impeachment because it runs out of time. Who can blame Mitch McConnell for that? The voters of Kentucky won't. Stains on records? Reminds me of beer spills at student parties in the 1970s. The only things the bollix Trump might fear are being cut off from Twitter or the inside of a prison cell. Either try the guy or fail to try the guy. The rest is just guff. That's my, er, tuppence worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 3 minutes ago, John Findlay said: If there is a more uneducated populace than that of the USA on earth, I've yet to hear of it. When you see and hear them it’s frightening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 26 minutes ago, Ulysses said: To be banned from running again he would have to be impeached by the House, and for the Senate to vote to both remove him from office and ban him from running again. But we already know that impeachment proceedings won't get that far, even in the unlikely event that there were 67 favourable votes in the Senate. Seems unlikely unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beni Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 9 minutes ago, John Findlay said: If there is a more uneducated populace than that of the USA on earth, I've yet to hear of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 If Congress impeaches him under the 14th Amendment, he'll be banned from running again. The Sentate just votes on what other punishment to mete out and if he should be removed from office. This does require a 2/3 majority so it has little chance of happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gentleman Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, Justin Z said: Imagine my shock (and baws) ...been updated now: The bloke's saying he's not against checks [sic] per se. And why would it be $2000? Heven't peeps already received $600? Edited January 8, 2021 by John Gentleman minor editorial Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 16 minutes ago, Cade said: If Congress impeaches him under the 14th Amendment, he'll be banned from running again. The Sentate just votes on what other punishment to mete out and if he should be removed from office. This does require a 2/3 majority so it has little chance of happening. It's the Senate that can disqualify Trump from holding office again, not the House. So impeachment itself doesn't mean he's banned from future office automatically. But in the Senate it's a simple majority needed for disqualification rather than the 2/3rds needed for conviction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redjambo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 One of the more enjoyable subreddits at the moment: https://www.reddit.com/r/byebyejob/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 4 minutes ago, John Gentleman said: ...been updated now: The bloke's saying he's not against checks [sic] per se. And why would it be $2000? Heven't peeps already received $600? I'm not sure it was poor journalism originally, or Manchin walking back his comments, but glad to hear it. Most people (up to a certain income threshold) in the U.S. have already received or should soon receive $600, but that's a tiny amount in the great scheme of things. $2,000 is a more substantial amount for people trying to pay rent, bills and feed themselves - and would be a big help to the economy more generally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 5 minutes ago, Cade said: If Congress impeaches him under the 14th Amendment, he'll be banned from running again. The Sentate just votes on what other punishment to mete out and if he should be removed from office. This does require a 2/3 majority so it has little chance of happening. 1 minute ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said: It's the Senate that can disqualify Trump from holding office again, not the House. So impeachment itself doesn't mean he's banned from future office automatically. But in the Senate it's a simple majority needed for disqualification rather than the 2/3rds needed for conviction. Unless I'm mistaken, there has only been one successful impeachment and trial which resulted in the permanent barring of someone from office. However, the Senate made the decision that he would be barred from office, even though it was clear that he was in breach of the 14th Amendment. See Humphreys (or was it Humphries), 1862. Unless the Senate both voted in favour of the House impeachment motion and in favour of a permanent ban on Trump holding office again, I think he'd be off to the Supreme Court. And I don't think the outcome of a case would be as obvious as it looks just by reading the 14th Amendment. See also Article 1, Section 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 5 minutes ago, redjambo said: One of the more enjoyable subreddits at the moment: https://www.reddit.com/r/byebyejob/ "You've gotta be a stupid mother****er to get fired on your day off" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 If you don't impeach then you are relying on the justice system catching up with him so as that he isn't allowed to stand again? Can you take the risk on the justice system? But the justice system may be able stop the dynasty, that impeachment doesn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 3 minutes ago, Ulysses said: Unless I'm mistaken, there has only been one successful impeachment and trial which resulted in the permanent barring of someone from office. However, the Senate made the decision that he would be barred from office, even though it was clear that he was in breach of the 14th Amendment. See Humphreys (or was it Humphries), 1862. Unless the Senate both voted in favour of the House impeachment motion and in favour of a permanent ban on Trump holding office again, I think he'd be off to the Supreme Court. And I don't think the outcome of a case would be as obvious as it looks just by reading the 14th Amendment. See also Article 1, Section 3. Ah, I figured it out. The guy did things that were in breach of the 14th, but it was before the 14th was ratified. Oops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Looks like Twitter are throwing the trash out. All of Donnie’s tweets have vanished and looks like the account is suspended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Just now, Tazio said: Looks like Twitter are throwing the trash out. All of Donnie’s tweets have vanished and looks like the account is suspended. It's permanent apparently. Really should have given a few hours notice so we could go for him. Facebook and Instagram still suspended. He only has the nuke codes left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 10 minutes ago, Tazio said: Looks like Twitter are throwing the trash out. All of Donnie’s tweets have vanished and looks like the account is suspended. It took them long enough. Didn’t have the balls to do it a long time ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 1 minute ago, DETTY29 said: Hahahahaha she’s pretty funny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Twitter really going for it now. https://news.yahoo.com/twitter-permanently-bans-michael-flynn-215552379.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS9zZWFyY2g_cT10d2l0dGVyJTIwYmFuZCUyMG1pY2hhZWslMjBmbHlubiZpZT11dGYtOCZvZT11dGYtOCZjbGllbnQ9ZmlyZWZveC1iLW0&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAAsQ3qbYuSchYTqCi2uDp9Fb6j6j2_nCfurTeRj9kxqH_SEBsA9KU1AKvBPzyEZbdrSqFC53qve9NPGemjKbYdiFNo6Hb6ov8XjTfH0lTHB6y9KIANGrZHkfJ56Li0FbveYjcNm1-fgSYjonQ92hB7NjKUB-bZaXC7kxZbtzNFVW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjcc Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 7 minutes ago, Barack said: Welcome to the club, Donald. I feel vindicated. You didn’t get chucked for giving him abuse did you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redjambo Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 A "permanent suspension" seems bizarre as suspension implies a temporary aspect. Perhaps the suspension is actually for an indeterminate period, or I'm just not au fait with modern English usage. Either way though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Z Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Kudos to the Times of India for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalamazoo Jambo Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 Message to Republicans: Don’t Fear The Tweeter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gentleman Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 10 minutes ago, redjambo said: A "permanent suspension" seems bizarre as suspension implies a temporary aspect. Perhaps the suspension is actually for an indeterminate period, or I'm just not au fait with modern English usage. Either way though... Agree. It should be 'account deactivated'. Americans seem to enjoy mangling the language. Guess he'll pop up on Parler now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovecraft Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 17 minutes ago, redjambo said: A "permanent suspension" seems bizarre as suspension implies a temporary aspect. Perhaps the suspension is actually for an indeterminate period, or I'm just not au fait with modern English usage. Either way though... I think it is an amazing windup. Still allowing him to sign on as it is only suspended, but he can't post anything. Genius! It's worse than a ban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redjambo Posted January 9, 2021 Share Posted January 9, 2021 5 minutes ago, Lovecraft said: I think it is an amazing windup. Still allowing him to sign on as it is only suspended, but he can't post anything. Genius! It's worse than a ban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.