U.S. Politics megathread (merged)

[Ulysses]

On 11/01/2021 at 19:23, frankblack said:

 

I'm sure they would need to be convicted first, which won't happen before the 20th.

 

They don't, as it happens.  The presidential pardon power is very broad, though of course it only applies to federal offences and charges.

[DETTY29]

Instead of having Pence as his running mate, could Trump have ran with one of his dofus kids?

 

And if he had, what would have happened if Jnr or Eric had refused, as Pence didn't refuse, to ratify the EC votes?

[Sharpie]

14 minutes ago, J.T.F.Robertson said:

 

Bob, hypothetically, how long do you think Britain would have suffered an Argentinian claim to say Orkney or Shetland?

Just saying.

 

 

I know what you are saying, but and I know it was the cause when a Country invades a territory that is under the control and management of another Country by invasion, and deliberately tries to belittle their military representatives reprisal is guaranteed.  I suspect they would have rejected it strongly, Argentina have tried for years to get the Falklands and have been unable to present sufficient argument to have their claims granted. Argentina if I recall had a new President a military man, and I guess he felt he could make his move based on his military experience that this was a good time to do it with force, and that it was too far and small for Britain to react, turned out to not be a good plan.

[SwindonJambo]

17 minutes ago, J.T.F.Robertson said:

 

Bob, hypothetically, how long do you think Britain would have suffered an Argentinian claim to say Orkney or Shetland?

Just saying.

 

 

Not a valid comparison. The Argentinians were and are colonials themselves, being principally of Spanish and Italian stock, displacing the indigenous population. The Falklands just happen to be relatively near the coast of Argentina and were thought to have been uninhabited before being fought over by the Spanish and the British, with the latter winning out. When they were under Spanish control, Argentina was also a Spanish colony. At no time ever were the Falklands owned by Argentina as an independent country.

[Sharpie]

So the machinations are all in place to remove one way or the other Trump. I am torn about this , he has such a short time left, would it be better to let him just get out in a few days, and then go after him as the former President,   proceed with investigation of his statement encouraging action and charge him in State or Federal Court as any other accused would be handled. I have  concern that however this is handled it is not the end, Trump is seen as a figurehead for the people who are out to take over the system. He is the ideal subject to be used, he is egotistical to the extreme, he is mentally ill,  he thinks he is in control and a leader, he is in fact a dupe who is going to be used to justify violence, nd it is not at all going to end well for either side. The Country and the system will survive, but the attainment of survival will be brutal.

 

The information coming out this afternoon about senior military personnel, police officers possibly being part of the riots  is quite serious information. The 20th Inauguration day I  suggest will be the day that this all simmers down, or starts the really serious violent actions.

 

[Tazio]

1 hour ago, Tazio said:

I’m just watching the programme on ITV about last week. Some of the footage is amazing to say the least from a camera in the middle of the crowd. Never mind the archive footage from previous rallies. 
It never fails to baffle me when you see people in full battle gear carrying heavy arms yards from policemen. 

As an afterthought to this programme near the end of it after all the footage of the militias with their body armour, helmets, and guns they had footage of a new militia group marching through a neighbourhood. A black militia founded so they could protect themselves against the white ones. A scary turn of events. 
Maybe Charles Manson wasn’t so far off the mark after all his ideas of a race war in America. Though I highly doubt his prophesy of the black population winning. 

[redjambo]

11 minutes ago, Sharpie said:

So the machinations are all in place to remove one way or the other Trump. I am torn about this , he has such a short time left, would it be better to let him just get out in a few days, and then go after him as the former President,   proceed with investigation of his statement encouraging action and charge him in State or Federal Court as any other accused would be handled. I have  concern that however this is handled it is not the end, Trump is seen as a figurehead for the people who are out to take over the system. He is the ideal subject to be used, he is egotistical to the extreme, he is mentally ill,  he thinks he is in control and a leader, he is in fact a dupe who is going to be used to justify violence, nd it is not at all going to end well for either side. The Country and the system will survive, but the attainment of survival will be brutal.

 

The information coming out this afternoon about senior military personnel, police officers possibly being part of the riots  is quite serious information. The 20th Inauguration day I  suggest will be the day that this all simmers down, or starts the really serious violent actions.

 

 

Part of it is censuring Trump, but part of it is also keeping up the pressure on the lawmakers who supported his attempt to subvert democracy. If they let it go now, a great number of people will just be "It's a new presidency, let's heal and move on". They need to maintain the momentum, imo. By keeping up the pressure on Trump, they're hoping to flush out and put pressure on the enablers. If it's left alone until after the 20th, then it defines in no uncertain terms that the new Presidency is about revenge on the previous one. This way, the feel and the argument is that action against Trump was taken before his presidency finished as an immediate reaction by both Democrats and Republicans and not as the policy of a new administration. Never lose the momentum...

[J.T.F.Robertson]

16 minutes ago, Sharpie said:

 

I know what you are saying, but and I know it was the cause when a Country invades a territory that is under the control and management of another Country by invasion, and deliberately tries to belittle their military representatives reprisal is guaranteed.  I suspect they would have rejected it strongly, Argentina have tried for years to get the Falklands and have been unable to present sufficient argument to have their claims granted. Argentina if I recall had a new President a military man, and I guess he felt he could make his move based on his military experience that this was a good time to do it with force, and that it was too far and small for Britain to react, turned out to not be a good plan.

 

15 minutes ago, SwindonJambo said:

 

Not a valid comparison. The Argentinians were and are colonials themselves, being principally of Spanish and Italian stock, displacing the indigenous population. The Falklands just happen to be relatively near the coast of Argentina and were thought to have been uninhabited before being fought over by the Spanish and the British, with the latter winning out. When they were under Spanish control, Argentina was also a Spanish colony. At no time ever were the Falklands owned by Argentina as an independent country.

 

I get the angle you're both coming from and it wasn't exactly the best way for them to go about it and yes, the guy in charge was a power hungry dictator (is there any other kind) desperate to appeal to the locals' nationalism. (sound familiar?)

"Just saying" whatever the origins in colonial past the UK would have told them to get to France long before the era of vertical Harrier jets and destroyers. 

 

I still remember being in the pub the night victory was declared and a bunch of English mates coming downstairs draped in Union flags like they'd won another World Cup. 

I felt the same way about the whole thing back then but valued my good looks too much to make comment. 😨

 

[redjambo]

1 hour ago, SwindonJambo said:

 

Not a valid comparison. The Argentinians were and are colonials themselves, being principally of Spanish and Italian stock, displacing the indigenous population. The Falklands just happen to be relatively near the coast of Argentina and were thought to have been uninhabited before being fought over by the Spanish and the British, with the latter winning out. When they were under Spanish control, Argentina was also a Spanish colony. At no time ever were the Falklands owned by Argentina as an independent country.

 

That's a pretty black and white picture of the "ownership" of the Falkland Islands. In the early 19th century the islands were controlled, albeit mostly through the granting of rights, by the United Provinces, which mutated into Argentina, after Britain had abandoned the islands in 1776. It wasn't until 1833 that Britain "reasserted" its rights to the islands and reoccupied them. If Vernet hadn't had a go at the US whalers shortly before that, history might have been very different.

 

To emphasise how "black and white" your picture is, in 1766 the Spanish were ceded the colony of the French Port Louis, which had been founded before the first British colony of Port Egmont. When the Spanish decided to take over Port Egmont as well, there were some words had between the parties and Spain gave it back. That's it. The British didn't "win out", in respect to the idea that they won the entire Falklands, and both Spanish and British colonies continued existing until the British withdrew. The British did not have control over all the islands. Both countries had a legitimate claim to portions of the islands.

 

So, Britain only had a colonial presence in the islands, in Port Egmont, from 1766 to 1774, that's 8 years. Spain carried on until 1811. In 1823, the United Provinces, centralised in Buenos Aires, granted Vernet the right to exploit the islands' resources and settle there. He formed a colony which survived until 1833 when we decided to return and take over all the islands, control that we had never actually had before. No flag, no country.

 

Edited January 13, 2021 by redjambo

[redjambo]

Republicans currently arguing in the House that the 25th amendment was intended only to be used in case of incapacity of the President, not for transferring his powers because of disagreement with his activities.

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

4 hours ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said:

...and so it begins. Very important that the House impeachment vote doesn’t happen purely along party lines. I’m guessing a dozen or so Republicans in the House will vote to impeach. Hopefully including my local Rep, Fred Upton, although he’s been pretty quiet on the topic.

 

Update...

 

4 House Republicans now publicly stating they’ll vote to impeach:

John Katko

Liz Cheney

Adam Kinsinger

Fred Upton

 

Still think we may get a dozen or so total.

[Sharpie]

55 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

That's a pretty black and white picture of the "ownership" of the Falkland Islands. In the early 19th century the islands were controlled, albeit mostly through the granting of rights, by the United Provinces, which mutated into Argentina, after Britain had abandoned the islands in 1776. It wasn't until 1833 that Britain "reasserted" its rights to the islands and reoccupied them. If Vernet hadn't had a go at the US whalers shortly before that, history might have been very different.

 

To emphasise how "black and white" your picture is, in 1766 the Spanish were ceded the colony of the French Port Louis, which had been founded before the first British colony of Port Egmont. When the Spanish decided to take over Port Egmont as well, there were some words had between the parties and Spain gave it back. That's it. The British didn't "win out", in respect to the idea that they won the entire Falklands, and both Spanish and British colonies continued existing until the British withdrew. The British did not have control over all the islands. Both countries had a legitimate claim to portions of the islands.

 

So, Britain only had a colonial presence in the islands, in Port Egmont, from 1766 to 1774, that's 8 years. Spain carried on until 1811. In 1823, the United Provinces, centralised in Buenos Aires, granted Vernet the right to exploit the islands' resources and settle there. He formed a colony which survived until 1833 when we decided to return and take over all the islands, control that we had never actually had before. No flag, no country.

 

 Excellent historical review of the procurement  of the Islands. I do however think there and its still there a danger of Countries thinking Britain is a soft mark. I served twenty months  in the Suez Canal Zone after the Egyptian military had kicked old Farouk out, their first act was to nationalise the Canal and claim complete ownership of the Canal built by British and French to cut the distance of travel around the Cape. It was twenty months of confusion for an eighteen'/nineteen year old. Egyptians were murdering our comrades and we done nothing in reply. The confusing thing was that the average Egyptian were the nicest people you could meet. In 1954 we left after a Treaty was signed.  We were spat on and verbally abused by Egyptians as we boarded our ships to go back to Britain.  

 

In 1956 Anthony Eden was Prime Minister he obviously had a bug in his rear quarters because Britain, with France and Israel invaded and really hammered Egypt. I relate this because I still think that action and the Falklands action were not so much truly political but more of the old adage don't tweak the lions tail. 

Edited January 13, 2021 by Sharpie

[redjambo]

Democrats saying that a principal rationale of the move is to stop Trump from carrying out any activities which might bolster or facilitate further insurrection before he leaves office, including the potential pardoning of those involved. Republicans saying that Trump has spoken out against the violence.

[Sharpie]

Trump i n Alamo Texas, with his companion, I'm finished I'm out Lindsey Graham who flew down in the Presidential aircraft. Trump done his usual it was rigged, it was faked, they have taken away your rights spiel to a very supportive crowd. I repeat its a long way from over and he is a long way from saying nothing, whatever happens, criminal charges, it will be used by Trump to continue his the Russia thing was a hoax, the Impeachment was a hoax, they are all out to get me, we must fight, which translated means you must fight I don't do that physical stuff you could get hurt and I am not into that.

[redjambo]

3 minutes ago, Sharpie said:

 Excellent historical review of the procurement  of the Islands. I do however think there and its still there a danger of Countries thinking Britain is a soft mark. I served twenty months  in the Suez Canal Zone after the Egyptian military had kicked old Farouk out, there first act was to nationalise the Canal and claim complete ownership of the Canal built by British and French to cut the distance of travel around the Cape. It was twenty months of confusion for an eighteen/ year old. Egyptians were murdering our comrades and we done nothing in reply. The confusing thing was that the average Egyptian was the nicest people you could meet. In 1954 we left after a Treaty was signed.  We were spat on and verbally abused by Egyptians as we boarded our ships to go back to Britain.  

 

In 1956 Anthony Eden was Prime Minister he obviously ha a bug in his rear quarters because Britain, with France and Israel invaded and really hammered Egypt. I relate this because I still think that action and the Falklands action were not so much truly political but more of the old adage don't tweak the lions tail. 

 

You've certainly experienced a lot, Bob.

 

I'm not so sure that my historical review is so excellent - it required a very quick absorption of the details by me simply because I thought our colleague SwindonJambo's review seemed a bit like "history written by the victors". I actually went back to delete my post afterwards because I thought "nobody needs this irrelevant pish of mine" but I was out of time to do so. Thanks anyway.

 

I'm very much a proponent of "jaw-jaw", not "war-war", although the latter is unfortunately sometimes necessary when the former fails to achieve anything.

[redjambo]

Republicans arguing that as Pence has said that he won't support a 25th amendment move anyway, the whole thing is politically motivated and also a waste of time since it is an action that will be divisive instead of uniting.

[redjambo]

Notably, the Republican speakers are having a go at the Democrats, rather than speaking about the issue, more than Democrats are having a go at Republicans. Several Republicans have argued that the Democrats themselves have incited violence in recent times.

[JFK-1]

25 minutes ago, redjambo said:

Several Republicans have argued that the Democrats themselves have incited violence in recent times.

 

Who incited violence? When? What examples are they offering? Any? Just another Trump like ramble along the lines of "some people say" while never telling us who these people are?

[JFK-1]

Trump Defends His Sedition Speech as Support for Impeachment Grows

 

 

 

[John Gentleman]

33 minutes ago, redjambo said:

Republicans arguing that as Pence has said that he won't support a 25th amendment move anyway, the whole thing is politically motivated and also a waste of time since it is an action that will be divisive instead of uniting.

Now that the 25th amendment is no longer an option, here's the pathways to impeachment (though effectively there's only one). Snipped from the NYT:

 

[JFK-1]

Fmr. Sen. Jeff Flake: Not One GOP Colleague Believed There Was Election Fraud

 

 

 

[redjambo]

6 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Who incited violence? When? What examples are they offering? Any? Just another Trump like ramble along the lines of "some people say" while never telling us who these people are?

 

Sorry, I didn't take them on board. One was this I think: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/25/politics/maxine-waters-trump-officials/index.html

 

I got the impression that another was support for the BLM protests, but I may be wrong.

[redjambo]

Now going to a recorded vote...

[redjambo]

Along party lines so far. Ten minutes to go. And I need my kip...

[JFK-1]

10 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Sorry, I didn't take them on board. One was this I think: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/25/politics/maxine-waters-trump-officials/index.html

 

I got the impression that another was support for the BLM protests, but I may be wrong.

 

There is nothing like an equivalence there. First who is Maxine Waters? Someone none of us or most of us have ever heard of. Not a leading Democrat.

Did Joe Biden request people to harass anybody? Did  the president of the US and leader of the Republican party, Trump? Yes he did.

Did Joe Biden organise BLM protests? Did he ask them to turn up in a specific location on a specific date and "fight". No he didn't.

Did Trump ask people to turn up in a specific location on a specific date promising "it's going to be wild" Yes he did.

Then he dispatched them to the capitol to "fight" with no possible intention but to prevent Biden being confirmed as president elect. Which they actually did at least for a period of time.

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, JFK-1 said:

 

There is nothing like an equivalence there. First who is Maxine Waters? Someone none of us or most of us have ever heard of. Not a leading Democrat.

Did Joe Biden request people to harass anybody? Did  the president of the US and leader of the Republican party, Trump? Yes he did.

Did Joe Biden organise BLM protests? Did he ask them to turn up in a specific location on a specific date and "fight". No he didn't.

Did Trump ask people to turn up in a specific location on a specific date promising "it's going to be wild" Yes he did.

Then he dispatched them to the capitol to "fight" with no possible intention but to prevent Biden being confirmed as president elect. Which they actually did at least for a period of time.

 

You would have made a good speech at the debate tonight. Only one Republican voting for the resolution so far with 57 Republicans left to vote. I thought it would be more exciting.

[redjambo]

26 minutes ago, John Gentleman said:

Now that the 25th amendment is no longer an option, here's the pathways to impeachment (though effectively there's only one). Snipped from the NYT:

 

 

Cheers, JG.

[redjambo]

I wish these final 8 members would hurry up and fecking vote. Perhaps they're not going to. The vote passes with, so far perhaps, 1 Republican voting against.

 

Anyway, I doubt very much that I will ever stay up and watch a US House debate again, so there's that.

[Captain Slog]

8 minutes ago, redjambo said:

I wish these final 8 members would hurry up and fecking vote. Perhaps they're not going to. The vote passes with, so far perhaps, 1 Republican voting against.

 

Anyway, I doubt very much that I will ever stay up and watch a US House debate again, so there's that.

Agreed, - oh, theres another outstanding in

 

 

Romney was the sole Republican vote?

Edited January 13, 2021 by Captain Slog

[JFK-1]

You have to wonder if the Republicans have now fully transformed from the party of crazy to the party of suicidal self destruction. Trump has destroyed them.

In the general election they lost Arizona to the Democrats. A state that has been held by Republicans for over 70 years. Then they lost the two senate seats in Georgia to give the Democrats control of the senate.

And as I saw one Republican point out those two seats "should have been a gimme" for the Republicans. They lost it all and it's all due to the insanity of Trump and their enabling of it. And all that was even before the latest insanity at the capitol.

The most rational path now would be to completely remove themselves from Trump. Demonstrate that we know he's crazy but we're not. As pointed out by a Republican in the video I posted above every last one of them knows that Trumps claims of election fraud are utter nonsense.

Yet still they take this path? Demonstrating to the sane Americans and Republicans that we don't give a flying **** about your democracy? It's suicidal. Carry on like this they will become unelectable. Trump is going to go down in history as a plague they had the cure for but didn't use it.

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

17 minutes ago, Captain Slog said:

Agreed, - oh, theres another outstanding in

 

 

Romney was the sole Republican vote?

It was Adam Kinzinger, a vocal Trump critic. If you’re thinking Mitt Romney, he’s in the Senate not the House.

 

This vote wasn’t that important as Pence has already confirmed he won’t use the 25th Amendment. Tomorrow (impeachment) is much more important, and we’re now up to 5 Republican House members who have confirmed they will vote to impeach. This number should grow.

 

[JFK-1]

And incidentally i'm tired of the hypocrisy we hear from all corners when anything shocking happens such as the attack on the capitol.

"It's Un-American" they say. It's "not who we are" they say. We're a beacon of democracy they say.

I say bullshit.

This is nation with a long history of political violence and intolerance right from day one. They have assassinated 4 of their presidents for crying out loud. Wounded another two who were Reagan plus Teddy Roosevelt on top of dozens of failed plots and attempts at assassination.

Beacon of democracy and tolerance my arse. The latest attack on democracy is who they are. Where else in the Western world would we be expecting to see crowds wearing flak jackets and various other combat gear and toting military style rifles at a "rally"?

Nowhere but this self proclaimed beacon of democracy and tolerance.

[John Gentleman]

3 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said:

It was Adam Kinzinger, a vocal Trump critic. If you’re thinking Mitt Romney, he’s in the Senate not the House.

 

This vote wasn’t that important as Pence has already confirmed he won’t use the 25th Amendment. Tomorrow (impeachment) is much more important, and we’re now up to 5 Republican House members who have confirmed they will vote to impeach. This number should grow.

 

Aside from 'exposing' recalcitrant Republicans, does it really matter (assuming all Democrats vote yay)?

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

1 minute ago, John Gentleman said:

Aside from 'exposing' recalcitrant Republicans, does it really matter (assuming all Democrats vote yay)?

In a narrow legal sense, no. But it matters greatly that it is not simply a partisan, party-line venture as this is a safeguard against the torrent of bullshit talking points that will come down from many on the right. And it will matter to history.

[John Gentleman]

32 minutes ago, Kalamazoo Jambo said:

In a narrow legal sense, no. But it matters greatly that it is not simply a partisan, party-line venture as this is a safeguard against the torrent of bullshit talking points that will come down from many on the right. And it will matter to history.

Apologies KJ. I was thinking in terms of the impeachment, not invoking the 25th amendment (though what you say probably still applies).

[ri Alban]

1 hour ago, redjambo said:

I wish these final 8 members would hurry up and fecking vote. Perhaps they're not going to. The vote passes with, so far perhaps, 1 Republican voting against.

 

Anyway, I doubt very much that I will ever stay up and watch a US House debate again, so there's that.

I watch Holyrood and WM debates on road cones etc... Just in case Russia invade and I can the cope with sleep deprivation and folk talking shite all day. 

It’s a buzz.

 

Why are we talk about the Falklands, Orkney and Shetland. Fwiw Scotland bought our islands and Norway can come ahead. 👊🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JFK-1]

5 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Why are we talk about the Falklands, Orkney and Shetland. Fwiw Scotland bought our islands and Norway can come ahead.

 

Well regarding the islands geography also has to be a major factor when speaking of Orkney in particular. Orkney is only around 10 miles off the Scottish coast. That's within what? An hour or two rowing distance far less powered ship distance. Hell it's within swimming distance.

The Falklands on the other hand are almost a thousand miles from Argentina. Considerably further than that from Britain to be fair but Britain does have a legitimate historic claim and a population there who freely voted to remain British. That's the be all and end all.

[ri Alban]

Just now, JFK-1 said:

 

Well regarding the islands geography also has to be a major factor when speaking of Orkney in particular. Orkney is only around 10 miles off the Scottish coast. That's within what? An hour or two rowing distance far less powered ship distance. Hell it's within swimming distance.

The Falklands on the other hand are almost a thousand miles from Argentina. Considerably further than that from Britain to be fair but Britain does have a legitimate historic claim and a population there who freely voted to remain British. That's the be all and end all.

Not really, Crimea also voted to be Russian. Supposedly. 

[JFK-1]

18 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Not really, Crimea also voted to be Russian. Supposedly. 

 

Not the same thing, Crimea was sheared off from Ukraine. And the referendum declared illegal and invalid by the UN plus unrecognised as part of Russia by most of the world.

There is no dispute over the Falklands sovereignty nor a lack of global recognition from pretty much anybody but Argentina. 

[JFK-1]

I think it's a rational response to try to remove and silence Trump as quickly as possible. Doesn't everyone think this is a corrupt individual not forward thinking enough to grasp a day of reckoning would come? That day of reckoning is arriving just one week from now and he's appearing ever more desperate.

Personally I suspect that in the following days, weeks, and months there's likely to be an avalanche of information on even more corrupt and criminal behaviour regarding which he will no longer have the power to hinder investigation of.

He's now desperately acting ahead of the reckoning to attempt encouraging mass anarchy from the cult nuts in the population who follow him when the hammer falls.

And that hammer may even strike it's first blow directly after noon next week when Biden is inaugurated. One more reason he's not going to be there because he will very possibly be in hiding perhaps even out of the country in an attempt to escape being indicted.

Do we really want to give him the freedom to keep up this 'witch hunt' utter shite when everyone knows everything they're accusing him of is true?

 

Because I predict that's exactly what he's going to do when all the indictments begin arriving. There will be entire volumes of paper and other evidence demonstrating his indisputable guilt and he will still cry witch hunt.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

When it starts to go South it can do so quickly, as Donald 'The Worst President in History' Trump is finding out.

 

Deutsche Bank will not do any more business with Trump and Signature bank which Trump has personal accounts with is closing those accounts with him.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/12/investing/deutsche-bank-trump/index.html

 

[Riccarton3]

US military heads have made a statement recognising Biden ad the next chief of staff. Also highlighting their role in defending law, beliefs and values the Nazis want to tear down

[DETTY29]

Is it Lou Dodds on Fox.

 

'We know the grand fraud is there.  We have looked EVERYWHERE for it, but can't find it.  But it is there.'

Edited January 13, 2021 by DETTY29

[I P Knightley]

12 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

One of my favourite meme/clips. It seems to work in so many guises. Proper cheered me up this morning.

[I P Knightley]

6 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

Trump Defends His Sedition Speech as Support for Impeachment Grows

 

 

 

The guy on the clip at 11:00...

 

Once you've seen him as Butt-head, you just can't unsee it.

 

[Victorian]

Brilliant how Trump crowed about how they had looked at his words and they cleared him of any wrongdoing.  But nobody in the world knows who "they" are.  

 

When in trouble... invent people.

[Cade]

US Supreme Court rules that abortion medication cannot be sent via the postal system and that all abortions must only be carried out in a hospital.

 

 

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

7 hours ago, John Gentleman said:

Apologies KJ. I was thinking in terms of the impeachment, not invoking the 25th amendment (though what you say probably still applies).

No worries - I was referring to impeachment, too.

[JFK-1]

2 hours ago, Victorian said:

Brilliant how Trump crowed about how they had looked at his words and they cleared him of any wrongdoing.  But nobody in the world knows who "they" are.  

 

When in trouble... invent people.

 

That's just something he has been doing since the beginning of his dysfunctional reign. "Some people say"

 

Who says that Donnie? "Some people"

[Sharpie]

7 hours ago, ri Alban said:

I watch Holyrood and WM debates on road cones etc... Just in case Russia invade and I can the cope with sleep deprivation and folk talking shite all day. 

It’s a buzz.

 

Why are we talk about the Falklands, Orkney and Shetland. Fwiw Scotland bought our islands and Norway can come ahead. 👊🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

 

 

 

I referred to the Falklands not as a political point, but as to the value of planning, tactics, use of personnel, as opposed to the 6th January debacle where none of these attributes were utilised in any way.

The Orkneys Shetland comment was as I understood it to be a comment on going to war on something you didn't even own. Hundreds of miles away.