Illuminati-R-Us

New articles of impeachment are apparently being filed Monday morning...

Arneb wrote:What gets to me is how the security forces showed admirable restraint in using force to remove the intruders. Well I didn't know they were mentally equipped to do that. In summer, during the BLM protests, I learned that American police have come to view citizens as enemy combattants because anyone was liable, at any timne to attack them with a Magnum or, for that matter, with AR-15. Therefore, no-one knew how de-escalation strategies could work.

My interpretation is, if these intruders had been BLM activist, you could have scraped their remains from the pavement a mile away from Congress, but since these people are good, Christian, white patriots, you have to politely escort them out of the building and call a taxi for them so thay make curfew time.

Did anyone cry institutionalized racism? I'm shocked.

LOADS of people have made exactly that point, but they're mostly black. There was a very mild reference on the BBC to the contrasts that have been drawn between how law enforcement dealt with Wednesday's events and how it dealt with BLM protests, particularly the Portland and Washington ones. You would never guess from their report that a lot of black Americans are totally outraged at the contrast. One Tweet that's doing the rounds: "We don't want you to shoot them like you shoot us. We want you NOT to shoot us like you don't shoot them." But as I say. The overwhelming majority of whites who I've seen support this point have been my colleagues and students from the People's Democratic Republic of SOAS. (And disappointingly few even of them.) Well, to adapt, but not very much, a passage from the Bible, "If you remain silent, justice for them will arise from another quarter. But you and yours will be held accountable."

Still, it's good to see Arneb speaking out.

MM_Dandy wrote:Oh, I forgot why I actually came on in the first place. I haven't seen it, yet, but Trump gave a speech yesterday in which he actually conceded the presidential election, and called the insurrection a "heinous attack." Apparently, online right-wing nutjobs are losing their minds over it.

And also that he said in his speech that he was part of the march then bailed. I'm sure many of them thought they were 'escorting' the president and were unaware that he had opted out.

I haven't got all the way through it yet but here is his full speech to the crowd that morning. All the references seem to be about 'we'.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-t ... d=75110558

Trump has proven to be a terrible leader. Yet somehow, he got to be POTUS, which shows that terrible leaders can't be prevented from being elected to positions of power (unless perhaps, they were known to be terrible beforehand). So failing that, if only there was a silver bullet to prevent emergent terrible leaders from inciting terrible acts of violence, whether these acts be condoning police brutality and racist persecution, or inciting mob violation of lawful and legitimate democratic institutions and processes. Terrible leaders need to be put on trial and sentenced when found guilty. At the very minimum, he needs to be prevented from being re-elected, so impeachment might at least achieve that.

Lianachan wrote:

That's great. I wonder if the last line is a reference to the images showing some insurrectionists carrying the Republic of Georgia's flag. Like someone once said, "They're not sending their best."

Ever since the outcome of November's election became clear, several re-dubbings of Downfall have been made. I don't doubt we'll see more after this.

tubeswell wrote:Trump has proven to be a terrible leader. Yet somehow, he got to be POTUS, which shows that terrible leaders can't be prevented from being elected to positions of power (unless perhaps, they were known to be terrible beforehand).

I think it was known beforehand in this case, although there may be have been some uncertainty about precisely how terrible.

tubeswell wrote:Terrible leaders need to be put on trial and sentenced when found guilty.

I think they're going to have a hard time coming up with charges that will stick at the level of proof required in a courtroom, unless there are some facts we don't know about yet.

Various financial charges may have a better chance, and since at least some of them will be state-level, they can't be pardoned by the president. New York even changed their law to make this clear; you can guess whom they had in mind when passing the new law.

Definitely new ground for the US. Unlike South Korea, where the former president going to jail is just considered normal, this is a novelty.

I never thought I'd see a US president getting impeached nine days before he is scheduled to leave office anyway

Also, I think Mike Pence would only get the presidential pension if Trump is removed by impeachment, not by 25th amendment.

But since there doesn't seem to be much possibility that the congress/senate would get the impeachment done by 20 January, he may as well just go for the 25th.

Мастер wrote:I think they're going to have a hard time coming up with charges that will stick at the level of proof required in a courtroom, unless there are some facts we don't know about yet.

I believe the charge this time is "Incitement of Insurrection". And they have his own speech to prove it.

Interesting times...

Lance wrote:

Мастер wrote:I think they're going to have a hard time coming up with charges that will stick at the level of proof required in a courtroom, unless there are some facts we don't know about yet.

I believe the charge this time is "Incitement of Insurrection". And they have his own speech to prove it.

Interesting times...

Well that’s the impeachment. I meant an actual criminal prosecution.

Maybe they should rethink the thing about immigrants not being able to run for President.

The New York courts have plenty of evidence, they plan prosecutions for fraud and money laundering.

g-one wrote:Maybe they should rethink the thing about immigrants not being able to run for President.

In the future, people aren't going to run for president, they're going to try to take over the capitol building and the White House by force.

The Conan sword might be useful there.

Мастер wrote:

Lance wrote:

Мастер wrote:I think they're going to have a hard time coming up with charges that will stick at the level of proof required in a courtroom, unless there are some facts we don't know about yet.

I believe the charge this time is "Incitement of Insurrection". And they have his own speech to prove it.
Interesting times...

Well that’s the impeachment. I meant an actual criminal prosecution.

True, but it's also a Federal crime that can be pursued and prosecuted after he's out of office by whatever means.

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

Lance wrote:True, but it's also a Federal crime that can be pursued and prosecuted after he's out of office by whatever means.

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

Yes, but what I am saying is, it might be very hard to get a conviction in a court. If he has a good lawyer (i.e., one who keeps him off the stand), they’ll argue he was not advocating imminent violent action, and anything he said was protected speech.

Now, that’s assuming they don’t have additional evidence we don’t know about. If they do, it could be a different story.

But absent that, I think a conviction on some sort of financial impropriety is more likely. New York just changed their law to make it clear that state/federal offences that receive a federal pardon are still prosecutable at the state level - guess who this law is for?

Okay, yeah...

Honestly, I don't care why he goes to jail, just that he does. They got Capone for taxes too.

I hope I'm not being too optimistic, but I'm feeling the tides may be turning a little.

Hello, impeachment, my old friend...

The House has voted to impeach Trump again. The reports I've seen are that McConnell will not re-convene the Senate until the 19th. Perhaps they will not be so reluctant to impeach a President who is no longer in office, and will consider preventing from holding office again. I'm not sure what the swearing-in process is for Senators. If it requires the Senate to be in session, then McConnell will remain the majority leader until the 19th, at least. In that case, even if the Georgia runoff election results are certified before then (and even then, it's not likely they will be certified before the 15th, at the soonest), it won't do much good. I hope McConnell lives long enough to see his ratfuckery undone.

EDIT: Just after posting this, I came across some discussion as to whether Trump can be pardoned for inciting insurrection. I imagine that he will claim that he can, but that it would shield him from legal consequences and not from the impeachment trial.

Looks like Trump has 50% of all impeachment’s of a US President (2/4).

Lianachan wrote:Looks like Trump has 50% of all impeachment’s of a US President (2/4).

More impeachments than anyone in history!

MM_Dandy wrote:Hello, impeachment, my old friend...

I've come to vote on you again . . .

MM_Dandy wrote:The House has voted to impeach Trump again. The reports I've seen are that McConnell will not re-convene the Senate until the 19th. Perhaps they will not be so reluctant to impeach a President who is no longer in office, and will consider preventing from holding office again. I'm not sure what the swearing-in process is for Senators. If it requires the Senate to be in session, then McConnell will remain the majority leader until the 19th, at least. In that case, even if the Georgia runoff election results are certified before then (and even then, it's not likely they will be certified before the 15th, at the soonest), it won't do much good. I hope McConnell lives long enough to see his ratfuckery undone.

Supposedly, McConnell is telling his friends that this is an opportunity to purge the Republican Party of Trumpism. While I agree that it is an opportunity to purge the Republican Party of Trump, I'm not sure Trumpism will die so easily.

MM_Dandy wrote:EDIT: Just after posting this, I came across some discussion as to whether Trump can be pardoned for inciting insurrection. I imagine that he will claim that he can, but that it would shield him from legal consequences and not from the impeachment trial.

No effect on impeachment, unless they add "self-pardon" to his rap sheet

I expect he will self-pardon, then maybe in the future, he will be charged with a federal crime, he will invoke the pardon, and it will go up through the courts, possibly to the supreme court. When it does, we'll know the answer.

So will a constitutional amendment prohibiting self-pardoning be proposed?

I've heard people talking about civil liability as well, which I suppose could come into play for the people killed in the riot.

Мастер wrote:

Lianachan wrote:Looks like Trump has 50% of all impeachment’s of a US President (2/4).

More impeachments than anyone in history!

"I have the biggest impeachment in history! No one's been impeached like me!"

How dangerous, still, is Trump?