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.
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.
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).
tubeswell wrote:Terrible leaders need to be put on trial and sentenced when found guilty.
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.
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...
g-one wrote:Maybe they should rethink the thing about immigrants not being able to run for President.
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.
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
Lianachan wrote:Looks like Trump has 50% of all impeachment’s of a US President (2/4).
MM_Dandy wrote:Hello, impeachment, my old friend...
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.
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.
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!
Return to Current Events and Politics
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests