Re: 2020 Elections - Led to Impeachment?
Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:12 pm
Senate moved pretty fast to confirm acb.
Same Party, Different House
https://fanlax.com/forum/
That's what can be done when there's advance planning & enough police so that they're not fighting for their life, retreating, & giving up the territory they are supposed to protect. They have to have sufficient numbers to make arrests then transport & hold the suspects.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:15 pm Nine days police in DC arrested more people than they did during the Capitol siege
Yep. She was demoted at least once. Amazing what she got away with. (or maybe not so amazing, given her selfies)old salt wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 2:32 pmGood catch DMac = E4. I bet she was busted to that at NJP.DMac wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:15 amFigured that "high level" security was BS (pretty sure you mean E4).old salt wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 6:32 amI've seen reports of her total time in service varying from 11 to 14 years. The first 4 on active duty, then 2 yrs AF reserve, then her last 6 yrs in the DC ANG when she lived in SoMd then Annapolis & worked at Calvert Cliffs nuc plant until 2018 or '19. She then appeared to go (further) off the rails, hooked up with a married guy (now her husband) in SoMd, where she had an alleged road rage ramming incident with his ex. They moved to SD & bought a pool cleaning company. She left an interesting trail on social media (lots of hottie selfies) & in legal filings. In all that service time, she only advanced to Senior Airman (0-4). She served as a USAF security guard with some law enforcement training. Described by a fellow airman friend as a "boisterous firecracker". I bet her deployments were interesting. You could see this coming.
https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/b ... story.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ds-ex.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... pitol.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... sheet.html
Guess the patriot got what she wanted, died a real hero (or phukin
idiot, depending on how you look at it).
It does not appear to be as much of a slam dunk - If it were that easy why wouldn't they pursue it as you suggest?seacoaster wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:45 pm An alternative:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... etter-way/
"House Democrats’ plans to rush through an impeachment of President Trump won’t work, for a simple reason: The Constitution envisions impeachment only as a tool for proceeding against a president while he remains in office. Impeachment is meant to protect the country, not punish the offender. But that needn’t be the end of efforts to prevent Trump from again holding federal office. There is another, little-known constitutional provision that can achieve precisely that without distorting the Constitution’s meaning.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, passed in the aftermath of the Civil War, bars Trump from holding another federal office if he is found to have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the Constitution of the United States.
The finding could be accomplished by a simple majority vote of both houses, in contrast to the requirement in impeachment proceedings that the Senate vote to convict by a two-thirds majority. Congress would simply need to declare that Trump engaged in an act of “insurrection or rebellion” by encouraging the attack on the Capitol. Under the 14th Amendment, Trump could run for the White House again only if he were able to persuade a future Congress to, “by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
Section 3 was enacted to bar any “civil or military” officer who had served the United States before the Civil War from regaining a position of authority if he betrayed his country by supporting the Confederacy. During the height of Reconstruction, a number of former Confederates were, in fact, barred from holding office. It was only in 1872 that Congress once again allowed these men to serve the United States by passing an Amnesty Act with the requisite two-thirds majorities.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) seems to believe that the only way to disqualify Trump from running for a second term is to gain House support for a second impeachment while he is still in office, even though the Senate trial can’t begin until Jan. 20 or 21. Since impeachment is designed to remove officials from office, the constitutionality of such a trial is problematic. But even if it were legitimate, the trial would come with heavy costs to the country and to the incoming Biden administration.
First, the trial could well lead to Trump’s acquittal if most Republican senators decide that a vote to convict would damage their reelection chances by alienating their right-wing base. What message would that send? Second, having the Senate’s time consumed in holding a trial would delay President-elect Joe Biden’s efforts to secure confirmation of his Cabinet and other nominees and divert attention from other initiatives of the new administration. Third, it would further divide the country at precisely the time Biden is seeking to bring America together.
Of course, this being a litigious country, Trump could appeal to the courts to declare that Congress’s determination that he had engaged in an “insurrection or rebellion” was not justified by the facts. But this would be risky, since Trump would be required to testify under oath in response to detailed questioning by the government’s lawyers about his precise conduct during the attack.
Moreover, if the judiciary finally upheld the congressional determination, its judgment would undermine claims by the extreme right that Trump is a victim of a partisan vendetta.
Even more fundamentally, the law is the law. Not only is it in the political interest of the protagonists to heed the express instructions of the 14th Amendment; it is even more important to demonstrate to all Americans that their representatives in Washington take the Constitution seriously.
Now is the time to take a step back, call a halt to the House’s rush toward a last-minute impeachment — and deploy the constitutional means to the important end of making sure Trump is out of office for good."
Why forego?old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:07 pmWould you forgo the 14th Amendment solution outlined above in hopes of a subsequent Senate conviction later ?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:44 pmBiden may have a preference about timing, but he should keep his hands off it as much as he can.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:35 pmIt would be the quickest, surest way to keep Trump from ever holding office again.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:32 pmDoes it have to be an 'alternative' or can this be a 'yes and' with impeachment process? Perhaps takes some of the urgency out of the Senate trial for impeachment, which would probably suit both sides of the aisle...do that trial process downstream after a heck of a lot more evidence has been developed and the magnitude of how close we came actually sinks in. Then do it with bipartisan support.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 9:12 pmThat sounds great. Do it in the House now. I bet you could get 51 Senate votes on Jan 19, sending Trump to St Helena.seacoaster wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:45 pm An alternative:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... etter-way/
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, passed in the aftermath of the Civil War, bars Trump from holding another federal office if he is found to have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the Constitution of the United States.
The finding could be accomplished by a simple majority vote of both houses, in contrast to the requirement in impeachment proceedings that the Senate vote to convict by a two-thirds majority. Congress would simply need to declare that Trump engaged in an act of “insurrection or rebellion” by encouraging the attack on the Capitol. Under the 14th Amendment, Trump could run for the White House again only if he were able to persuade a future Congress to, “by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
That should not preclude prosecution after out of office.
Then let Biden decide if & when he wants to go forward with impeachment & a Senate trial.
His current position is that impeachment and trial in Senate can be done at the same time as moving his Cabinet through and initial legislative priorities. These guys are geared up and ready to go.
But it might nevertheless be wise to delay the Senate portion some heartbeats while the FBI develops more and more evidence of what went down and who was involved and why. I'd like to see this be a strong bi-partisan process when it gets done, send a very, very strong message. McConnell's capable of delivering that now, but I'm not thinking he's 100% ready.
The sooner Trump is prohibited from holding office again, the sooner he heads toward marginalization & less influence.
Yup, voter suppression...this, too, is what Salty wants.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:01 am https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics ... index.html
This is what it is really about.
another snowflake...Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:38 am Laurel County Sheriff John Root and Jailer Jamie Mosely held a “burning party” of UK basketball apparel in protest. Root said on a Facebook post that UK may have won the game but lost respect. He criticized coach John Calipari, who joined the team in kneeling, for allowing the event.
It’s always one side that wants to make it harder to register and harder to vote.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:10 amYup, voter suppression...this, too, is what Salty wants.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:01 am https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics ... index.html
This is what it is really about.
"voter irregularities" BS.
Historically it was a different side, but yes, always one side...Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:13 amIt’s always one side that wants to make it harder to register and harder to vote.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:10 amYup, voter suppression...this, too, is what Salty wants.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:01 am https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics ... index.html
This is what it is really about.
"voter irregularities" BS.
Yes. Have the people / demographic that are generally impacted changed?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:15 amHistorically it was a different side, but yes, always one side...Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:13 amIt’s always one side that wants to make it harder to register and harder to vote.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:10 amYup, voter suppression...this, too, is what Salty wants.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:01 am https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics ... index.html
This is what it is really about.
"voter irregularities" BS.
Nope, same sorts of folks and/or their kin and kind, different brand.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:17 amYes. Have the people / demographic that are generally impacted changed?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:15 amHistorically it was a different side, but yes, always one side...Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:13 amIt’s always one side that wants to make it harder to register and harder to vote.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:10 amYup, voter suppression...this, too, is what Salty wants.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:01 am https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics ... index.html
This is what it is really about.
"voter irregularities" BS.
Yep.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:36 amNope, same sorts of folks and/or their kin and kind, different brand.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:17 amYes. Have the people / demographic that are generally impacted changed?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:15 amHistorically it was a different side, but yes, always one side...Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:13 amIt’s always one side that wants to make it harder to register and harder to vote.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:10 amYup, voter suppression...this, too, is what Salty wants.Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:01 am https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics ... index.html
This is what it is really about.
"voter irregularities" BS.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/gerr ... ems-fix-it
Gerrymandering Created The Vacuum Trump Needed To Inspire Faux Coup. Here’s How Dems Can Fix It
It’s no coincidence that the vast preponderance of those who incited the insurrection by objecting to the counting of electoral votes were politicians who owed their perpetual re-election to gerrymandering.