Pyrian on 9/1/2021 at 10:07
Quote Posted by demagogue
It'll just take 3 GOP votes over the last one to cross the line.
It's a 2/3 vote in the Senate to sustain the charges. They'll need 18 more votes than last time.
Quote Posted by demagogue
...first term impeachment is still very much in the cards.
McConnell says the Senate trial won't be completed before the inauguration. Trump might still get impeached and barred from further office, but I don't think first term impeachment removal is in the cards if McConnell's not on board to rush it through.
demagogue on 9/1/2021 at 10:23
Ah, thank you for following up on that. 2/3 isn't out of the question now either. I was just watching that video where they were chanting "hang Mike Pence!", and probably some Rep Senators will also realize they were on a hit list when that mob broke in.
I think there's enough interpretive room in the term "first term impeachment" for an impeachment process after the inauguration, if you had to pick a category for it. It's certainly not a 2nd term impeachment, it's still an impeachment, and it was for actions taken in the first term. I guess we'll cross that bridge if we get there.
lowenz on 9/1/2021 at 10:44
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
4) Qanon (
Trump was hired by the military to help oust bad actors from the CIA and their friends in the Deep State)
So there are 2 Deep States :p
'cause "
military hiring a president" sounds like THE essence of the "Deep State" notion to me.
And the really dangerous incarnation.
Gryzemuis on 9/1/2021 at 11:58
I wonder if someone can use this week's events to create some structural change in the US. Right now, this century, the last 20-25 years, the US is on a path to self-implode. How can that be changed? Is it possible?
I think one of the biggest problems is the 2-party system. It encourages each party to take in all the allies they can get. Including the bad apples. Once a terrible politician is inside one of the 2 parties, he has a safe-haven. You want multiple parties, so it is clear what each of those parties want and strive for. Maybe a dozen or more. I think the evangelicals should have their own party. Bernie Sanders should have had his own party. The tea-party should have been its own independent party. The federal government is then formed by a coalition of a majority of those parties. Just like we do in so many other countries. The President can be chosen by your parliament. Or there can be separate elections for the position of president, with multiple candidates. More than 2 in any case, preferably one per party.
To allow the creation and growth of new parties, you need to get rid of the "winner takes all" system. No electoral college. One woman or man, one vote. No electoral thresholds. So the smallest parties can take part in election, and have a change to win one seat. And then grow from there.
I understand that the Republicans don't want this. They will lose direct power immediately, when the "winner takes all" system is gone. They will lose power immediately when their gerrymandering is removed. In the long term, they'll lose more power, because other conservative parties will pop up. But that will be true for the Democrats too. In the end, the power will be shared, by 2 or more parties that will form a coalition.
A system with many parties might also reduce partisanship (political polarization). Right now, it is easy to yell "you don't agree with my plans, because you are part of the enemy party". When you have a dozen parties, some working together, some being closer to each other, but not the same, it will be much harder to draw a thick line in the sand.
Another effect would be that it will be much harder to manipulate half the country with false news, bigoted news, propaganda. During the last 25 years, Fox News has been the Republicans' propaganda machine. They picked a party, and pushed it full force. This means they calculated that they would lose the other half of the country as customers/market. They didn't care, because having the Republican half of the population as market is enough. Suppose there are 12 parties. Are you gonna do the same trick? Pick one party, push it. And lose the other 11 parties? That's financial suicide (at least for a large company). Also, if you, and your party lie, there will be 11 other parties (and news agencies) going against that lie. It's no longer one against one. It no longer "both parties are equally bad". With a dozen parties, you can't play these dirty tricks anymore.
Normally this would never happen. But the recent events might be enough motivation to actually change politics. The 70 million voters who are willing to vote for a fascist are still there. They don't go away. How do you change their minds? How do you soften the situation? How do you de-polarize US politics?
I think a multi-party system would be the best step towards that. And maybe the easiest step to achieve. You don't need to change all the state-level stuff (governors, judges, etc). You only need change at the federal level. You can steal (the best) ideas from other countries. Technically it's doable. Doesn't even cost a lot of money. There only needs to be a political will to do it.
Nameless Voice on 9/1/2021 at 13:24
As I mentioned before, they'd need some kind of transferable or run-off voting for that to work, otherwise people would still be forced to vote for the two large parties because any other vote would be wasted.
SubJeff on 9/1/2021 at 13:26
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
This is a bad faith argument.
The Trump team claims their evidence is true and is asking for a "good faith" effort to examine it.
You do not even need the accused to be present.
Get computer scientists, IT workers, NSA personnel, and mathematicians into the room with the evidence and validate it the truth\falsehood of it digitally.
Wait, you're not STILL suggesting the election was rigged, are you?
nbohr1more on 9/1/2021 at 13:35
Quote Posted by That Miserable Thief
You are such an apologist for what you claim to not support. You actually believe that all of the 60+ failed lawsuits only failed because of corruption or politics. Jesus Christ. Occam's Razor be damned. And you imply that I am thick? I understand why you have been blocked and ignored by many here. I have been lurking here for 20 years, and normally only rarely post in Thief fan mission threads, but your illogical interjections goaded me into response. I was mistaken to believe that you might be a rational, critical thinker. Your self-righteous condescension is not nearly opaque enough to hide your narcissism and ignorance.
I guess the rules should be changed because...Trump can't win while following them. Because everyone ELSE is corrupt. Not because his assertions are fantastical lies created to protect his fragile little ego. Trump has long screamed the false narrative that he is a victim. And here you perpetuate that falsehood, because you are so neutral. Everyone picked on Baby Donnie. They all cheated and stole what is rightfully his.
Derp.
For the record, I am an independent and voted third party in 2016 and 2020, and I abstained in 2012. I vote by candidate, not party.
This is just plain shilling.
Go case by case and you will see that some lawsuits were "lost" because the Trump team dropped them because there would not be enough votes and the legal
theory that "some fraudulent votes means there is an overall problem" was rejected by higher courts even though there was a SCOTUS precedent for such a lawsuit.
Again, pay attention to who those higher courts are in relation to the Trump team.
Nah, just believe your MSM narratives written by the CIA.
nbohr1more on 9/1/2021 at 13:37
Quote Posted by That Miserable Thief
To add, if this election was "stolen" as the brainless GOP sheep believe, it would be the most successful conspiracy in the history of mankind...orchestrated by "libtards." Reconcile that.
Not "libtards", CIA orchestrated just as the CIA has done in MANY other countries.
nbohr1more on 9/1/2021 at 13:43
Quote Posted by SubJeff
Wait, you're not STILL suggesting the election was rigged, are you?
I will believe that the election was rigged by the CIA until the cyber forensics are "credibly" debunked.
I don't want to hear all the political pundits and legal analysts.
Get me an army Computer Scientists and then tell me that the Trump team claims, the claims of the head of the US Army Cyberwarfare division, etc are false.
Just as with the former head of the NSA "Bill Binney", nobody has credibly "debunked" his forensic analysis of the DNC leak files.
I am just sick of being lied to by the media.
Put computer specialists on my TV, Radio, Print Media, and Internet and tell "non technical" people who aren't scientists to shut up for a few seconds.
lowenz on 9/1/2021 at 13:47
Why? Computer Scientists are honest not-politically-biased people by default?
They are mean as the other people, and they love money too.
NOOB for more? :D
