Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[facilitatorn]

http://www.vice.com/en_us/article/k7qg4z/summer-camp-covid-spread-risk-for-kids-and-counselors

The small scale model underway creating data relevant to the reopening of schools is not going well.

Fewer people every day trust republicans to make a school opening go any better. Most expect it to go worse.

Supply side thinking is a clusterfuck. Trump is a sideshow, ugly and poisonous as he is. Mitch is patient zero. His caucus are the superspreaders.

Fortunately, the voting population is developing some heard immunity,

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2020/7/16/1961265/-It-s-not-just-Trump-voters-are-abandoning-the-Republican-party-like-it-s-sinking-ship

[Hamilton Samuels]

https://nypost.com/2020/07/16/protesters-got-shipment-of-bats-before-brooklyn-bridge-brawl-video/

Hardly helping the cause.

As long as they don't eat them they should be okay.

The intent was never peaceful. That's why it harms.

But you knew that.

It was a PUN, uno.

Nothing FUNNY about peaceful protest being destroyed by interlopers intent on violent conflict.

[Hamilton Samuels]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-millennials-and-gen-zers-can-talk-about-race-and-racism-so-their-parents-and-grandparents-will-listen-2020-07-15?mod=mw_latestnews

[Hamilton Samuels]

GOP governor slams Trump:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/marylands-republican-governor-slams-trumps-handling-of-coronavirus-pandemic-2020-07-16?mod=newsviewer_click

He'll run for POTUS in 2024.

[bankshot1]

Biden should call on Trump to resign for all the damage he's caused.
Maybe wait until the week before the first debate ...
(though I'd be tempted to call the debates off)

Biden calling for Trump's resignation would be seen as an empty political grandstanding.

But I wonder with Trump's #s plummeting and most Americans having no faith in Trump's ability to govern or lead us in a crisis, IF Mitch Machiavellian would move on Trump, publicly imploring him to resign for the good of the country, and let VP Pence run out the clock and probably get toasted as the R's 2020 pence-hitter versus Biden.

Mitchy's Machiavellian maneuver, knifing Trump (et tu Mitchus?) sort of clears him of Trump taint, might save a R-senate, (and Mitchy's power seat) and resets the Repubs for 2022-24. With Trumps 35-40% approval ratings, barring mircales (plural), 2020 looks like a disaster for the Repubs in November. so what's the down-side a few crazy Trump tweets about Mitch?

just a thought

Mitch could just move to reconsider the vote on impeachment...

That would need the House to reimpeach and IMO we're not going there.

Nope. It could be done strictly in the Senate, no need for Nancy to get involved. Mitt could move to reconsider just on the one count he voted against, for example.

reconsider - Senate rules permit one motion to reconsider any question decided by vote, if offered by a senator who voted on the winning side. Normally a supporter of the outcome immediately moves to reconsider the vote, and the same senator or another immediately moves to table this motion, thus securing the outcome of the vote.

I don't know the rules of the Senate, but it strikes me purely as a layman, that as Trump was found "not guilty" on the impeachment charges brought before the Senate, a motion to reoconsider in this case, might be viewed as double jeopardy. So a new charge would have to be brought against him.

But I leave it to legal experts and those possessing far more expertise than I will ever possess to set the record straight.

Anyone seen kid?

Double jeopardy is a legal term involving criminal cases. Impeachment trials are not criminal and are only "legal" in the sense that they are not illegal. There is no double jeopardy possible.

It's not going to happen, Banks. I know that. But I also know it would fall within the Senate rules to reconsider the not guilty vote and for it to have a different outcome.

Yes double jeopardy is a legal term, and I've no idea if a president could be found "not guilty" in a Senate jury vote and then guilty months later on a re-vote on the same issue. It smells like double-jeopardy.

And I've no idea if its legal to do so, or how it might be viewed by a SC review.

I understand that you have no idea. Nor is there any reason for you to have known.

I'm telling you how it works.

Despite the fact that it would be double jeopardy in a criminal court, there is no such concept in a Senate trial (or a civil trial, for that matter).

And SCOTUS repeatedly, despite the efforts of whomever has been out of power, declines to try to change the Senate's rules because the Senate is empowered by the Constitution to set their own.

Josh I'm sure you believe you're right.

But in this instance when you say that Mitch could do it NOW (July) how does that stand with Senate rules as you posted that says

and I quote you

reconsider - Senate rules permit one motion to reconsider any question decided by vote, if offered by a senator who voted on the winning side. Normally a supporter of the outcome immediately moves to reconsider the vote, and the same senator or another immediately moves to table this motion, thus securing the outcome of the vote.

Even if assuming the Senate could retry Trump on the same charges after finding him not guilty, which i remain highly dubiious of, no matter your strenous and learned  opinion you bring to the table, how does the phrase, " immediately moves to reconsider the vote" and the fact that a re-trial/reconsideration would takes month later be considered?

I'm thinking immediately and it being months later, should perhaps make you reconsider your opinion.

 

[Echo4]

https://www.comicsands.com/trump-warns-biden-no-ratings-2646403316.html?fbclid=IwAR0v0BW8GhzsXFAJQMeMWaJNe5oeqwY8o_71QjkbvMBfBNZunRu4pgrKOd4

Not that it really matters -- especially since formatting is frequently such a disaster here -- but in a link anything after the ? can be cut off.

https://www.comicsands.com/trump-warns-biden-no-ratings-2646403316.html

I try to do it with the image posts, but largely don't bother with c&p urls.

[Echo4]

https://nypost.com/2020/07/16/protesters-got-shipment-of-bats-before-brooklyn-bridge-brawl-video/

Hardly helping the cause.

As long as they don't eat them they should be okay.

The intent was never peaceful. That's why it harms.

But you knew that.

It was a PUN, uno.

Nothing FUNNY about peaceful protest being destroyed by interlopers intent on violent conflict.

If you say so.

That they ordered bats in advance is pretty wry, all by itself.

And the confluence of their bats and the ostensible coronavirus bats was too good to pass up for this punster.

[bankshot1]

Its meanigless grandstanding.
Biden calls for Trump to resign"
News at 11
BFD.

Let Biden attack Trump on his stupid polices, those have legs and will resonate with the electorate.
...
It'll never happen.

Well, Biden wouldn't just toss that out and walk away after one sentence.
You follow that pronouncement up with all the wrongs committed and the horrors inflicted by the Trump Admin.  You make the case against Trump, and make the case that this is beyond acceptable.  Politicizing an epidemic -- masks, lockdowns, state reopenings, school reopenings -- is disgraceful and beyond the pale.  Good government saves lives, bad gov't kills.

And needless to say, you don't even want Trump to resign.  You just want the idea disseminated widely.  You want the entire GOP flushed away with Trump.  Of course this should have happened with W Bush, but the Dems never forced the issue or forcefully made the case.  It's time ...

Every Dem and most indies know Trump is unfit for office so kill him on policies.

There's a Blue Tsunami coming and the Rs are going to drown (if we're lucky)

and in your 2nd paragrapgh, you're getting my point,

Trump is a huge drag on Rs nationwide and could threaten Rs in the Senate and McConnell's position of power.

Biden calling for his resignation is dumb, weak and meaningless.

I'm not sure why you suggested it.

Mitch doing it, is so old school, like 15th century old school.

And Mitch is nothing if not a 15th century renaissance man at heart.

heh   

[Echo4]

Biden should call on Trump to resign for all the damage he's caused.
Maybe wait until the week before the first debate ...
(though I'd be tempted to call the debates off)

Biden calling for Trump's resignation would be seen as an empty political grandstanding.

But I wonder with Trump's #s plummeting and most Americans having no faith in Trump's ability to govern or lead us in a crisis, IF Mitch Machiavellian would move on Trump, publicly imploring him to resign for the good of the country, and let VP Pence run out the clock and probably get toasted as the R's 2020 pence-hitter versus Biden.

Mitchy's Machiavellian maneuver, knifing Trump (et tu Mitchus?) sort of clears him of Trump taint, might save a R-senate, (and Mitchy's power seat) and resets the Repubs for 2022-24. With Trumps 35-40% approval ratings, barring mircales (plural), 2020 looks like a disaster for the Repubs in November. so what's the down-side a few crazy Trump tweets about Mitch?

just a thought

Mitch could just move to reconsider the vote on impeachment...

That would need the House to reimpeach and IMO we're not going there.

Nope. It could be done strictly in the Senate, no need for Nancy to get involved. Mitt could move to reconsider just on the one count he voted against, for example.

reconsider - Senate rules permit one motion to reconsider any question decided by vote, if offered by a senator who voted on the winning side. Normally a supporter of the outcome immediately moves to reconsider the vote, and the same senator or another immediately moves to table this motion, thus securing the outcome of the vote.

I don't know the rules of the Senate, but it strikes me purely as a layman, that as Trump was found "not guilty" on the impeachment charges brought before the Senate, a motion to reoconsider in this case, might be viewed as double jeopardy. So a new charge would have to be brought against him.

But I leave it to legal experts and those possessing far more expertise than I will ever possess to set the record straight.

Anyone seen kid?

Double jeopardy is a legal term involving criminal cases. Impeachment trials are not criminal and are only "legal" in the sense that they are not illegal. There is no double jeopardy possible.

It's not going to happen, Banks. I know that. But I also know it would fall within the Senate rules to reconsider the not guilty vote and for it to have a different outcome.

Yes double jeopardy is a legal term, and I've no idea if a president could be found "not guilty" in a Senate jury vote and then guilty months later on a re-vote on the same issue. It smells like double-jeopardy.

And I've no idea if its legal to do so, or how it might be viewed by a SC review.

I understand that you have no idea. Nor is there any reason for you to have known.

I'm telling you how it works.

Despite the fact that it would be double jeopardy in a criminal court, there is no such concept in a Senate trial (or a civil trial, for that matter).

And SCOTUS repeatedly, despite the efforts of whomever has been out of power, declines to try to change the Senate's rules because the Senate is empowered by the Constitution to set their own.

Josh I'm sure you believe you're right.

But in this instance when you say that Mitch could do it NOW (July) how does that stand with Senate rules as you posted that says

and I quote you

reconsider - Senate rules permit one motion to reconsider any question decided by vote, if offered by a senator who voted on the winning side. Normally a supporter of the outcome immediately moves to reconsider the vote, and the same senator or another immediately moves to table this motion, thus securing the outcome of the vote.

Even if assuming the Senate could retry Trump on the same charges after finding him not guilty, which i remain highly dubiious of, no matter your strenous and learned  opinion you bring to the table, how does the phrase, " immediately moves to reconsider the vote" and the fact that a re-trial/reconsideration would takes month later be considered?

I'm thinking immediately and it being months later, should perhaps make you reconsider your opinion.

The goal of that process is to prevent reconsideration.

If Mitch's goal was to have reconsideration, then his party would follow him, same as they have almost every step of the way.

But whatever, Bamks. It's pure fiction, not because it is impossible to do as I have described, but because Mitch isn't going to do it and if Mitt did it then it would get the immediate table.

(A motion to table gets voted on - if Mitch didn't want it tabled, it would not be tabled.)

[NeedsAdjustments]

Biden calling for his resignation is dumb, weak and meaningless.

I'm not sure why you suggested it.

I'm not sure why you seem so upset by the suggestion.

Trump isn't doing the job he was elected to do, for a start.  And anyone at any level in government or business would be forced to resign with these results.

I think it is fair to put out there the notion that maybe the so-called "leader of the free world" should not be held to the lowest possible standard, but the highest.

[bankshot1]

Biden calling for his resignation is dumb, weak and meaningless.

I'm not sure why you suggested it.

I'm not sure why you seem so upset by the suggestion.

Trump isn't doing the job he was elected to do, for a start.  And anyone at any level in government or business would be forced to resign with these results.

I think it is fair to put out there the notion that maybe the so-called "leader of the free world" should not be held to the lowest possible standard, but the highest.

i'm not upset its just dumb politics for Biden to call for Trump's resignation.

and even Bo now seems to understand that point.

Schumer could do it or Pelosi and it would be a little less dumb, but dumb nonetheless.

Trump is an achor down ticket right now, I want him to drag every possible P with him.

Biden, Schumer, and Pelois should too.

Mitch should not.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Trump is an achor down ticket right now, I want him to drag every possible P with him.

Biden, Schumer, and Pelois should too.

I don't think anyone would expect Trump to take Biden up on the suggestion.

[bankshot1]

But whatever, Bamks. It's pure fiction, not because it is impossible to do as I have described, but because Mitch isn't going to do it and if Mitt did it then it would get the immediate table.

I agree, and as I posted earlier, Mitch does not want to re-air dirty R-laundry as there is a lot of it and we're getting close to an election.

[bankshot1]

Trump is an achor down ticket right now, I want him to drag every possible P with him.

Biden, Schumer, and Pelois should too.

I don't think anyone would expect Trump to take Biden up on the suggestion.

That's not the argument.

Dems should want to run against a national disaster and disgrace like Trump and hope it reaps large H/S benefits.

Biden should hammer away on issues of substance that people care about.

Let Rs worry about Trump and how he's destroying their corrupt party.

Why help them?

[NeedsAdjustments]

Dems should want to run against a national disaster and disgrace like Trump and hope it reaps large H/S benefits.

They would.

Biden should hammer away on issues of substance that people care about.

He will.

Let Rs worry about Trump and how he's desrtoying the party.

They do.

Why help them?

It wouldn't.

I don't need to repeat my argument, or say it in a different way so that you will understand.  It should have been pretty easy to get.