Trump Watch
Moderator: Long slender neck
-
- MB Legend
- Posts: 12565
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:06 am
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 2577 times
-
- Bored office worker
- Posts: 2449
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 1:13 pm
- Has thanked: 244 times
- Been thanked: 1130 times
Re: Trump Watch
Will believe anything said about the Biden's, but the dozens of criminal charges and civil findings of guilt against Trump are all part of an elaborate conspiracy.
-
- Bored office worker
- Posts: 2880
- Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2019 12:29 pm
- Has thanked: 31 times
- Been thanked: 567 times
Re: Trump Watch
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/11 ... tion-fraudRedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 29, 2023 12:27 pm Yeah, apparently there's a shitload . You must be cursing your luck that Biden is the Democrat in charge .
Looks like it’s the thing to do if your Dad is president
-
- MB Legend
- Posts: 12565
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:06 am
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 2577 times
Re: Trump Watch
The problem is the proven fake Russian dossier bought and paid for by Hilary Clinton to overturn the 2016 election . Now even if Trump is guilty of a crime nothing is going to stick because people think it’s a political hatchet job . The Democrats only have themselves to blame .Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Fri Sep 29, 2023 2:51 pm Will believe anything said about the Biden's, but the dozens of criminal charges and civil findings of guilt against Trump are all part of an elaborate conspiracy.
- Dunners
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 9067
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:21 pm
- Has thanked: 1076 times
- Been thanked: 2506 times
Re: Trump Watch
I believe that this is an example of one of those things that has the potential to spectacularly backfire on those celebrating the ruling.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -amendment
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -amendment
-
- MB Legend
- Posts: 12565
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:06 am
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 2577 times
Re: Trump Watch
Is this how democracy dies ? If you can't beat the man at the ballot box , ban the man . It's like something you read about Russia . By the way tuffers , even if Trump goes to jail I think he can still run for President .Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 9:08 am I believe that this is an example of one of those things that has the potential to spectacularly backfire on those celebrating the ruling.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -amendment
- Long slender neck
- MB Legend
- Posts: 14366
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:13 am
- Has thanked: 2528 times
- Been thanked: 3316 times
- Dunners
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 9067
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:21 pm
- Has thanked: 1076 times
- Been thanked: 2506 times
Re: Trump Watch
Yes he did. He's a threat to democracy. But using a Supreme Court ruling in this way could have dire consequences. Even for the goodies.
Re: Trump Watch
In what sense?
The way the US legal system and political system are entwined is bloody weird
-
- Tiresome troll
- Posts: 1468
- Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2023 5:26 am
- Has thanked: 733 times
- Been thanked: 114 times
- Dunners
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 9067
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:21 pm
- Has thanked: 1076 times
- Been thanked: 2506 times
Re: Trump Watch
This is a case of a single state unilaterally disqualifying a candidate for a national election. It compromises the veracity of the federal system. And, as ever, once it happens against a candidate you don't like it can then be weaponised against anyone.
It's possible that, regardless of who wins the next election, up to 30% of the population may not accept the outcome of that election. Not just be dissatisfied with it, but actively refuse to accept it and possibly even deploy low-level civil disobedience. That is a crisis of legitimacy that could undermine key institutions. And this ruling does nothing to reduce that legitimacy risk.
Re: Trump Watch
Does it compromise the veracity of it though? (I’m not expressing an opinion, just thinking out loud) or is it a rare but legitimate situation in which the specifics have necessitated this action, without which, a different aspect of society (the rule of law and of proportionate consequences and of appropriate standards for those seeking election) would be compromised?
- Hoover Attack
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 5169
- Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2023 10:41 am
- Has thanked: 655 times
- Been thanked: 1316 times
Re: Trump Watch
30% of the population could deploy low-level civil disobedience? Seriously?Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 11:43 amThis is a case of a single state unilaterally disqualifying a candidate for a national election. It compromises the veracity of the federal system. And, as ever, once it happens against a candidate you don't like it can then be weaponised against anyone.
It's possible that, regardless of who wins the next election, up to 30% of the population may not accept the outcome of that election. Not just be dissatisfied with it, but actively refuse to accept it and possibly even deploy low-level civil disobedience. That is a crisis of legitimacy that could undermine key institutions. And this ruling does nothing to reduce that legitimacy risk.
Re: Trump Watch
Yeah that seems far fetched to me. Social media and giddy coverage massively amplifies the loudest voices. The actual attempt at an insurrection and the refusal to accept the result didn’t have the outcome Trump wanted.
My gut instinct on this is that while there’s some truth in what Dunners says, the whole Trump phenomenon is a stress test of democracy and the rule of law, and to *not* impose certain sanctions, or to close off certain avenues of investigation, is itself a subversion of the mechanisms that exist supposedly to uphold certain values
My gut instinct on this is that while there’s some truth in what Dunners says, the whole Trump phenomenon is a stress test of democracy and the rule of law, and to *not* impose certain sanctions, or to close off certain avenues of investigation, is itself a subversion of the mechanisms that exist supposedly to uphold certain values
- Dunners
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 9067
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:21 pm
- Has thanked: 1076 times
- Been thanked: 2506 times
Re: Trump Watch
"up to 30%"Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 11:57 am30% of the population could deploy low-level civil disobedience? Seriously?Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 11:43 amThis is a case of a single state unilaterally disqualifying a candidate for a national election. It compromises the veracity of the federal system. And, as ever, once it happens against a candidate you don't like it can then be weaponised against anyone.
It's possible that, regardless of who wins the next election, up to 30% of the population may not accept the outcome of that election. Not just be dissatisfied with it, but actively refuse to accept it and possibly even deploy low-level civil disobedience. That is a crisis of legitimacy that could undermine key institutions. And this ruling does nothing to reduce that legitimacy risk.
So, if there was to be civil disobedience, that would probably be worst case scenario. Reality is likely to be a lot less.
- Dunners
- Boardin' 24/7
- Posts: 9067
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:21 pm
- Has thanked: 1076 times
- Been thanked: 2506 times
Re: Trump Watch
That's what we'll find out, I guess. Fingers crossed.CEB wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 11:53 am Does it compromise the veracity of it though? (I’m not expressing an opinion, just thinking out loud) or is it a rare but legitimate situation in which the specifics have necessitated this action, without which, a different aspect of society (the rule of law and of proportionate consequences and of appropriate standards for those seeking election) would be compromised?
-
- MB Legend
- Posts: 12565
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:06 am
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 2577 times
Re: Trump Watch
You mean like Hillary Clinton’s completely made up and paid for fake Russian dossier to overthrow the 2016 election.Long slender neck wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 11:26 am Trump did try to overthrow an election result though.
Re: Trump Watch
Interesting. Can you point me to where Hilary Clinton attempted to “overthrow the 2016 election”?
-
- MB Legend
- Posts: 12565
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:06 am
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 2577 times
Re: Trump Watch
I’ve obviously spent more time on YouTube than you . It’s been proven it was fake. It was then quickly forgotten about by the state media
-
- Regular
- Posts: 4765
- Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:48 pm
- Has thanked: 2093 times
- Been thanked: 1714 times
Re: Trump Watch
Can you just signpost us to the link where this is "proven"? A quick c&p of the URL will clear all this up. Thanks!RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 1:42 pmI’ve obviously spent more time on YouTube than you . It’s been proven it was fake. It was then quickly forgotten about by the state media
Re: Trump Watch
Even a summary of what the “it” is that he is claiming is proven, because as far as I’m aware, whatever one’s position on a Russia Dossier, there’s absolutely no suggestion whatsoever, anywhere, that Hilary Clinton attempted to “overthrow” the result of an election
-
- MB Legend
- Posts: 12565
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:06 am
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 2577 times
Re: Trump Watch
I’m at work at the moment so I’ll look later tonight. Actually, put it this way. If Trump was guilty of this crime and the dossier was real ,why isn’t he already in jail. With the amount of enemies he has surely it would have been done and dusted.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 1:47 pmCan you just signpost us to the link where this is "proven"? A quick c&p of the URL will clear all this up. Thanks!RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 20, 2023 1:42 pmI’ve obviously spent more time on YouTube than you . It’s been proven it was fake. It was then quickly forgotten about by the state media
- Long slender neck
- MB Legend
- Posts: 14366
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:13 am
- Has thanked: 2528 times
- Been thanked: 3316 times