Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?
-
That would be interesting, it isn't moot since the Senate has the option to prevent him from ever holding office again.
-
That would be interesting, it isn't moot since the Senate has the option to prevent him from ever holding office again.
@jon-nyc said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
That would be interesting, it isn't moot since the Senate has the option to prevent him from ever holding office again.
"from ever holding federal office again"
FIFY....
"Governor Trump?"
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@jon-nyc said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
That would be interesting, it isn't moot since the Senate has the option to prevent him from ever holding office again.
"from ever holding federal office again"
FIFY....
"Governor Trump?"
-
@jon-nyc said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
That would be interesting, it isn't moot since the Senate has the option to prevent him from ever holding office again.
"from ever holding federal office again"
FIFY....
"Governor Trump?"
-
@jon-nyc said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
That would be interesting, it isn't moot since the Senate has the option to prevent him from ever holding office again.
Would be nice. I was wondering the other day if Congress could do anything to prevent a 2024 run. He’d be quite old but would likely disrupt everything again within the GOP or even as an independent candidate.
-
@jolly said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
@loki said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
Not gonna happen.
Exactly.
Great test to see if people want to move on. Part of me senses so many people have zero interest in moving on, preferring a partisan fight and inciting people. We will soon find out whether the best or worst people prevail.
-
It’s not about moving on or not. It’s about recognizing the moral hazard problem.
The downside of “try to overturn the democratic result” has to be something more than ‘it probably won’t work’, unless we want it to become the new normal. This is an iterative game remember.
Only non-witches get due process.
- Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
-
It’s not about moving on or not. It’s about recognizing the moral hazard problem.
The downside of “try to overturn the democratic result” has to be something more than ‘it probably won’t work’, unless we want it to become the new normal. This is an iterative game remember.
@jon-nyc said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
It’s not about moving on or not. It’s about recognizing the moral hazard problem.
The downside of “try to overturn the democratic result” has to be something more than ‘it probably won’t work’, unless we want it to become the new normal. This is an iterative game remember.
Trump and his supporters lost a great deal in the violent reactions to his loss of a very small subset of his supporters. Even you have acknowledged that. Now you want to establish it as a precedent going forward. I'm not seeing that as reasonable.
Meanwhile, no levers of powers or cultural leaders or followers in general lost anything in the wake of the massive wave of violent rioting earlier in 2020. But now you choose to invoke the slippery slope, over the incident where everybody on the side of the rioters lost. The slippery slope is actually where people win, or at least establish their safety in doing whatever they want to do, to gain control over the culture.
Education is extremely important.
-
It’s not about moving on or not. It’s about recognizing the moral hazard problem.
The downside of “try to overturn the democratic result” has to be something more than ‘it probably won’t work’, unless we want it to become the new normal. This is an iterative game remember.
-
It’s not about moving on or not. It’s about recognizing the moral hazard problem.
The downside of “try to overturn the democratic result” has to be something more than ‘it probably won’t work’, unless we want it to become the new normal. This is an iterative game remember.
@jon-nyc said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
It’s not about moving on or not. It’s about recognizing the moral hazard problem.
The downside of “try to overturn the democratic result” has to be something more than ‘it probably won’t work’, unless we want it to become the new normal. This is an iterative game remember.
Saying it probably won’t work is utter BS. It has no hope of working. The brain shouldn’t be fixated on hopeless causes, for or against. If we iterate on hopelessness we have a hopeless society.
-
@jon-nyc said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
It’s not about moving on or not. It’s about recognizing the moral hazard problem.
The downside of “try to overturn the democratic result” has to be something more than ‘it probably won’t work’, unless we want it to become the new normal. This is an iterative game remember.
Trump and his supporters lost a great deal in the violent reactions to his loss of a very small subset of his supporters. Even you have acknowledged that. Now you want to establish it as a precedent going forward. I'm not seeing that as reasonable.
Meanwhile, no levers of powers or cultural leaders or followers in general lost anything in the wake of the massive wave of violent rioting earlier in 2020. But now you choose to invoke the slippery slope, over the incident where everybody on the side of the rioters lost. The slippery slope is actually where people win, or at least establish their safety in doing whatever they want to do, to gain control over the culture.
@horace said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
Trump and his supporters lost a great deal in the violent reactions to his loss of a very small subset of his supporters. Even you have acknowledged that. Now you want to establish it as a precedent going forward. I'm not seeing that as reasonable.
The attempts to overturn the democratic election and the peaceful transition of power were more than just those in the Capitol, it was Trump for months spewing lies about a stolen election and pumping up his crowd to take back the power.
-
@horace said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
Trump and his supporters lost a great deal in the violent reactions to his loss of a very small subset of his supporters. Even you have acknowledged that. Now you want to establish it as a precedent going forward. I'm not seeing that as reasonable.
The attempts to overturn the democratic election and the peaceful transition of power were more than just those in the Capitol, it was Trump for months spewing lies about a stolen election and pumping up his crowd to take back the power.
@89th said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
@horace said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
Trump and his supporters lost a great deal in the violent reactions to his loss of a very small subset of his supporters. Even you have acknowledged that. Now you want to establish it as a precedent going forward. I'm not seeing that as reasonable.
The attempts to overturn the democratic election and the peaceful transition of power were more than just those in the Capitol, it was Trump for months spewing lies about a stolen election and pumping up his crowd to take back the power.
But it never had a single chance of working. I mean an entire neighborhood was taken over by CHAZ, and then the Portland thing. It worked, they occupied it, for a long time. Precedent. The people who invaded the Capitol were in my opinion insane and suicidal. I believe they will pay a heaver price than any violent/predatory elements in the leftist riots of 2020.
-
True. But taking over a city block in Portland is nothing compared to a sitting president claiming an election he lost was stolen and fraudulent.
-
True. But taking over a city block in Portland is nothing compared to a sitting president claiming an election he lost was stolen and fraudulent.
@89th said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
True. But taking over a city block in Portland is nothing compared to a sitting president claiming an election he lost was stolen and fraudulent.
Is it nothing? That's a claim. Not one that is inarguable.
Elections lost due to fraudulence, as a social idea, are far from a new thing. Neighborhoods being taken over, now there's a new thing.
-
True. But taking over a city block in Portland is nothing compared to a sitting president claiming an election he lost was stolen and fraudulent.
@89th said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
True. But taking over a city block in Portland is nothing compared to a sitting president claiming an election he lost was stolen and fraudulent.
Of course it isn't. The Portland thing is worse because I hate pop culture more than I do people trying to compromise an election.
-
@89th said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
True. But taking over a city block in Portland is nothing compared to a sitting president claiming an election he lost was stolen and fraudulent.
Of course it isn't. The Portland thing is worse because I hate pop culture more than I do people trying to compromise an election.
@aqua-letifer said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
@89th said in Senate trial could happen after Jan 20?:
True. But taking over a city block in Portland is nothing compared to a sitting president claiming an election he lost was stolen and fraudulent.
Of course it isn't. The Portland thing is worse because I hate pop culture more than I do people trying to compromise an election.
Ok, so make a choice. Call it hate, whatever. You can choose to hate both, great on you.
-
True. But taking over a city block in Portland is nothing compared to a sitting president claiming an election he lost was stolen and fraudulent.
