Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[Don Kershane]

Kevin Andrews dumped by pre selectors. One less bible basher in Parliament. Slowly but surely these types are disappearing without me praying for it.

Kevin's quote after losing pre-selection:

"The greatest privilege an Australian can have is to serve in the Federal Parliament," Mr Andrews said.

"And to have done so for almost three decades is something which I wake up every morning, and shake myself that I have been able to do that."

Really! Every morning - for thirty years!


Blokes just lost his job, that he has had for 30 years. Had a gracious answer. Cant see a problem in that, despite I dont agree with his religious views.

He was a protected species. Protected from internal challenges within his electorate by the Federal machine. All he had to do to keep job was get out of bed. Perhaps it was his wife who told him to go shake himself.

 

[jadtiger]

It looks quite likely that a right wing military coup is taking place in Myanmar because they didnt win the latest election.Another wannabee Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon on the loose

 

[Tiger5150]

Something I found interesting.

Remember how Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was a "hitleresque dictator"? Well what would you consider the definition of dictatorial leadership? I would think ruling by executive fiat, making decisions and rulings based on his own whims with no reference to democratically elected congress is a pretty good definition.

In his first week in office, Biden has signed off on 33 Executive Orders as compared to Trumps 5 and Obama's 4.

I have scrolled through them and whilst I dont see anything completely egregious within them, they are also not particularly controversial and more importantly have not been blocked by Congress which is the genuine purpose of Executive Orders (as ruled by Supreme Court). So why not let it go through Congress, particularly as the Dems control both houses?

I dont think Biden is bad man, not do I think he is a radical. I have however been concerned that he has many debts to pay for support from more radical parts of the party. This massive flood of Executive Orders has a whiff of paying his dues.

 

[Nelson]

Something I found interesting.

Remember how Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was a "hitleresque dictator"? Well what would you consider the definition of dictatorial leadership? I would think ruling by executive fiat, making decisions and rulings based on his own whims with no reference to democratically elected congress is a pretty good definition.

In his first week in office, Biden has signed off on 33 Executive Orders as compared to Trumps 5 and Obama's 4.

I have scrolled through them and whilst I dont see anything completely egregious within them, they are also not particularly controversial and more importantly have not been blocked by Congress which is the genuine purpose of Executive Orders (as ruled by Supreme Court). So why not let it go through Congress, particularly as the Dems control both houses?

I dont think Biden is bad man, not do I think he is a radical. I have however been concerned that he has many debts to pay for support from more radical parts of the party. This massive flood of Executive Orders has a whiff of paying his dues.

Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon and Obama didn't start their presidencies in the midst of a pandemic. At least 10 of those executive orders appear to be directly related to the COVID-19 response which required immediate action. A number of the others might also relate at least in part to the COVID-19 response. Executive orders are meant, in part, to be used in addressing emergencies and the country happens to be in the middle of one

It's a trend to keep an eye on but I don't think a direct comparison between the first few weeks of the respective presidencies is a fair one given the very different circumstances.

 

[happy_tiger]

Something I found interesting.

Remember how Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was a "hitleresque dictator"? Well what would you consider the definition of dictatorial leadership? I would think ruling by executive fiat, making decisions and rulings based on his own whims with no reference to democratically elected congress is a pretty good definition.

In his first week in office, Biden has signed off on 33 Executive Orders as compared to Trumps 5 and Obama's 4.

I have scrolled through them and whilst I dont see anything completely egregious within them, they are also not particularly controversial and more importantly have not been blocked by Congress which is the genuine purpose of Executive Orders (as ruled by Supreme Court). So why not let it go through Congress, particularly as the Dems control both houses?

I dont think Biden is bad man, not do I think he is a radical. I have however been concerned that he has many debts to pay for support from more radical parts of the party. This massive flood of Executive Orders has a whiff of paying his dues.

Could it be because he wants to have as much influence as possible because he is only doing a single term ......

 

[Tim Sheens]

Something I found interesting.

Remember how Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was a "hitleresque dictator"? Well what would you consider the definition of dictatorial leadership? I would think ruling by executive fiat, making decisions and rulings based on his own whims with no reference to democratically elected congress is a pretty good definition.

In his first week in office, Biden has signed off on 33 Executive Orders as compared to Trumps 5 and Obama's 4.

I have scrolled through them and whilst I dont see anything completely egregious within them, they are also not particularly controversial and more importantly have not been blocked by Congress which is the genuine purpose of Executive Orders (as ruled by Supreme Court). So why not let it go through Congress, particularly as the Dems control both houses?

I dont think Biden is bad man, not do I think he is a radical. I have however been concerned that he has many debts to pay for support from more radical parts of the party. This massive flood of Executive Orders has a whiff of paying his dues.

I'd say it was always going to happen as much was promised and the misuse of the filibuster rules along with the increase of cloture motions in recent times is at the root of it. Something that was long pretty well only used on civil rights matters is no longer, instead becoming more frequently a political weapon of the minority.

Without such orders the US has morphed into being virtually ungovernable, when even with a huge majority there are such constraints on the administration by the Senate. Imagine if the elected government here had to get a 60/40 result to pass large structural legislation, as like over there, I can't see much at all getting through. Particularly so with McConnell still there and we only have to go back to his plans to bring down the incoming government a dozen years back.

Even to get their promised election relief package passed, the new administration will almost certainly require utilising an annual one off procedural loophole so they can utilise a simple majority to include the funding. Even then, that is only if they get the votes of the conservative Dems that have already sold out a lot of their power through guarantees.

 

[TillLindemann]

Ever since they hysterical reaction to the Capitol 'terrorist insurrection', we're going further down the path of dangerously redefining words like 'terrorism'.

Today's case in point:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-04/proud-boys-right-wing-terrorist-organisations/13123000

The Proud Boys are a fringe far right group, and prone to street battles with their far left equivalents in places like Portland. Their views would repulse the vast majority of people. But that does NOT equate to terrorism.

And I shouldn't need to say, but will anyway, that opposing the legislation of such groups as terrorists does not mean I have any sympathy for their cause.

 

[Curly_Tiger]

Interesting way of presenting how things went down. Wonder why they felt the need to come out with this now?
https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

 

[cochise]

https://www.bitchute.com/video/G5cpoo30A8tn/

Any one who want to know about US election fraud please watch it's the start point I could go into what I know but would be called something like conspiracy theories

Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon is back baby

Go to 1 hour 40 minutes if you don't have enough time

Have a great day

It really is time to stop.

 

[Guest]

https://www.bitchute.com/video/G5cpoo30A8tn/

Any one who want to know about US election fraud please watch it's the start point I could go into what I know but would be called something like conspiracy theories

Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon is back baby

Go to 1 hour 40 minutes if you don't have enough time

Have a great day

It really is time to stop.

And now it has.

 

[Tiger5150]

https://www.bitchute.com/video/G5cpoo30A8tn/

Any one who want to know about US election fraud please watch it's the start point I could go into what I know but would be called something like conspiracy theories

Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon is back baby

Go to 1 hour 40 minutes if you don't have enough time

Have a great day

It really is time to stop.

And now it has.

Probably the right decision, but a shame in one way. I was hoping to hear the justification and twisting when Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon doesnt come back on a winged chariot.

 

[happy_tiger]

https://www.bitchute.com/video/G5cpoo30A8tn/

Any one who want to know about US election fraud please watch it's the start point I could go into what I know but would be called something like conspiracy theories

Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon is back baby

Go to 1 hour 40 minutes if you don't have enough time

Have a great day

It really is time to stop.

And now it has.


Probably the right decision, but a shame in one way. I was hoping to hear the justification and twisting when Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon doesnt come back on a winged chariot.

Many would prefer he gets delivered to prison in a Correctional Services bus ...you can paint some wings on that I suppose if it helps Donny's mindset

 

[Tim Sheens]

So the opening arguments in the second impeachment trial of Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon have been delivered and we again saw a continuation of nonsense defence arguments like the first one. It is fantastical to think that the framers did not want the senate to utilise the only vehicle available to try a president for acts within their term.

The only real question after one additional senator in Cassidy voted to it's jurisdiction, is whether 16 others will have the fortitude to join the lone Mitt Romney from the first one to find that which they ethically should have previously found a little more than a year ago.

Refusal to do so opens for each and every president to not accept the results of future elections lost, then continue to lie to supporters of their votes being stolen, despite otherwise knowledge for months. Worse still, they would be excusing actions to arrange, call on and assemble a protest of supporters, excite such throng to fever pitch and command that they march alongside them to the Capitol building to pressure the house representatives of the people from carrying out the duties.

All without personal consequence.

 

[jadtiger]

So the opening arguments in the second impeachment trial of Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon have been delivered and we again saw a continuation of nonsense defence arguments like the first one. It is fantastical to think that the framers did not want the senate to utilise the only vehicle available to try a president for acts within their term.

The only real question after one additional senator in Cassidy voted to it's jurisdiction, is whether 16 others will have the fortitude to join the lone Mitt Romney from the first one to find that which they ethically should have previously found a little more than a year ago.

Refusal to do so opens for each and every president to not accept the results of future elections lost, then continue to lie to supporters of their votes being stolen, despite otherwise knowledge for months. Worse still, they would be excusing actions to arrange, call on and assemble a protest of supporters, excite such throng to fever pitch and command that they march alongside them to the Capitol building to pressure the house representatives of the people from carrying out the duties.

All without personal consequence.

Nobody should be suprised by the complete lack of ethics from the majority of the republicans,it is like asking the nazi party members to condemn Hitler during the Nuremberg trials.
I take some faith from the Republicans who do vote to convict even though most have less spine than a jellyfish.

 

[Nelson]

So the opening arguments in the second impeachment trial of Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon have been delivered and we again saw a continuation of nonsense defence arguments like the first one. It is fantastical to think that the framers did not want the senate to utilise the only vehicle available to try a president for acts within their term.

The only real question after one additional senator in Cassidy voted to it's jurisdiction, is whether 16 others will have the fortitude to join the lone Mitt Romney from the first one to find that which they ethically should have previously found a little more than a year ago.

Refusal to do so opens for each and every president to not accept the results of future elections lost, then continue to lie to supporters of their votes being stolen, despite otherwise knowledge for months. Worse still, they would be excusing actions to arrange, call on and assemble a protest of supporters, excite such throng to fever pitch and command that they march alongside them to the Capitol building to pressure the house representatives of the people from carrying out the duties.

All without personal consequence.

I don't have a problem with them arguing the jurisdictional point. It's not a point that has previously arisen and it is better to have a contradictor when establishing precedent than not - better, more robust law usually results.

 

[Tim Sheens]

So the opening arguments in the second impeachment trial of Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon have been delivered and we again saw a continuation of nonsense defence arguments like the first one. It is fantastical to think that the framers did not want the senate to utilise the only vehicle available to try a president for acts within their term.

The only real question after one additional senator in Cassidy voted to it's jurisdiction, is whether 16 others will have the fortitude to join the lone Mitt Romney from the first one to find that which they ethically should have previously found a little more than a year ago.

Refusal to do so opens for each and every president to not accept the results of future elections lost, then continue to lie to supporters of their votes being stolen, despite otherwise knowledge for months. Worse still, they would be excusing actions to arrange, call on and assemble a protest of supporters, excite such throng to fever pitch and command that they march alongside them to the Capitol building to pressure the house representatives of the people from carrying out the duties.

All without personal consequence.

I don't have a problem with them arguing the jurisdictional point. It's not a point that has previously arisen and it is better to have a contradictor when establishing precedent than not - better, more robust law usually results.

Maybe not with a president, though precedent exists for civil officials which are named alongside both the president and their deputy in the articles, with them having been impeached upon exiting office, both at federal and state levels.

Then there is the fact that these proceedings began during the term, so similar to statute limitations on timing elsewhere, the proceedings should continue past any potential restriction in the sole chamber with the ability to try, as they were begun prior in the chamber with the sole power to impeach.

 

[Tiger5150]

So the opening arguments in the second impeachment trial of Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon have been delivered and we again saw a continuation of nonsense defence arguments like the first one. It is fantastical to think that the framers did not want the senate to utilise the only vehicle available to try a president for acts within their term.

The only real question after one additional senator in Cassidy voted to it's jurisdiction, is whether 16 others will have the fortitude to join the lone Mitt Romney from the first one to find that which they ethically should have previously found a little more than a year ago.

Refusal to do so opens for each and every president to not accept the results of future elections lost, then continue to lie to supporters of their votes being stolen, despite otherwise knowledge for months. Worse still, they would be excusing actions to arrange, call on and assemble a protest of supporters, excite such throng to fever pitch and command that they march alongside them to the Capitol building to pressure the house representatives of the people from carrying out the duties.

All without personal consequence.

I don't have a problem with them arguing the jurisdictional point. It's not a point that has previously arisen and it is better to have a contradictor when establishing precedent than not - better, more robust law usually results.

Maybe not with a president, though precedent exists for civil officials which are named alongside both the president and their deputy in the articles, with them having been impeached upon exiting office, both at federal and state levels.

Then there is the fact that these proceedings began during the term, so similar to statute limitations on timing elsewhere, the proceedings should continue past any potential restriction in the sole chamber with the ability to try, as they were begun prior in the chamber with the sole power to impeach.

I dont think there is any question whether it is constitutional or not. I think there is plenty to discuss about whether it is a good idea or not.

 

[Tim Sheens]

Today marks 13 years since the national apology was delivered and it is a great shame that there has been very little forward progress over that time.

 

[TillLindemann]

So the opening arguments in the second impeachment trial of Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon have been delivered and we again saw a continuation of nonsense defence arguments like the first one. It is fantastical to think that the framers did not want the senate to utilise the only vehicle available to try a president for acts within their term.

The only real question after one additional senator in Cassidy voted to it's jurisdiction, is whether 16 others will have the fortitude to join the lone Mitt Romney from the first one to find that which they ethically should have previously found a little more than a year ago.

Refusal to do so opens for each and every president to not accept the results of future elections lost, then continue to lie to supporters of their votes being stolen, despite otherwise knowledge for months. Worse still, they would be excusing actions to arrange, call on and assemble a protest of supporters, excite such throng to fever pitch and command that they march alongside them to the Capitol building to pressure the house representatives of the people from carrying out the duties.

All without personal consequence.


Nobody should be suprised by the complete lack of ethics from the majority of the republicans,it is like asking the nazi party members to condemn Hitler during the Nuremberg trials.
I take some faith from the Republicans who do vote to convict even though most have less spine than a jellyfish.

https://www.newsweek.com/how-first-amendment-saved-jamie-raskins-father-opinion-1568724

 

[innsaneink]

Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon acquitted.... As much a surprise as Tamou (C)