|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 10 2017 02:19 Danglars wrote: Sometimes, I think the new drug is outrage and you all are addicts.
There's always so much projection when talking to far right people, it's kind of unbelievable...
|
On March 10 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2017 02:19 Danglars wrote: Sometimes, I think the new drug is outrage and you all are addicts. There's always so much projection when talking to far right people, it's kind of unbelievable... Love me some horseshoe theory. Just another example of it at work.
|
Here's a theory, let's say the bill passes:
Then this happens:
Paul Ryan then has a mandate to impeach....
|
On March 10 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2017 02:19 Danglars wrote: Sometimes, I think the new drug is outrage and you all are addicts. There's always so much projection when talking to far right people, it's kind of unbelievable... I cannot wait for powerful issue and important issue of Happy Holidays vs Marry Christmas to be debated this year and the White House to totally weigh in.
|
I don't follow, why would Paul Ryan have the mandate to impeach Donald Trump for passing his healthcare bill?
Furthermore, impeachment isn't a parliamentary vote-of-no-confidence, it's only for crimes. The president supporting a bill that axes his own base is really dumb, but it's not illegal.
|
On March 10 2017 02:38 LightSpectra wrote: I don't follow, why would Paul Ryan have the mandate to impeach Donald Trump for passing his healthcare bill?
Trump is taking credit for it, which every major lobby is against and when Medicaid is gutted his supporters will be the most affected, just around the time the midterms or even 2020 is rolling around.
|
On March 10 2017 02:40 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2017 02:38 LightSpectra wrote: I don't follow, why would Paul Ryan have the mandate to impeach Donald Trump for passing his healthcare bill? Trump is taking credit for it, which every major lobby is against and when Medicaid is gutted his supporters will be the most affected, just around the time the midterms or even 2020 is rolling around.
Sorry I added something to my post while you were responding: Furthermore, impeachment isn't a parliamentary vote-of-no-confidence, it's only for crimes. The president supporting a bill that axes his own base is really dumb, but it's not illegal.
In any case, the GOP has been attacking its own base since the 1980s. They still get re-elected. Poor Republican voters mostly believe in trickle-down economics and other neoliberal fantasies, they're more afraid of socialism than losing their benefits.
But who knows, maybe things will be different this time. The GOP has mostly held Medicare and social security to be sacrosanct until the Tea Party took over.
|
I'd rather remove trump by having him declared unfit than by impeachment, that seems like it'd be easier to get done.
|
Does anyone here not think the GOP doesn't have Trump's Tax Returns or his Russian allegations buried in case of emergency.... Be honest.
|
L.Spectra is right that the bill alone wouldn't be the cause. But it isn't like there are not endless things to investigate, including Trump being personally enriched by the office.
Presidents don't get impeached until public support to remove them exists. And I sort of doubt that the Republicans have the spin to pull that maneuver.
On March 10 2017 02:46 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Does anyone here not think the GOP doesn't have Trump's Tax Returns or his Russian allegations buried in case of emergency.... Be honest.
I am sure they could find it if they wanted. But you are attributing a level of skill and planning to a political party that has shown no signs they know what they are doing. They can't even get their own people to vote on a health care bill, or talk about creating one based on compromise.
|
On March 10 2017 02:46 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Does anyone here not think the GOP doesn't have Trump's Tax Returns or his Russian allegations buried in case of emergency.... Be honest.
I still don't follow why Ryan would want to destroy Trump for passing his healthcare bill. Are you suggesting the AHCA is some kind of Machiavellian plot to make Pence president? How does Ryan benefit from that?
|
On March 10 2017 02:45 zlefin wrote: I'd rather remove trump by having him declared unfit than by impeachment, that seems like it'd be easier to get done. Is there any official way of declaring him unfit?
|
On March 10 2017 02:53 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2017 02:45 zlefin wrote: I'd rather remove trump by having him declared unfit than by impeachment, that seems like it'd be easier to get done. Is there any official way of declaring him unfit? yes, more or less, in amendment 25. it was written in case of a truly insane person/advanced senility rather than something more mild like trump of course, and has never been used.
"Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office."
|
On March 10 2017 02:49 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2017 02:46 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Does anyone here not think the GOP doesn't have Trump's Tax Returns or his Russian allegations buried in case of emergency.... Be honest. I still don't follow why Ryan would want to destroy Trump for passing his healthcare bill. Are you suggesting the AHCA is some kind of Machiavellian plot to make Pence president? How does Ryan benefit from that?
To pass the blame if goes to shit.
|
On March 10 2017 02:57 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2017 02:49 LightSpectra wrote:On March 10 2017 02:46 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Does anyone here not think the GOP doesn't have Trump's Tax Returns or his Russian allegations buried in case of emergency.... Be honest. I still don't follow why Ryan would want to destroy Trump for passing his healthcare bill. Are you suggesting the AHCA is some kind of Machiavellian plot to make Pence president? How does Ryan benefit from that? To pass the blame if goes to shit.
Yeah, I mean... I know many voters have a really short attention span, but I am doubtful that their periodic amnesia would be so bad as to forget that the whole thing is primarily Paul Ryan's work.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I think it's moot since it would take a miracle for this plan to pass.
|
If this happens, big business is going to go berserk...
Fifa president Gianni Infantino has indicated Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban could prevent the United States from hosting the World Cup.
The US is favourite to win the right to host the 2026 World Cup, either on its own or in a cross-border bid alongside one or both of Mexico and Canada.
But President Trump on Monday signed a new executive order banning immigration from six Muslim-majority countries, which could have implications for the nation’s ability to host football’s biggest tournament, as well as the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games which Los Angeles is bidding to stage.
Speaking in London on Thursday, Infantino said: “When it comes to Fifa competitions, any team – including the supporters and officials of that team – who qualify for a World Cup need to have access to the country, otherwise there is no World Cup. That is obvious.”
The competition will be expanded from 32 to 48 teams in 2026. Of the countries affected by the executive order, Iran has the highest-ranked team in the Fifa rankings at No33 and they have qualified for four World Cups. Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen are the other countries on the list.
Fifa is finalising the bidding requirements for the 2026 tournament. Infantino added: “Mr Trump is the president of the United States of America and as such of course [I have] huge respect for what he does. He’s in charge, together with his government, to take decisions that are best for his country. That’s why he has been elected.
“In the world there are many countries who have bans, travel bans, visa requirements and so on and so forth.
“We are now in the process of defining the bid requirements. The requirements will be clear. And then each country can make up their decision, whether they want to bid or not based on the requirements. It’s general sporting criteria.”
Source
|
On March 10 2017 03:02 LegalLord wrote: I think it's moot since it would take a miracle for this plan to pass.
It of course only needs 51 votes in the Senate. That means it can pass if Ryan/Trump can sway all but one Republican Senators.
Currently there's about four or five of them making noise about it, but I could see all of them (except maybe for Rand Paul) falling in line when the whip comes out.
So while it's unlikely to pass, it's far from needing a miracle.
|
On March 10 2017 03:13 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2017 03:02 LegalLord wrote: I think it's moot since it would take a miracle for this plan to pass. It of course only needs 51 votes in the Senate. That means it can pass if Ryan/Trump can sway all but one Republican Senators. Currently there's about four or five of them making noise about it, but I could see all of them (except maybe for Rand Paul) falling in line when the whip comes out. So while it's unlikely to pass, it's far from needing a miracle. Its needs 60 votes in the senate to overcome a filibuster, which will never happen.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
And is Senator #101 (Pence) on board?
|
|
|
|