This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
US politics
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Wisbech Eagle  Truro Cornwall 03 Jul 24 2.33pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Or you're a supreme court judge who voted for it. What is a good thing depends entirely on personal opinion. Why SC Judges vote one way or another depends on their personal motivations. Which may ,or may not, be linked to their opinion of what is good.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
Teddy Eagle  03 Jul 24 2.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
What is a good thing depends entirely on personal opinion. Why SC Judges vote one way or another depends on their personal motivations. Which may ,or may not, be linked to their opinion of what is good. If the supposition is that they voted for this change just to save Trump from being charged then their system is broken.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 03 Jul 24 3.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
So the president is now legally immune by the SC for official acts. Actually what an opportunity for Biden. He should begin by unilaterally defining what constitute “official acts” of the President. As the power now vested in him by this decision this should be conceived as broadly and deeply as possible. His first such “official” act should be to issue an arrest warrant for his insurrectionist predecessor for trying to overthrow the U.S. government and the constitution. Under his new authority, he should be able to waive any trial (or associated delays and appeals) and summarily jail the now convicted felon, forthwith. Have a ball there's not much time left when you are 80. Personally I swould abolish elections and the opposition, but then I am a democrat. What a united state the United States is in.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 03 Jul 24 10.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
If the supposition is that they voted for this change just to save Trump from being charged then their system is broken. It’s looked broken to me for 8 years. Something is going on and it isn’t logic, wisdom or common sense.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 03 Jul 24 10.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
So the president is now legally immune by the SC for official acts. Actually what an opportunity for Biden. He should begin by unilaterally defining what constitute “official acts” of the President. As the power now vested in him by this decision this should be conceived as broadly and deeply as possible. His first such “official” act should be to issue an arrest warrant for his insurrectionist predecessor for trying to overthrow the U.S. government and the constitution. Under his new authority, he should be able to waive any trial (or associated delays and appeals) and summarily jail the now convicted felon, forthwith. Have a ball there's not much time left when you are 80. Personally I swould abolish elections and the opposition, but then I am a democrat. What a united state the United States is in. He won’t, richly though Trump deserves it, as the outcome would be violence on a scale not seen in recent years. That could still happen though. It is a crazy decision with very far reaching consequences.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 03 Jul 24 10.34pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
So the president is now legally immune by the SC for official acts. Actually what an opportunity for Biden. He should begin by unilaterally defining what constitute “official acts” of the President. As the power now vested in him by this decision this should be conceived as broadly and deeply as possible. His first such “official” act should be to issue an arrest warrant for his insurrectionist predecessor for trying to overthrow the U.S. government and the constitution. Under his new authority, he should be able to waive any trial (or associated delays and appeals) and summarily jail the now convicted felon, forthwith. Have a ball there's not much time left when you are 80. Personally I swould abolish elections and the opposition, but then I am a democrat. What a united state the United States is in. Hang on Steely....you were a commie five minutes ago! Mind you....it's not that different I suppose.....modern day Democrats use Antifa as their foot soldiers and then hypocritically complain about proud boys. Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jul 2024 10.36pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Houston Eagle  Houston 04 Jul 24 3.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
The democrats with media assistance have lied there way through the past 3 1/2 years, on closed borders, on household prosperity, on the president’s health and fitness etc. the only reason he won’t go quickly or easily will be the implications for him, his family and the Biden businesses. He will need assurances first that there will be no repercussions from any within the party! Hunter even in attendance yesterday as the VP, top governors to discuss the way forward.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 04 Jul 24 8.17am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Houston Eagle
The democrats with media assistance have lied there way through the past 3 1/2 years, on closed borders, on household prosperity, on the president’s health and fitness etc. the only reason he won’t go quickly or easily will be the implications for him, his family and the Biden businesses. He will need assurances first that there will be no repercussions from any within the party! Hunter even in attendance yesterday as the VP, top governors to discuss the way forward. How do these conspiracy theories start? How would the “media” organise such assistance and why would they do it? Unless, of course, like me they see great danger in a second 4 years of Trump. The first 3 years and 364 days were more than enough. Biden obviously has mobility issues and has never been an orator. They are not his skills. Leading and trusting a team, listening to others, being quietly thoughtful and efficient, and a belief in decent standards are his skill set. He believes in the law and that no one is above it, so would not be seeking any unnecessary reassurances or making grubby deals. Deals are what Trump does! According to him it’s an art. I think he will though step aside. If the priority is to avoid another Trump Presidency then he will understand very clearly how best to ensure that. If that means someone else standing then someone else will stand.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 04 Jul 24 8.28am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
How do these conspiracy theories start? How would the “media” organise such assistance and why would they do it? Unless, of course, like me they see great danger in a second 4 years of Trump. The first 3 years and 364 days were more than enough. Biden obviously has mobility issues and has never been an orator. They are not his skills. Leading and trusting a team, listening to others, being quietly thoughtful and efficient, and a belief in decent standards are his skill set. He believes in the law and that no one is above it, so would not be seeking any unnecessary reassurances or making grubby deals. Deals are what Trump does! According to him it’s an art. I think he will though step aside. If the priority is to avoid another Trump Presidency then he will understand very clearly how best to ensure that. If that means someone else standing then someone else will stand. They start because there are many willing to dismiss any suggestion they don't like as a conspiracy theory. Leaving specifics out surely there is a way a party can replace a presidential candidate if he, or she, is considered to a liability. Or is the decision entirely up to the person involved?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 04 Jul 24 8.37am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
They start because there are many willing to dismiss any suggestion they don't like as a conspiracy theory. Leaving specifics out surely there is a way a party can replace a presidential candidate if he, or she, is considered to a liability. Or is the decision entirely up to the person involved? My understanding is that once a delegate to the convention is bound to a candidate they must vote for them. Only the candidate can withdraw and direct their bound delegates to vote for someone else. It’s a self inflicted weakness of their system. The only other way, I suspect, would be for the Party to scrap the system and introduce a new one but to try to do that now would result in chaos, as it would become embroiled in legal challenges.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 04 Jul 24 9.15am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
My understanding is that once a delegate to the convention is bound to a candidate they must vote for them. Only the candidate can withdraw and direct their bound delegates to vote for someone else. It’s a self inflicted weakness of their system. The only other way, I suspect, would be for the Party to scrap the system and introduce a new one but to try to do that now would result in chaos, as it would become embroiled in legal challenges.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Behind Enemy Lines Sussex 04 Jul 24 9.32am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
My understanding is that once a delegate to the convention is bound to a candidate they must vote for them. Only the candidate can withdraw and direct their bound delegates to vote for someone else. It’s a self inflicted weakness of their system. The only other way, I suspect, would be for the Party to scrap the system and introduce a new one but to try to do that now would result in chaos, as it would become embroiled in legal challenges. If only the USA had a functioning monarchy that could dissolve their system and take direct control of things, and then restore the parliamentary system when things had calmed down...
hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.