Would you like to make a guess at the potential fallout of this debacle? I know I have asked many times and no one seems to want to play this game.
Thereâs usually no way to prove you didnât do something sleazy youâve been falsely accused of. The onus is on the accuser.
1 Like
But apparently that is what just happened. He was more or less cleared after an investigation.
Maybe I am moving the goalposts
but the investigation and confirmation seemed rushed.
Also his demeanor was (imo rightfullly) questioned.
Plus the withheld documents thing.
Not sure I have the skills to play that game, tbh.
Of course you do, you have a brain. The worst case scenario for impugning an incoming Supreme Court Justice is civil war.
Yeah, thats not a good game to play.
the EU commission has the executive and legislative power and can enforce it to all EU members. And thereâs no election process by EU citizens; the commission decides what to do âfor the greater goodâ and if you donât like it tough luck. Itâs garbage.
A US president that has to be elected and possibly re-confirmed after 4 years seems a lot more reasonable for me. Just because you donât like the guy and decided to buy into any Russia/#believeher bullshit doesnât change the fact that the system works.
2 Likes
Iâm still laughing at this.
Chuckle.
You canât even put a coherent paragraph together.
I thought that might be where you were going. Hopefully a worst case scenario is avoidable- but both sides must act rationally, and I canât say that is true for either this time because they were both up in arms.
Iâve heard about this latent threat of a civil war for some years now. Itâs truly terrifying, but you canât let that be a deterrence.
And also learn to shoot guns.
Two ways in the US.
The body of the Constitution says the the House has the sole power of impeachment and the Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. A bit like a court case in that the House brings charges (impeaches) that are tried in the Senate, where the President is either convicted or found innocent of the articles or charge(s) of impeachment. It takes a simple majority in the House to bring charges (articles) and a two-thirds majority in the Senate (67 votes) to convict.
Itâs happened twice, but no President has ever been convicted by the Senate. A Republican president, Nixon, was about to be brought up in the House on impeachment charges (Watergate break-in) when he resigned from office in 1974. Bill Clinton was impeached by the House but not convicted by the Senate, and he finished his second term. A President in the 19th century was also impeached, but not convicted by the Senate.
The Constitution was amended in 1967 to allow for an orderly transition of power in case the President dies or becomes incapacitated (in reaction to Kennedyâs assassination in 1963), or is judged to have become incapacitated. This is the second way the President can be removed. Last phrase, âjudged to be incapacitated,â is yet another way in which the President can be removed. Obviously open to political hijinks, and itâs been discussed by Democrats more or less continuously since Trumpâs first tweet in office.
Both ways are a high bar to overcome, but they are viable paths. By viable I mean itâs doable in theory, although neither path has ever been taken (but Nixon did resign before being taken down).
2 Likes
Fake news lol.
Do better.
Teehee
Vote for the other candidate.
Executive power
It is the Commission that currently holds executive powers over the [European Union]
Legislative initiative
The Commission differs from the other institutions in that it alone has [legislative initiative]
Good, now we all know why you are clueless about the EU.
I feel a four year term with a max of 2 terms is pretty reasonable. Any shorter makes it hard for them to get things done long term because theyâre so worried about re-election and short term perceptions. Any longer feels too powerful.
Youâre arenât wrong about problems with a 2 party system. But itâs not like a multip party system is without issues. Look at Italy.
National govenrnents supersede the commission in most aspects of policy.
Besides the commission has representatives from each state.
The president of the commission is more like a figurehead.
Next !
If there are better candidates than trump, Iâd vote for them. But so far the Democrats have been crying so much and putting up ridiculous names to play trumps game that I think theyâre just shooting themselves in the foot. I donât understand why they arenât changing their strategy. Theyâve essentially doubled downed on their strategy that game them the loss.
You canât vote for âthemâ, you could only really vote for one other candidate.
They pretend like thereâs a choice.
And thatâs the whole problem .
There is a choice.
Also, there is no problem. Itâs just not what you are used to.
Looks like thereâs a problem to meâŚ
Tweedle dumb and tweedle dee are rolled out.
Pick one.
What do you means Iâm not used to it lol.
Whaf do I get used to ?
There are always problems in the US. That problems exist in the US does not mean that there is no choice. It also does not mean that things are broken or need to be changed.
I think you are used to faster change in government, and that is what I meant. I may be wrong about that, and if so apologies.
You can write in a candidate. Protest votes are popular.
micky mouse is a popular candidate.