Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6818

  • DRW50

    5991

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3465

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Check out what the mental health doctors are saying about T****:

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-world-mental-health-coalition-25th-amendment-removal-1560008%3famp=1

 

I'm not surprised that the Arizona GOP has completely lost it. After all, SIX of Rep. Paul Gosar's siblings publicly endorsed his opponent - TWICE (in 2018 and 2020)!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You could argue that Congress doesn't have enough time to impeach Donald Trump (again), but I agree that Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer need to send the message that there MUST be accountability for what happened this week at the Capitol.  The risk of another insurrection (or worse) happening is just too high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Impeachment could happen quickly.

They are talking about dispensing the need for committee work on impeachment. 
The plan is to just have the House do an up and down yes/no vote to impeach.  
"Impeach" is like "indict" - to bring formal charges.

 

Then it's up to the Senate to put him on trial.

 

The senate won't reconvene until Jan 19th and ...
There's two things.

They need 2/3 of the Senators to vote to convict him.
The Senate needs 50 votes to permanently disqualify Trump from holding "any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States."

 

Explained much better here:

https://www.vox.com/22220495/impeachment-trump-2024-election-bar-from-office

Edited by janea4old
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Most likely.  It's too bad we can't wrap it up in a half-hour, like they do on "Judge Judy."  On the other hand, it's got to be better viewing than B&B.

 

ETA: Sorry, @ChitHappens, I misunderstood your question.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Legal experts are mixed on if a president can be impeached and/or convicted after leaving office. There is one precedent that points to yes they can. In 1876, Secretary of War, William Belknap resigned minutes before the US House was set to vote on impeachment. The House went ahead and impeached him anyways. The Senate also proceeded to have a trial. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Agreed. The Emmys next year are gonna be a pretty tough competition and I hope we get a Days sweep lol  Not only does Deidre deserve a nomination for these last few weeks, but I also think Paul Telfer, Raven Bowens, Carson Boatman, Dan Feuerriegel and Alison Sweeney have good chances as well.
    • It’s not about a lack of faith and trust in MVJ, it’s about a a lack of faith and trust in Ron Carlivati, who I think can be very sneaky and manipulative when he wants to be.  And, all that “He’s just a breakdown writer” talk never changed my mind about anything, because at Days, it was “just a breakdown writer” that gave us some of the worst episodes I’ve ever seen. 
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Please register in order to view this content

         
    • @TaoboiI ran into Dani’s favorite party planner again tonight

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I think they’re desperately trying to cover his awful tattoos. But anyway them being unable to style short kings properly has been a major pet peeve of mine for a while now.  I honestly don’t understand what some people expect from actors to even begin considering them for recognition. Let’s be real—awards mostly mean that an actor is respected by their peers and has some level of cultural relevance. Actual judgment on the acting itself? That’s often secondary—highly subjective and shaped by the times. I completely agree on both points. If you’re an actor or a dancer you shouldn’t get any tattoos (sorry not sorry). Tomas’ tattoos are ugly too. And regarding the couples- you’re completely right. These writers are unable to write romance.   Further comments: - Kat cannot be this dumb to keep tampering with evidence over and over again. And I’m officially not a fan of the actress—every time she’s in a scene with Leslie, she doesn’t seem intimidated at all. She plays it like comic relief, which is just too much, especially when paired with Leslie’s histrionics and over-the-top antics. Leslie is older, dangerous, and has literally been portrayed as homicidal—Kat should be at least a little scared. • I also didn’t like Kat playing damsel in distress with the hotel manager. It gave off the same weird energy as Dani with the cop. I would’ve much preferred the version Paul Raven suggested, with her sneaking in through housekeeping. • And yes, Dani again accused Hayley of faking the pregnancy—this time even specifying she might be using a pillow under her shirt. (No fake miscarriage being mentioned) I stand by my take: this is ridiculous writing. No one in the real world—except us, the chronically online soap watchers—would even think of such a conspiracy theory. Haley is no Beyoncé. • What in the world was Chelsea wearing in her hair the other day? And this whole thing with Madison is beyond cringe. Chelsea’s coming off as needy and toxic—basically like every other Dupree. • I’m glad the casino storyline is moving forward, but it’s still boring as hell. Honestly, I’d be so here for a plot twist where Vanessa and Doug take Joey out. • The direction and editing lately have been rough. Abrupt cuts, weird pacing… something just feels off overall. There’s a strange uneasiness to how it’s all coming together. • And finally: Tomas is too much of a saint. Where are the messy sluts when you need them? (Vanessa doesn’t count.)
    • I was watching some August 1987 episodes and they brought back so many memories. I had some thoughts: Lisa and Jamie were so dull. Lisa was such a nothing character. It boggles my mind that so much story was centered around her in such a short amount of time. Joanna Going is a talented actress, but the material was just not there.  It was so good to see Wallingford and Mitch again. I know there was talk about Felicia a while back, but these episodes reminded me how integral Felicia was for the show.  Sally Spencer was done so dirty. She is turning in superb performances in an icky storyline. I wish she had stuck around longer. She has chemistry with everyone. The McKinnons should have lasted longer. Spencer had some strong stuff with Stephen Schnetzer and Mary Alexander. AW waster such a talented actress by getting rid of her. Justice for Cheryl too. I also missed Ed Fry when he left. Sandra Ferguson was a star from the moment she came on. She was charismatic and just popped. She had immediate chemistry with RKK and blended in well with Wyndham and Watson. I'd forgotten about the teenage Matthew.  I have no memory of Peggy Lazarus. She must not have lasted long. Was the original plan for John that he was going to turn out to be the twins' real father?      
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy