Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Is it time to watch the mud stick with TFG? Watch this space!

984 replies

Roussette · 21/09/2022 21:03

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4396017-Big-Bird-may-be-innocent-but-who-can-vouch-for-Elmo?page=40&reply=120171921

Previous thread!

This thread is now full, here is the link to the new thread www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4912378-trump-gets-gagged-mccarthy-gets-booted-whats-next-in-trumpworld? (added my MNHQ)

OP posts:
Thread gallery
80
AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 27/07/2023 22:42

What I am hoping to find out is what, amid all the sound and fury from the nuttier space-laser-type Republicans, they think would actually amount to an actual charge of any sort against President Biden. I simply can't make it out; they do a lot of saying things like "we've seen the bank statements", but they never seem to say what it is that they have seen in them which demonstrates illegality, for instance.

Winning an election isn't an offence in law yet, is it? But none of the other stuff seems to be either, nor even to have been done by President Biden himself rather than his son. It isn't even particularly naughty, like Clinton having a sexual affair while he was President...

(Actually I think it is Republicans getting so aerated about someone buying a gun that boggles my mind.)

AcrossthePond55 · 27/07/2023 22:53

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 27/07/2023 22:42

What I am hoping to find out is what, amid all the sound and fury from the nuttier space-laser-type Republicans, they think would actually amount to an actual charge of any sort against President Biden. I simply can't make it out; they do a lot of saying things like "we've seen the bank statements", but they never seem to say what it is that they have seen in them which demonstrates illegality, for instance.

Winning an election isn't an offence in law yet, is it? But none of the other stuff seems to be either, nor even to have been done by President Biden himself rather than his son. It isn't even particularly naughty, like Clinton having a sexual affair while he was President...

(Actually I think it is Republicans getting so aerated about someone buying a gun that boggles my mind.)

It's 'all sound and fury, signifying nothing'. They have nothing concrete so they're just pointing in the air, making vague insinuations, and saying "Look, a fish!!!" to take the public's eye off of Doofus et al, as well their own questionable doings. Classic 'if we can't dazzle 'em with brilliance (or the truth), we'll baffle them with bullshit'.

And of course, pandering to 'the base'. They don't have to make a specific accusation of any kind to rile them and have them screaming "Off with his head!!".

AcrossthePond55 · 27/07/2023 23:34

3 additional charges against Doofus, 1 against Nauta, and a charge against a new defendant.

apple.news/AfdzRTdBCRH6vPiu4VfNldA

OP posts:
DuncinToffee · 01/08/2023 23:11

Donald Trump has been indicted by a federal grand jury on FOUR CRIMINAL COUNTS in special counsel Jack Smith's investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

CHARGES AGAINST TRUMP:

18 U.S.C. § 371: Conspiracy to Defraud the United States

18 U.S.C. § 1512(k): Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding

18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2): Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding

18 U.S. Code § 241: Conspiracy Against Rights

Reuters: INDICTMENT MENTIONS SIX UNNAMED CO-CONSPIRATORS -DOCUMENT

AcrossthePond55 · 01/08/2023 23:22

Well it's about time!

I was napping and this is the happy news I woke up to!

AcrossthePond55 · 01/08/2023 23:45

Trying to read the indictment AND listen to MSNBC at the same time.

Unfortunately, none of the charges extend to the level of 'insurrection' so if convicted there will be no bar to holding federal office.

FYI Rachel Maddow Indictment Special on MSNBC tonight at 8pm EDT

AcrossthePond55 · 02/08/2023 00:22

5 out of the 6 co-conspirators tentatively identified as:

1 Rudy Giuliani (unverified)
2 John Eastman (verified by his attorneys)
3 Sidney Powell (unverified)
4 Jeff Clark (unverified)
5 Kenneth Cheseboro (unverified)
6 unknown/undeterminable based on the indictment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/08/01/trump-indictment-jan-6-2020-election/

TheSilveryPussycat · 02/08/2023 01:19

Dammit! Tried to watch Rachel but it wouldn't let me.
Back to the old days of watching CNN and reading this thread - but in much much happier circumstances!

Original poster
Roussette · 02/08/2023 06:15

Unfortunately, none of the charges extend to the level of 'insurrection' so if convicted there will be no bar to holding federal office.

Now... this I just cannot get my head round. Listening to the charges which are about as serious as they can get, without insurrection, doesn't preclude him from becoming POTUS. Shock

I would love to know what 'our rules' are... I think of Johnson and his lying and cover ups, it saw him off in the end. Yet there seems to be nothing that stops someone running for office like Trump... multiple legal cases, indictments, criminal charges... it's almost like a badge of honour for him and invigorates the MAGAs. And they carry on donating and isn't he using this money for the multiple court cases?

OP posts:
DuncinToffee · 02/08/2023 08:27

In the UK, those 6 co-conspirators would have been given seats in the House of Lords Roussette

PerkingFaintly · 02/08/2023 10:05

Haven't listened yet, but this looks worthwhile.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0g485nc

In today's episode, the Americast team are joined by former FBI director James Comey, who was fired by Trump during his presidency.
Comey says Trump's loyal base hasn't expanded since the last election, but he has "tightened his grip" on those who support him.
"There's a ceiling on his poll numbers. But he’s tightened his grip on those who supported him and that's a function of human nature that I've seen over and over again in criminal cases," Comey says.
"People who have been defrauded struggle to admit that they were fools and they tend to be drawn deeper and deeper by fresh and new lies," he adds.
"Otherwise what will they do? They will look at the television images of January 6th, and those images whisper, 'you fool – look what you’ve done to your country'. Most people can't hear that whisper."

BBC Radio - Americast, Capitol Punishment

Donald Trump has been charged with a third set of crimes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0g485nc

Igotjelly · 02/08/2023 10:20

PerkingFaintly · 02/08/2023 10:05

Haven't listened yet, but this looks worthwhile.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0g485nc

In today's episode, the Americast team are joined by former FBI director James Comey, who was fired by Trump during his presidency.
Comey says Trump's loyal base hasn't expanded since the last election, but he has "tightened his grip" on those who support him.
"There's a ceiling on his poll numbers. But he’s tightened his grip on those who supported him and that's a function of human nature that I've seen over and over again in criminal cases," Comey says.
"People who have been defrauded struggle to admit that they were fools and they tend to be drawn deeper and deeper by fresh and new lies," he adds.
"Otherwise what will they do? They will look at the television images of January 6th, and those images whisper, 'you fool – look what you’ve done to your country'. Most people can't hear that whisper."

Just listened, he was really interesting as ever and surprisingly upbeat!

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 02/08/2023 11:54

PerkingFaintly · 02/08/2023 10:05

Haven't listened yet, but this looks worthwhile.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0g485nc

In today's episode, the Americast team are joined by former FBI director James Comey, who was fired by Trump during his presidency.
Comey says Trump's loyal base hasn't expanded since the last election, but he has "tightened his grip" on those who support him.
"There's a ceiling on his poll numbers. But he’s tightened his grip on those who supported him and that's a function of human nature that I've seen over and over again in criminal cases," Comey says.
"People who have been defrauded struggle to admit that they were fools and they tend to be drawn deeper and deeper by fresh and new lies," he adds.
"Otherwise what will they do? They will look at the television images of January 6th, and those images whisper, 'you fool – look what you’ve done to your country'. Most people can't hear that whisper."

PerkingFaintly
you quoted
Most people can't hear that whisper.

I feel that might equally be "Most people can't bear that whisper." In fact that was what I read, and then did a double-take and saw it properly.

It's that agonised cry of "How could I have been so stupid?!" which they just can't utter, isn't it. Publicly admitting you were wrong is incredibly hard to do: most politicians are simply incapable of it, journalists don't bother but simply ignore it and move on to a new subject (literally the only publication I saw admitting it had been wrong about the danger of the MMR jab was Private Eye, while the rest just shut up about the whole business), doctors and other professionals feel they mustn't because if they do people may start to doubt their professional expertise and then that of the entire profession... It really isn't surprising if Ordinary Joe, with the example of all his "betters" (hah!) in front of him, thinks that "I made a mistake" is something nobody ever says.

AcrossthePond55 · 02/08/2023 17:21

Roussette · 02/08/2023 06:15

Unfortunately, none of the charges extend to the level of 'insurrection' so if convicted there will be no bar to holding federal office.

Now... this I just cannot get my head round. Listening to the charges which are about as serious as they can get, without insurrection, doesn't preclude him from becoming POTUS. Shock

I would love to know what 'our rules' are... I think of Johnson and his lying and cover ups, it saw him off in the end. Yet there seems to be nothing that stops someone running for office like Trump... multiple legal cases, indictments, criminal charges... it's almost like a badge of honour for him and invigorates the MAGAs. And they carry on donating and isn't he using this money for the multiple court cases?

There doesn't seem to be a particular set of rules for who can be PM. This is what I found and It doesn't list criminal convictions as a bar to standing for Parliament. I'd assume that the PM would sort of fall under the same 'rules' as aren't they usually an MP?

https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/electing-mps/candidates/

From Wiki

"The office of prime minister is not established by any statute or constitutional document, but exists only by long-established convention, whereby the monarch appoints as prime minister the person most likely to command the confidence of the House of Commons.[3] In practice, this is the leader of the political party that holds the largest number of seats in the Commons".

greenacrylicpaint · 02/08/2023 17:43

but the pm is an mp.

are there rules about mp's conduct? thinking of the removal of margaret ferrier just now.

BruceAndNosh · 02/08/2023 19:25

I've been trolling on YouTube...
Fox News is pro Trump but the comments section is fairly anti... So I hit "Right Side Broadcasting" instead which is an eye opener full of those proclaiming Trump is anointed by God.
I managed to get blocked with my very first comment!

TheSilveryPussycat · 02/08/2023 20:00

@AcrossthePond55 I think it's phrased like because we have an unwritten constitution. In fact, in 1968 when I was 15, I got an O Level in British Constitution, main thing being that the sytem is designed to separate the legislative, executive, and judiciary ams of governance. In the US, AIUI, there is less separation, eg politicians appoint some civil servants?

TheSilveryPussycat · 02/08/2023 20:00

meant to bold this unwritten constitution

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 02/08/2023 20:07

TheSilveryPussycat · 02/08/2023 20:00

@AcrossthePond55 I think it's phrased like because we have an unwritten constitution. In fact, in 1968 when I was 15, I got an O Level in British Constitution, main thing being that the sytem is designed to separate the legislative, executive, and judiciary ams of governance. In the US, AIUI, there is less separation, eg politicians appoint some civil servants?

And the judiciary, as was made brutally obvious under Trump.

TheSilveryPussycat · 02/08/2023 20:26

Oh yes. How could I have forgotten Grin

AcrossthePond55 · 02/08/2023 22:26

TheSilveryPussycat · 02/08/2023 20:00

@AcrossthePond55 I think it's phrased like because we have an unwritten constitution. In fact, in 1968 when I was 15, I got an O Level in British Constitution, main thing being that the sytem is designed to separate the legislative, executive, and judiciary ams of governance. In the US, AIUI, there is less separation, eg politicians appoint some civil servants?

There are the three same branches and constitutionally a 'balance of power' with each branch having 'powers' with the other two branches having some oversight or 'veto' power.

Cabinet members/judges/Department heads (Secretary of Interior, Treasury, Defense etc)level civil servants are 'nominated' by the POTUS (executive branch) but must be approved by the Senate (legislative branch). Congress (Senate/House of Reps) passes legislation that must be signed off or vetoed by POTUS. The Supreme Court (judicial) is charged with determining the constitutionality of the actions of the other two branches. It is the ONLY branch over which the other two branches have very little control, although a judge/justice can be impeached.

In 'days past', SCOTUS justice nominations were expected to be nonpartisan and the Senate was expected to confirm/reject based purely on the qualifications of the candidate without regards to the candidate's political/religious leanings. But in actuality, the SCOTUS has been 'politicized' as far back as 1937 in one way or another. But it's just recently that it's been so blatantly done based purely on religious and/or 'social' issues (ie abortion, race, equality, sexual orientation). Trump was just the POTUS who decided to openly do this to pander to his base.

TheSilveryPussycat · 03/08/2023 00:09

I have just caught some of Bob Woodward being interviewed on CNN. Impressive. He compared and contrasted Nixon and Trump. Nixon committed his crimes before the election. Trump is accused of crimes while he was president. What motivated each, he surmises, is the lust for power, pure and simple.

(CNN then treated me to a 30 second holiday in Ghana. T'was lovely Smile)

Original poster
Roussette · 03/08/2023 07:27

I'm not sure we've seen Mike Pence so vociferous in his criticism of Trump?

https://twitter.com/Mike_Pence/status/1686839230168006656

https://twitter.com/Mike_Pence/status/1686839230168006656

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread