This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
I think PB is rather missing the point - what's happening in Scotland could have real implications for UK politics and betting. Is there a market for Sturgeon exit? The Wings Over Scotland site has Alex Salmond's full evidence and it is explosive to say the least. I don't see how Sturgeon stays.
Noted elsewhere, the debate is raging over which of them is telling lies, while the obvious truth would be that both of them are
I honestly think there are two options. 1. She goes now. 2. She stays as 'caretaker' to 'see Covid through' but promises to make way for a new leader at some predetermined point. I don't see an option 3 where she survives. But perhaps I'm totally wrong.
Given her evidence and that of her husband so far, she has been involved deeply and lied repeatedly. Salmond may have been a womaniser but as shown in court the stitch up was either fabricated or consensual. People may not like that but it means they don't like millions that are doing similar at work every day. Key point is she tried to have him jailed to stop him coming back into politics , failed miserably and then tried to cover up and lied to parliament etc. She is a goner , no UN job in Geneva for her as Boris will welch for sure.
Do you really think it was all to stop him coming back in to politics?
That and the woke MeTo mince , she is fanatical feminist. May have been someone else's idea but it looks very like she at least ended up going along with it. She could have stopped it all many times but chose not too, her husband was up to neck in it as well as we saw with whatsapp. Also if you know some of the other players you would know it was a group all at the top of government / civil service / SNP.
Several members of the GOP came out well when the heat was on. I name Raffensperger. Gov. Kemp. The Governor of Maryland who called out the National Guard and deployed them. The numerous Congress folk and Senators who were having none of it. Above all Mike Pence. Who almost single handedly saved the Republic. Who'd have imagined that? The problem with a coup is you need full control of your own side. Don thought he did. But didn't. When the curtain was drawn back there wasn't much more than a sad loser and a bunch of enablers. Some very sad, some extremely dangerous.
To get loyalty you first need to show loyalty.
And I doubt few people have ever thought that Trump was loyal to them.
If Trump goes to prison, he will be rather lonely having pardoned all his mates!
What chances Democrat representatives in a state legislature somewhere are captured and killed at some point in the next four years? It must be pretty scary for them knowing many Republican politicians at that level who control local law enforcement go along with the coup.
Pretty likely. Of course, some of these nutters will go for Republicans too, who they deem traitors to the cause.
High. The trouble is that when things like this happen some Democrats just double-down on their condemnation and vitriol against all Republicans, further inflaming tensions, and then striking at things they know the other side hold dear.
It really does require some very brave leadership from both Republicans and Democrats (who will get extreme abuse from their own side) to solve this.
I think PB is rather missing the point - what's happening in Scotland could have real implications for UK politics and betting. Is there a market for Sturgeon exit? The Wings Over Scotland site has Alex Salmond's full evidence and it is explosive to say the least. I don't see how Sturgeon stays.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Excellent article, David. Chills the blood, doesn't it?
I think the future of American democracy rests as much on an internal battle within the Republican Party as it does executive-led action by the new Biden administration.
America is so partisan now each side needs to put its own house in order first before it will be able to sensibly engage again with the other.
Yep. The Republicans need to decide what they do about the Trump fans in their midst, much as Starmer needs to work through the problems caused by the Corbyn fans in the Labour Party.
The Democrats need to decide if spending their first two years of power going after Trump is really making the best use of their time, as opposed to taking advantage of their good position to pass legislation in line with their agenda.
I still think the best thing to do with Trump is to ignore him, he craves publicity and denying him that oxygen will be worse for him than spending every day in a courthouse or on the news. I also think the tech companies have screwed up yesterday, they risk making a martyr of the guy.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
Given there's strong evidence that some of them were planning on hanging Mike Pence then I'm fairly certain some of them would have ensured a similar fate for Pelosi, who was sat next to Pence.
One point to add, in favour of David's thesis, is that much of the American Right believes there has ALREADY been a coup: America has inexplicably and "illegally" been taken over by a bunch of Woke liberal anti-patriots, pushing an alien, unAmerican agenda.
Trump is a bully and a coward. He wanted the coup to succeed but deep down knew it was unlikely to do so and did not want to face the consequences of being caught red handed. Caught with blood on his hands.
He behaved like a Caesar or a Mafia boss. He made it as clear as he dared, without explicitly saying so, what he wanted to happen. "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" But the coward in him and perhaps any residual humanity that still lurks within his baseless soul, stopped him going all in.
That is his typical pattern of behaviour. Tough talk, encourage others, but attempt to stop just short of doign something legally actionable. I don't see how that works this time, but after years of legalities it'll turn out he didn't cross the line somehow.
Looked like a good piece but I'm afraid I gave up on the third or fourth paragraph. Too long, too wordy.
It's not exactly War and Peace.
I thought it was just long enough to make its argument.
Criticisms of the articles here being too long consistently astound me. Who can be bothered to log on to a political betting site a couple of days after a coup in Washington yet finds two minutes reading something very well written and argued a bit too much? And then makes that public!
One point to add, in favour of David's thesis, is that much of the American Right believes there has ALREADY been a coup: America has inexplicably and "illegally" been taken over by a bunch of Woke liberal anti-patriots, pushing an alien, unAmerican agenda.
That would, morally, justify a counter-coup
A lot of them seem surprised that the media (even the friendly bits) aren't painting them as some kind of heroes
I think PB is rather missing the point - what's happening in Scotland could have real implications for UK politics and betting. Is there a market for Sturgeon exit? The Wings Over Scotland site has Alex Salmond's full evidence and it is explosive to say the least. I don't see how Sturgeon stays.
Noted elsewhere, the debate is raging over which of them is telling lies, while the obvious truth would be that both of them are
I honestly think there are two options. 1. She goes now. 2. She stays as 'caretaker' to 'see Covid through' but promises to make way for a new leader at some predetermined point. I don't see an option 3 where she survives. But perhaps I'm totally wrong.
How's your record so far?
I don't make predictions very often, so Ok I suppose? At any rate, I certainly don't expect anyone to make decisions based on my feelings, hence the caveat at the end of the post.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Phew, all a storm in a teacup then.
No, I didn't say that. I was just saying I don't think she would have been killed.
Is it possible for you to engage in any discussion on this forum without being sarcastic or obtuse ?
I may be an idiot but it seems almost all of Salmond's submission is based on material outside the remit of the inquiry?
And contains a mountain of speculation rather than facts.
There's two inquiries, from The Times
Mr Salmond’s claims were made in a submission to James Hamilton, the independent adviser to the Scottish government who is investigating Ms Sturgeon’s conduct. The submission has been shared with a separate Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish government’s unlawful handling of complaints against the former first minister.
This is what is intriguing me lots, has this advice been published?
Mr Salmond said the breaches included a failure to inform the civil service in good time of her meetings with him, and allowing the Scottish government to contest a civil court case against him despite having had legal advice that it was likely to collapse.
Looked like a good piece but I'm afraid I gave up on the third or fourth paragraph. Too long, too wordy.
It's not exactly War and Peace.
I thought it was just long enough to make its argument.
Criticisms of the articles here being too long consistently astound me. Who can be bothered to log on to a political betting site a couple of days after a coup in Washington yet finds two minutes reading something very well written and argued a bit too much? And then makes that public!
I'm prone to be unnecessarily verbose myself, and if people generally prefer something shorter and punchier I totally get that, but whilst things can be too padded, longform content simply affords more opportunity to lay out an argument. It's not overly repetitve, it has clear points to make, so merely being too long is not a negative it's what you do with that length that matters. I have heard.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
Given there's strong evidence that some of them were planning on hanging Mike Pence then I'm fairly certain some of them would have ensured a similar fate for Pelosi, who was sat next to Pence.
They were saying "hang Mike Pence" and "murder the media" but I think that was just rhetoric.
When they get near real media or Republicans (like Lindsey Graham) they get very abusive and pushy/shovey but still baulk at killing them.
Of course.. you can never be *sure*.. I'm just making my prediction.
One point to add, in favour of David's thesis, is that much of the American Right believes there has ALREADY been a coup: America has inexplicably and "illegally" been taken over by a bunch of Woke liberal anti-patriots, pushing an alien, unAmerican agenda.
That would, morally, justify a counter-coup
Yes, on that basis Trump is Franco against the woke, Antifa Communists for them
Disagree, Hawley is young, articulate, very intelligent, Standford and Yale degrees, taught at St Paul's, a former lawyer and now probably the most telegenic figurehead for the Trumpite GOP base once Trump leaves office
That doesn't really counter the craven opportunist point. He treated this all like a game, a theatrical performance, and ceding his time in debate kind of proves that, as if he believed his own objections still needed to be made even after the riot, he would have properly made that argument. He knew it was bogus and did it anyway.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
I think most of them would have done that, yes. The number who wandered around like fucking tourists in Paris taking selfies and picking up mementos sort of points to that, they saw it as a big day out.
There might have been a mob mentality or there might not have been when it came to harming people. But outside of that it would have only taken a handful of determined folk or even just a few unhinged individuals with guns to kill several people in the chaos even if that was not part of any particular plan.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
Given there's strong evidence that some of them were planning on hanging Mike Pence then I'm fairly certain some of them would have ensured a similar fate for Pelosi, who was sat next to Pence.
They were saying "hang Mike Pence" and "murder the media" but I think that was just rhetoric.
When they get near real media or Republicans (like Lindsey Graham) they get very abusive and pushy/shovey but still baulk at killing them.
Of course.. you can never be *sure*.. I'm just making my prediction.
... even the guy with the zip tie 'handcuffs' and tactical gear?
I may be an idiot but it seems almost all of Salmond's submission is based on material outside the remit of the inquiry?
And contains a mountain of speculation rather than facts.
There's two inquiries, from The Times
Mr Salmond’s claims were made in a submission to James Hamilton, the independent adviser to the Scottish government who is investigating Ms Sturgeon’s conduct. The submission has been shared with a separate Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish government’s unlawful handling of complaints against the former first minister.
This is what is intriguing me lots, has this advice been published?
Mr Salmond said the breaches included a failure to inform the civil service in good time of her meetings with him, and allowing the Scottish government to contest a civil court case against him despite having had legal advice that it was likely to collapse.
Tricky one that. If the case doesn't go ahead, it is open to the charge of "SNP closing ranks". Easier - and potentially, politically less damaging - to let it go ahead, despite the advice - "let justice take its course."
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
Given there's strong evidence that some of them were planning on hanging Mike Pence then I'm fairly certain some of them would have ensured a similar fate for Pelosi, who was sat next to Pence.
They were saying "hang Mike Pence" and "murder the media" but I think that was just rhetoric.
When they get near real media or Republicans (like Lindsey Graham) they get very abusive and pushy/shovey but still baulk at killing them.
Of course.. you can never be *sure*.. I'm just making my prediction.
I'm not sure the zip ties and IEDs they brought along were for rhetoric.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I don't think it was a serious attempt at a coup. It was a demonstration - in the military definition - and an attempt to use the mob and create a mythology for the future. I see it more as the basis for the use of violent force during the next 4 years of opposition. Think the Nazis in the 1920s.
I dont think there was any strategy at all. Trump just makes it up as he goes along in a haze of dementia, personality disorders and drugs.
It was just a bunch of nutjobs , most of whom would struggle to beat a carpet. Anyone suggesting a coup is similar or on the make.
Don't be silly. What constitutes a coup is not a simple question, that's why there are definitions for so many different types of coup. At the urging of a political figure a mob, some violent, stormed the Capitol in order to prevent certification of the presidential election, which they succeeded in delaying, in order to provide opportunity for the inciting figure to remain in power.
How organised it was, how shambolic it was, these will raise questions of just how much it was a 'proper' coup d'etat, but at the very least it does not make suggestion of it meeting the requirements of a coup unreasonable.
Much like predicting the next recession if Sturgeon does go I'm sure PB will be full of self congratulatory Scotch experts who have been predicting her resignation every year since 2016.
What chances Democrat representatives in a state legislature somewhere are captured and killed at some point in the next four years? It must be pretty scary for them knowing many Republican politicians at that level who control local law enforcement go along with the coup.
Pretty likely. Of course, some of these nutters will go for Republicans too, who they deem traitors to the cause.
High. The trouble is that when things like this happen some Democrats just double-down on their condemnation and vitriol against all Republicans, further inflaming tensions, and then striking at things they know the other side hold dear.
It really does require some very brave leadership from both Republicans and Democrats (who will get extreme abuse from their own side) to solve this.
I think Biden's instincts are best-placed for this. He wants to work across the aisle.
But that requires two things from the Republicans. Firstly, they have to split from the Coup Caucus within their midst. Secondly, they have to step back from the no surrender obstructionism that has been their Congressional strategy since Gingrich.
If they did that then I expect that Biden would prefer to deal with anti-Coup Republicans.
Convicting Trump in the Senate is the first test. Ultimately what side is McConnell on when it comes to a Trump coup?
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
Given there's strong evidence that some of them were planning on hanging Mike Pence then I'm fairly certain some of them would have ensured a similar fate for Pelosi, who was sat next to Pence.
They were saying "hang Mike Pence" and "murder the media" but I think that was just rhetoric.
When they get near real media or Republicans (like Lindsey Graham) they get very abusive and pushy/shovey but still baulk at killing them.
Of course.. you can never be *sure*.. I'm just making my prediction.
A lot of people there probably thought they'd never participate in a violent storming of the Capitol either, but once in the moment. So the ones who were inclined to be violent in the first place, if they had got their hands on Pence, might have whipped each other up into doing it.
That photo is never going to leave him. It's going to be in every opponent's ads whenever he runs for anything
He'll probably proudly run it himself, I don't doubt for one second that he supports what that crowd did 100%, apart from a few people regrettably dying. The storming of the building seems entirely in line with his own rhetoric.
One point to add, in favour of David's thesis, is that much of the American Right believes there has ALREADY been a coup: America has inexplicably and "illegally" been taken over by a bunch of Woke liberal anti-patriots, pushing an alien, unAmerican agenda.
That would, morally, justify a counter-coup
Yes, this is why I think *just* condemning and prosecuting Trump (although that should be done) is an insufficient answer.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
Given there's strong evidence that some of them were planning on hanging Mike Pence then I'm fairly certain some of them would have ensured a similar fate for Pelosi, who was sat next to Pence.
They were saying "hang Mike Pence" and "murder the media" but I think that was just rhetoric.
When they get near real media or Republicans (like Lindsey Graham) they get very abusive and pushy/shovey but still baulk at killing them.
Of course.. you can never be *sure*.. I'm just making my prediction.
I'm not sure the zip ties and IEDs they brought along were for rhetoric.
Either that, or someone really misunderstood the term 'rhetorical device'...
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
I think most of them would have done that, yes. The number who wandered around like fucking tourists in Paris taking selfies and picking up mementos sort of points to that, they saw it as a big day out.
There might have been a mob mentality or there might not have been when it came to harming people. But outside of that it would have only taken a handful of determined folk or even just a few unhinged individuals with guns to kill several people in the chaos even if that was not part of any particular plan.
From what is now coming out I think this was more than a mob expressing their frustrations. Some of those who went to Congress were intent on violence and others on stopping Congress declaring Jo Biden the next President. Had they done so - whether by seizing hostages or creating such disorder that Congress could not continue - I have no doubt that Trump would have used that to stay in power. I also think we have not yet found out the truth of why security in Congress was so poor, whether actions were deliberately taken to make it easier for the mob to storm it and the extent of any connivance by some in the police.
It may look like a clown coup because there were some grannies in the crowd or people wearing silly costumes. But there were also some who were armed and were anything but clowns. Trump looks like an orange-haired buffoon but his actions - not just this week - but for a long time show him to be a danger to democracy and good governance.
What chances Democrat representatives in a state legislature somewhere are captured and killed at some point in the next four years? It must be pretty scary for them knowing many Republican politicians at that level who control local law enforcement go along with the coup.
Pretty likely. Of course, some of these nutters will go for Republicans too, who they deem traitors to the cause.
High. The trouble is that when things like this happen some Democrats just double-down on their condemnation and vitriol against all Republicans, further inflaming tensions, and then striking at things they know the other side hold dear.
It really does require some very brave leadership from both Republicans and Democrats (who will get extreme abuse from their own side) to solve this.
I think Biden's instincts are best-placed for this. He wants to work across the aisle.
But that requires two things from the Republicans. Firstly, they have to split from the Coup Caucus within their midst. Secondly, they have to step back from the no surrender obstructionism that has been their Congressional strategy since Gingrich.
If they did that then I expect that Biden would prefer to deal with anti-Coup Republicans.
Convicting Trump in the Senate is the first test. Ultimately what side is McConnell on when it comes to a Trump coup?
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I don't think it was a serious attempt at a coup. It was a demonstration - in the military definition - and an attempt to use the mob and create a mythology for the future. I see it more as the basis for the use of violent force during the next 4 years of opposition. Think the Nazis in the 1920s.
I dont think there was any strategy at all. Trump just makes it up as he goes along in a haze of dementia, personality disorders and drugs.
It was just a bunch of nutjobs , most of whom would struggle to beat a carpet. Anyone suggesting a coup is similar or on the make.
Don't be silly. What constitutes a coup is not a simple question, that's why there are definitions for so many different types of coup. At the urging of a political figure a mob, some violent, stormed the Capitol in order to prevent certification of the presidential election, which they succeeded in delaying, in order to provide opportunity for the inciting figure to remain in power.
How organised it was, how shambolic it was, these will raise questions of just how much it was a 'proper' coup d'etat, but at the very least it does not make suggestion of it meeting the requirements of a coup unreasonable.
I think the problem is this. It is very easy to identify a successful coup. A failed one is always denied by the participants.
There might have been a mob mentality or there might not have been when it came to harming people. But outside of that it would have only taken a handful of determined folk or even just a few unhinged individuals with guns to kill several people in the chaos even if that was not part of any particular plan.
FPT: "The SNP are less likely to enjoy their current hegemony post independence. I can even imagine a (rebranded) Scottish Conservative party being in government post independence."
I don't buy that. If Scotland is going to be independent, then surely the expression of that is ensuring it remains something very different to what they have now - a Tory Government. The SNP will ride the wave of delivery for a decade before it all gets horribly incestuous, with a chumocracy that even the Westminster Tories would never have the neck to put in place. Some bad scandals, some jail time and a quite abrupt turning away from the SNP is my guess.
But not to anything that looks like it might be Tories in disguise. A new Tartan-clad social democrat party would be my guess, one that appeals to both LibDems and Tories with quite a few ex-SLAB and SNPers who see a need for change climbing aboard. The interesting question will be - is it a party that will want to join the EU? But they will have the benefit of quite a few years to see how the wind is blowing on that. (Implicit in that is that I don't expect the SNP to apply to join straight away - there will be a huge debate about the pros and cons. There will be plenty who don't want to swap the choke-hold of Westminster for the choke-hold of Brussels....)
I think posters like @malcolmg would vote for an independent Scottish centre-right party.
Probably called the Freedom Party, or something similar (maybe with extra e's in the middle for the full Gibson).
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
Mobs are unpredictable.
Agreed, I'm just contesting the prediction that the murder of Pence and Pelosi was inevitable had they been found.
I'm under no illusions as to how serious and terrifying the event was, and how it could easily have been worse. It should never have happened and those involved should be prosecuted with the full force of the law.
Looked like a good piece but I'm afraid I gave up on the third or fourth paragraph. Too long, too wordy.
It's not exactly War and Peace.
I thought it was just long enough to make its argument.
Criticisms of the articles here being too long consistently astound me. Who can be bothered to log on to a political betting site a couple of days after a coup in Washington yet finds two minutes reading something very well written and argued a bit too much? And then makes that public!
A writer, apparently.
But evidently not a reader.
It is very tiresome. @Mysticrose repeatedly describes himself/herself as some brilliant writer and/or editor reducing other authors to tears, criticises those who write headers but never puts forward some of their own work to show us lesser mortals how it should be done.
I assume that they must be a famous haiku author because even the shortest of short stories must be beyond them to read - and if they cannot read them how could they possibly write them.
Excellent and interesting article, but, in the heat of these weird and terrifying times maybe slightly overblown about how close it all got to a coup.
Perhaps we should take from all this that despite a fascist winning in 2016 and being C in C of USA forces and controlling the majority in the SCOTUS the fascist came nowhere close to overturning the broadly democratic process of the USA.
Not least because, like the unsung hero of the Georgia telephone conversation with the POTUS, thousands of officials, politicians, judges as well as the police and the armed forces did their duty and did it well.
Scandalous, shameful, hubristic, scary, murderous, Yes. All these things. But the USA is neither China nor Russia and its systems + 81,000,000 voters have some reasons for relief.
Nothing much happens. A minor demo perhaps at the inauguration. Trump slithers off to Florida. Eventually he is jailed for tax evasion. His supporters dissipate like the Tea Party have. "Damp squib. He let us down". He plays no role in 2024. Kamala Harris next president.
or
Big violent demos by Trump's lot in Washington and perhaps elsewhere. These are very forcibly put down. Many end up in jail. Trump slithers off to Florida. Eventually he is jailed for sedition. His supporters dissipate like the Tea Party have. "Shit - they weren't supposed to jail us!". He plays no role in 2024. Kamala Harris next president.
Same ending. Trump in jail and out of politics. Republicans out of power for 8-12 years.
This is a great header, David. Can't agree more. I have always viewed Trump as a fascist, but probably too disorganised and incompetent to present a mortal danger. A virus, if you like, but a weakened one. But has America been vaccinated? Will it have the antibodies when a more dangerous virus emerges? Of that I am genuinely unsure.
If I was majoring on how reliable and Trustworthy Alex Salmond's evidence is I would certainly be wishing I hadn't spent the previous twenty years banging on about him being an untrustworthy liar.
I think PB is rather missing the point - what's happening in Scotland could have real implications for UK politics and betting. Is there a market for Sturgeon exit? The Wings Over Scotland site has Alex Salmond's full evidence and it is explosive to say the least. I don't see how Sturgeon stays.
Well I suppose technically referendums are not required either way, but does that seem advisable? At least she clarified this Joanna Cherry made it clear she would not wish to "replicate the violence" that preceded the creation of the Irish Republic just over a century ago.
I may be an idiot but it seems almost all of Salmond's submission is based on material outside the remit of the inquiry?
And contains a mountain of speculation rather than facts.
There's two inquiries, from The Times
Mr Salmond’s claims were made in a submission to James Hamilton, the independent adviser to the Scottish government who is investigating Ms Sturgeon’s conduct. The submission has been shared with a separate Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish government’s unlawful handling of complaints against the former first minister.
This is what is intriguing me lots, has this advice been published?
Mr Salmond said the breaches included a failure to inform the civil service in good time of her meetings with him, and allowing the Scottish government to contest a civil court case against him despite having had legal advice that it was likely to collapse.
Tricky one that. If the case doesn't go ahead, it is open to the charge of "SNP closing ranks". Easier - and potentially, politically less damaging - to let it go ahead, despite the advice - "let justice take its course."
The civil servants involved will be desperate to keep their part covered up. Apart from the criminality, there are some substantial pensions to be protected.
What chances Democrat representatives in a state legislature somewhere are captured and killed at some point in the next four years? It must be pretty scary for them knowing many Republican politicians at that level who control local law enforcement go along with the coup.
Pretty likely. Of course, some of these nutters will go for Republicans too, who they deem traitors to the cause.
High. The trouble is that when things like this happen some Democrats just double-down on their condemnation and vitriol against all Republicans, further inflaming tensions, and then striking at things they know the other side hold dear.
It really does require some very brave leadership from both Republicans and Democrats (who will get extreme abuse from their own side) to solve this.
I think Biden's instincts are best-placed for this. He wants to work across the aisle.
But that requires two things from the Republicans. Firstly, they have to split from the Coup Caucus within their midst. Secondly, they have to step back from the no surrender obstructionism that has been their Congressional strategy since Gingrich.
If they did that then I expect that Biden would prefer to deal with anti-Coup Republicans.
Convicting Trump in the Senate is the first test. Ultimately what side is McConnell on when it comes to a Trump coup?
His own.
What advantage is there to him to taking things further? He's 78, if Trump comes back in 4 years he's only got a few years left in the Senate anyway and would probably retire I'd have thought.
That sounds about of a piece with the atmosphere we've seen this week. And how could anyone ever suggest that Big Tech is creating an ever more polarising climate of ideological lunacy for the sake of advertising clicks.
Excellent and interesting article, but, in the heat of these weird and terrifying times maybe slightly overblown about how close it all got to a coup.
Perhaps we should take from all this that despite a fascist winning in 2016 and being C in C of USA forces and controlling the majority in the SCOTUS the fascist came nowhere close to overturning the broadly democratic process of the USA.
Not least because, like the unsung hero of the Georgia telephone conversation with the POTUS, thousands of officials, politicians, judges as well as the police and the armed forces did their duty and did it well.
Scandalous, shameful, hubristic, scary, murderous, Yes. All these things. But the USA is neither China nor Russia and its systems + 81,000,000 voters have some reasons for relief.
I think you make a fair point in general - Trump had all the advantages - but I also think stating "nowhere near" is probably underestimating things. I don't mean just the coup/insurrection bit, but the entire run up to the election period and beyond. The whole democratic system was severely stress tested in a good number of different ways and there were many, many different instances of people publicly recognising that the system was under serious threat.
Well I suppose technically referendums are not required either way, but does that seem advisable? At least she clarified this Joanna Cherry made it clear she would not wish to "replicate the violence" that preceded the creation of the Irish Republic just over a century ago.
Nice of her to make that clear. She sounds like Trump telling his supporters to calm down yesterday.
On a USA theme. I have been watching The Americans on Amazon prime. Really like it.
Bit slow at times, but it has a lot of compelling television.
I really enjoyed The Americans
It also contains a line spoken by Elizabeth which had me in stitches first time I heard it (watched the whole thing from beginning to end twice now)
I like how on a few occasions there are massive cockups or coincidences, but of course the various figures naturally assume it is part of the diabolical plans of their opponents. Probably true to life, we tend to assume when things happen it is according to someone's plan.
If I was majoring on how reliable and Trustworthy Alex Salmond's evidence is I would certainly be wishing I hadn't spent the previous twenty years banging on about him being an untrustworthy liar.
Having been the the company of both, I would trust Salmond with the future of Scotland. I would trust Sturgeon with the future of Sturgeon.
I may be an idiot but it seems almost all of Salmond's submission is based on material outside the remit of the inquiry?
And contains a mountain of speculation rather than facts.
There's two inquiries, from The Times
Mr Salmond’s claims were made in a submission to James Hamilton, the independent adviser to the Scottish government who is investigating Ms Sturgeon’s conduct. The submission has been shared with a separate Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish government’s unlawful handling of complaints against the former first minister.
This is what is intriguing me lots, has this advice been published?
Mr Salmond said the breaches included a failure to inform the civil service in good time of her meetings with him, and allowing the Scottish government to contest a civil court case against him despite having had legal advice that it was likely to collapse.
Tricky one that. If the case doesn't go ahead, it is open to the charge of "SNP closing ranks". Easier - and potentially, politically less damaging - to let it go ahead, despite the advice - "let justice take its course."
The civil servants involved will be desperate to keep their part covered up. Apart from the criminality, there are some substantial pensions to be protected.
Yes , sure a few of them will have been looking at the value of their pots/updating CV's.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
One of the people there in Congress was a highly decorated senior army veteran - armed and with ties used to handcuff people. He has - according to the New Yorker - been identified as Lt. Colonel. Ret. Larry Brock of Texas. Allegedly.
It will be interesting to see the make up of those arrested and those who were at this protest.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
Mobs are unpredictable.
Agreed, I'm just contesting the prediction that the murder of Pence and Pelosi was inevitable had they been found.
I'm under no illusions as to how serious and terrifying the event was, and how it could easily have been worse. It should never have happened and those involved should be prosecuted with the full force of the law.
I don’t think anyone has said that. But reading one or two comments from senators/representatives, it’s clear that not a few are realising that their lives were genuinely in danger, however uncertain the extent of that might be.
And that their President set up the situation without much, if any concern for that.
Looked like a good piece but I'm afraid I gave up on the third or fourth paragraph. Too long, too wordy.
It's not exactly War and Peace.
I thought it was just long enough to make its argument.
Criticisms of the articles here being too long consistently astound me. Who can be bothered to log on to a political betting site a couple of days after a coup in Washington yet finds two minutes reading something very well written and argued a bit too much? And then makes that public!
I'm prone to be unnecessarily verbose myself, and if people generally prefer something shorter and punchier I totally get that, but whilst things can be too padded, longform content simply affords more opportunity to lay out an argument. It's not overly repetitve, it has clear points to make, so merely being too long is not a negative it's what you do with that length that matters. I have heard.
Brevity - using the minimum of words to make your point - is in my most humble opinion praised and celebrated well in excess of its true value and worth. By which I mean it's rather overrated. In my view.
This attempted coup was farcical, although it could have have turned out very bloodily. I'm pretty sure that people like Nancy Pelosi would have been strung up had they fallen into the hands of the rioters.
The hallmark of a properly executed coup d'etat is that it should be almost bloodless at the point of execution, because all the pieces have already been played.
I think the protestors would have shouted and screamed at her, spat in her face, slapped her, punched her and pushed her about - and generally been deeply deeply unpleasant - but I don't think they'd have actually killed her.
Phew, all a storm in a teacup then.
No, I didn't say that. I was just saying I don't think she would have been killed.
Is it possible for you to engage in any discussion on this forum without being sarcastic or obtuse ?
I bow to your superior insights into the minds of a mob that inadvertently beat a policeman to death with a fire extinguisher.
Imagining the reactions of the riot/coup apologists to a BLM mob breaking into an institution of government and folk saying they wouldn't have killed a Republican politician, just shouted and screamed at them, spat in there face, slapped them, punched them and pushed them about doesn’t really help reduce my tendency to sarkiness. Besides, the whatabouters’ attempt to conflate the Capitol rioters with Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems means you’ve lost the right to be taken seriously ever again.
Well I suppose technically referendums are not required either way, but does that seem advisable? At least she clarified this Joanna Cherry made it clear she would not wish to "replicate the violence" that preceded the creation of the Irish Republic just over a century ago.
Clearly not seen @HYUFD invasion plans, and a new cohort of Black and Tans setting to work on the secessionist.
This seems to me to be heading in a dangerous direction
It's also giving Trump cover. My Daily Mail comments bellwether has moved from total revulsion against Trump earlier in the week, to a growing proportion agreeing with his propaganda in a fury that the twitter ban is the work of the "radical left".
I think they would do well to change the policy back to an even more strictly and periodically conditional one, despite that being a humiliation.
Several members of the GOP came out well when the heat was on. I name Raffensperger. Gov. Kemp. The Governor of Maryland who called out the National Guard and deployed them. The numerous Congress folk and Senators who were having none of it. Above all Mike Pence. Who almost single handedly saved the Republic. Who'd have imagined that? The problem with a coup is you need full control of your own side. Don thought he did. But didn't. When the curtain was drawn back there wasn't much more than a sad loser and a bunch of enablers. Some very sad, some extremely dangerous.
Pence could come out of the inevitable Congressional Inquiry very well indeed. "The Man Who Saved American Democracy" might not be a bad tagline to go into the next election with.
Joanna Cherry is dangerous. Her ridiculous rhetoric will be counterproductive for the Independent cause
If being keen on independence means you are dangerous then perhaps you are correct, however I think not , pussyfooting about asking permission from Westminster has not worked so time to do something about it.
The more I learn about the USA, the more I think it has a deeply flawed political system. Yes, I get that any system would creek when confronted by a nutter like Trump, but how can you have a situation whereby the security of the legislature is directly in the hands of one person? That is beyond ridiculous.
This seems to me to be heading in a dangerous direction
It is. We saw this week Google / Youtube giving TalkRadio the ban hammer for nothing like this. They were only saved I suspect because Murdoch has at the moment enough sway.
The likes of Carlson are ridiculous partisan spinning news to fit their agenda, but then so is the likes of Rachel Maddow.
FPT: "The SNP are less likely to enjoy their current hegemony post independence. I can even imagine a (rebranded) Scottish Conservative party being in government post independence."
I don't buy that. If Scotland is going to be independent, then surely the expression of that is ensuring it remains something very different to what they have now - a Tory Government. The SNP will ride the wave of delivery for a decade before it all gets horribly incestuous, with a chumocracy that even the Westminster Tories would never have the neck to put in place. Some bad scandals, some jail time and a quite abrupt turning away from the SNP is my guess.
But not to anything that looks like it might be Tories in disguise. A new Tartan-clad social democrat party would be my guess, one that appeals to both LibDems and Tories with quite a few ex-SLAB and SNPers who see a need for change climbing aboard. The interesting question will be - is it a party that will want to join the EU? But they will have the benefit of quite a few years to see how the wind is blowing on that. (Implicit in that is that I don't expect the SNP to apply to join straight away - there will be a huge debate about the pros and cons. There will be plenty who don't want to swap the choke-hold of Westminster for the choke-hold of Brussels....)
I think posters like @malcolmg would vote for an independent Scottish centre-right party.
Probably called the Freedom Party, or something similar (maybe with extra e's in the middle for the full Gibson).
I'm still reeling from getting a like from malcy - for my reading of future Scottish politics. Crazy times.....!
Joanna Cherry is dangerous. Her ridiculous rhetoric will be counterproductive for the Independent cause
If being keen on independence means you are dangerous then perhaps you are correct, however I think not , pussyfooting about asking permission from Westminster has not worked so time to do something about it.
If an SNP majority in Holyrood this summer is refused a further Sindyref, the pressure for UDI will just grow and grow.
Comments
Having said that, if armed semi-professional assassins who were deadly serious (as opposed to amateurs and online trolls and weirdos) had got in it could have been very different.
High. The trouble is that when things like this happen some Democrats just double-down on their condemnation and vitriol against all Republicans, further inflaming tensions, and then striking at things they know the other side hold dear.
It really does require some very brave leadership from both Republicans and Democrats (who will get extreme abuse from their own side) to solve this.
And contains a mountain of speculation rather than facts.
The Democrats need to decide if spending their first two years of power going after Trump is really making the best use of their time, as opposed to taking advantage of their good position to pass legislation in line with their agenda.
I still think the best thing to do with Trump is to ignore him, he craves publicity and denying him that oxygen will be worse for him than spending every day in a courthouse or on the news. I also think the tech companies have screwed up yesterday, they risk making a martyr of the guy.
That would, morally, justify a counter-coup
I have been watching The Americans on Amazon prime.
Really like it.
--AS
Presumably spontaneous.
A point is all that you can score
That photo is never going to leave him. It's going to be in every opponent's ads whenever he runs for anything
Is it possible for you to engage in any discussion on this forum without being sarcastic or obtuse ?
It may not appeal much to swing voters if he ever was on a national GOP ticket but that is a different matter
Mr Salmond’s claims were made in a submission to James Hamilton, the independent adviser to the Scottish government who is investigating Ms Sturgeon’s conduct. The submission has been shared with a separate Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish government’s unlawful handling of complaints against the former first minister.
This is what is intriguing me lots, has this advice been published?
Mr Salmond said the breaches included a failure to inform the civil service in good time of her meetings with him, and allowing the Scottish government to contest a civil court case against him despite having had legal advice that it was likely to collapse.
When they get near real media or Republicans (like Lindsey Graham) they get very abusive and pushy/shovey but still baulk at killing them.
Of course.. you can never be *sure*.. I'm just making my prediction.
There might have been a mob mentality or there might not have been when it came to harming people. But outside of that it would have only taken a handful of determined folk or even just a few unhinged individuals with guns to kill several people in the chaos even if that was not part of any particular plan.
How organised it was, how shambolic it was, these will raise questions of just how much it was a 'proper' coup d'etat, but at the very least it does not make suggestion of it meeting the requirements of a coup unreasonable.
But that requires two things from the Republicans. Firstly, they have to split from the Coup Caucus within their midst. Secondly, they have to step back from the no surrender obstructionism that has been their Congressional strategy since Gingrich.
If they did that then I expect that Biden would prefer to deal with anti-Coup Republicans.
Convicting Trump in the Senate is the first test. Ultimately what side is McConnell on when it comes to a Trump coup?
Or indeed the cause of its close cousin - "symptom not a cause".
But I suppose it will be. Deep saturday sigh.
They just generate vastly less headlines than other sources.
Both sides need leadership to cool it.
Apologies for that. I was not aware of this.
From what is now coming out I think this was more than a mob expressing their frustrations. Some of those who went to Congress were intent on violence and others on stopping Congress declaring Jo Biden the next President. Had they done so - whether by seizing hostages or creating such disorder that Congress could not continue - I have no doubt that Trump would have used that to stay in power. I also think we have not yet found out the truth of why security in Congress was so poor, whether actions were deliberately taken to make it easier for the mob to storm it and the extent of any connivance by some in the police.
It may look like a clown coup because there were some grannies in the crowd or people wearing silly costumes. But there were also some who were armed and were anything but clowns. Trump looks like an orange-haired buffoon but his actions - not just this week - but for a long time show him to be a danger to democracy and good governance.
It is very easy to identify a successful coup.
A failed one is always denied by the participants.
I'm under no illusions as to how serious and terrifying the event was, and how it could easily have been worse. It should never have happened and those involved should be prosecuted with the full force of the law.
I assume that they must be a famous haiku author because even the shortest of short stories must be beyond them to read - and if they cannot read them how could they possibly write them.
Perhaps we should take from all this that despite a fascist winning in 2016 and being C in C of USA forces and controlling the majority in the SCOTUS the fascist came nowhere close to overturning the broadly democratic process of the USA.
Not least because, like the unsung hero of the Georgia telephone conversation with the POTUS, thousands of officials, politicians, judges as well as the police and the armed forces did their duty and did it well.
Scandalous, shameful, hubristic, scary, murderous, Yes. All these things. But the USA is neither China nor Russia and its systems + 81,000,000 voters have some reasons for relief.
Two scenarios:
Nothing much happens. A minor demo perhaps at the inauguration. Trump slithers off to Florida. Eventually he is jailed for tax evasion. His supporters dissipate like the Tea Party have. "Damp squib. He let us down". He plays no role in 2024. Kamala Harris next president.
or
Big violent demos by Trump's lot in Washington and perhaps elsewhere. These are very forcibly put down. Many end up in jail. Trump slithers off to Florida. Eventually he is jailed for sedition. His supporters dissipate like the Tea Party have. "Shit - they weren't supposed to jail us!". He plays no role in 2024. Kamala Harris next president.
Same ending. Trump in jail and out of politics. Republicans out of power for 8-12 years.
But has America been vaccinated? Will it have the antibodies when a more dangerous virus emerges? Of that I am genuinely unsure.
It also contains a line spoken by Elizabeth which had me in stitches first time I heard it (watched the whole thing from beginning to end twice now)
Joanna Cherry made it clear she would not wish to "replicate the violence" that preceded the creation of the Irish Republic just over a century ago.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/08/media/tv-providers-disinfo-reliable-sources/index.html
What advantage is there to him to taking things further? He's 78, if Trump comes back in 4 years he's only got a few years left in the Senate anyway and would probably retire I'd have thought.
I call dibs on Edinburgh for the UK.
It will be interesting to see the make up of those arrested and those who were at this protest.
But reading one or two comments from senators/representatives, it’s clear that not a few are realising that their lives were genuinely in danger, however uncertain the extent of that might be.
And that their President set up the situation without much, if any concern for that.
Imagining the reactions of the riot/coup apologists to a BLM mob breaking into an institution of government and folk saying they wouldn't have killed a Republican politician, just shouted and screamed at them, spat in there face, slapped them, punched them and pushed them about doesn’t really help reduce my tendency to sarkiness. Besides, the whatabouters’ attempt to conflate the Capitol rioters with Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems means you’ve lost the right to be taken seriously ever again.
I think they would do well to change the policy back to an even more strictly and periodically conditional one, despite that being a humiliation.
The more I learn about the USA, the more I think it has a deeply flawed political system. Yes, I get that any system would creek when confronted by a nutter like Trump, but how can you have a situation whereby the security of the legislature is directly in the hands of one person? That is beyond ridiculous.
The likes of Carlson are ridiculous partisan spinning news to fit their agenda, but then so is the likes of Rachel Maddow.