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.
But the verdict of the People’s’ Tribunal of WoS, Murdo Fraser and the PB Scotch experts is the only one that counts.
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.
Harris is in my view much less electable than Biden, especially if a moderate non coup supporter like Pence or Haley got the GOP nomination in 2024 and Biden did not run again and she was the Democrat nominee
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.
You know we all take the piss out of HYUFD for his send the army to crush the Nats shtick but Cherry's just as stupid. I mean HYUFD isn't an MP.
Honestly who thinks the best way to obtain Scottish independence is to follow the Irish model? Does she need history lessons on how bloody that was and the fact it was still bloody on the island of Ireland & in Great Britain nearly eight decades later.
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.
How hard do you think it is to kill an 81 year old half drunk woman held together with botox and hairspray?
You only have to spend 5 seconds in MAGA world online to know they'd kill her. According to individual psychosis they literally believe she is a Chinese agent (right up your street), possesed by demons or trafficking children.
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.
I don’t agree.
David, I always read, without any doubt, Is brilliant writer and commentator. But not today. “He succeeds by playing rugby whilst others playing football.” Is meant as explanation, but actually tells us nothing. Hackneyed I think is the expression.
The whole premise of the article stands or falls on the belief Trump actually wanted revolution, actively sought it. As an argument it leaves no room for Trump merely unable to admit defeat. Admitting defeat is just not the Trump brand, it’s not the thing he can do with his father watching, and he dug himself into a hole by not doing the proper diplomatic thing needed in political defeat.
No, Trump has never been serious about revolution.
In fact, commentary on US politics on PB since the election has been extremely poor. You big up the bad guy as being more strategic than merely incapable, and everything written here is a sigh of relief he’s gone, the politics and issues in US politics today read through those cloudy glasses.
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.
I thought twitter policy of tagging all his bullshit and "turning the volume down" by restricting interactions was a sensible middle ground.
You know we all take the piss out of HYUFD for his send the army to crush the Nats shtick but Cherry's just as stupid. I mean HYUFD isn't an MP.
Honestly who thinks the best way to obtain Scottish independence is to follow the Irish model, does she need history lessons on how bloody that was and the fact it was still bloody on the island of Ireland nearly eight decades later.
Nope, pointing out that it was violent to do it that way for years is just unionist whinging about independence itself. Apparently.
But of course she doesn't not know it was violent, she's just trying to suggest the same way without violence. That is, a totally different way. I'd suggest we should unify the islands of Great Britain and Ireland under one entity under the Cromwell model. Only without the violence i hope.
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.
Harris is in my view much less electable than Biden, especially if a moderate non coup supporter like Pence or Haley got the GOP nomination in 2024 and Biden did not run again and she was the Democrat nominee
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.
I think Sean said he was pretty sure and had no doubt that would happen yesterday; I usually agree with Sean and I'm just saying I'm not sure it would.
I agree with the rest of your post. Trump must be held accountable. I think that will happen after Biden's inauguration.
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
It certainly would. And I think it also justifies a hard look at the education system in these Trumpy parts of the country. Something is going wrong. People should be equipped with a certain de minibus level of critical faculties when launched into adult life.
You know we all take the piss out of HYUFD for his send the army to crush the Nats shtick but Cherry's just as stupid. I mean HYUFD isn't an MP.
Honestly who thinks the best way to obtain Scottish independence is to follow the Irish model? Does she need history lessons on how bloody that was and the fact it was still bloody on the island of Ireland & in Great Britain nearly eight decades later.
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 American Presidency ironically is like the Monarchy here, it is based on the assumption that honourable people will occupy the roles.
The moment a dishonourable person has the role things get complicated and dangerous.
We dodged a bullet a few decades ago, in 1940 we could have as a monarch a racist Nazi lover. Just imagine how WWII could have turned out if we had the appeaser Lord Halifax in charge. You could see Edward VIII ensuring Halifax became PM after the Norway debate. Or at least buggering things up ensuring the war effort got delayed leaving suing for peace as our only otion.
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.
I don’t agree.
David, I always read, without any doubt, Is brilliant writer and commentator. But not today. “He succeeds by playing rugby whilst others playing football.” Is meant as explanation, but actually tells us nothing. Hackneyed I think is the expression.
The whole premise of the article stands or falls on the belief Trump actually wanted revolution, actively sought it. As an argument it leaves no room for Trump merely unable to admit defeat. Admitting defeat is just not the Trump brand, it’s not the thing he can do with his father watching, and he dug himself into a hole by not doing the proper diplomatic thing needed in political defeat.
No, Trump has never been serious about revolution.
In fact, commentary on US politics on PB since the election has been extremely poor. You big up the bad guy as being more strategic than merely incapable, and everything written here is a sigh of relief he’s gone, the politics and issues in US politics today read through those cloudy glasses.
The coup narrative has been coming from the US, mainly by collecting and collating different sources of information. Several UK outlets were actually more reluctant to cover it like that in the first day or so, I found.
This is the sort of stuff Biden has to deal with. Such delusion is not open to reconciliation. The best that can be done is to get some of the waverers back from the precipice.
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.
Harris is in my view much less electable than Biden, especially if a moderate non coup supporter like Pence or Haley got the GOP nomination in 2024 and Biden did not run again and she was the Democrat nominee
But you don't like Dems anyway.
I said I would have voted for Biden over Trump (but GOP for Congress), I would however vote for Pence or Haley over Harris if that was the choice in 2024
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.
As an argument it leaves no room for Trump merely unable to admit defeat.
Because that is not the argument he is making - why would he leave room for an argument he does not support, in his own opinion piece arguing the opposite?
Trump clearly wanted to overturn the election, I don't think there can be any realistic dispute about that given all his actions since November. The questions on whether he merely used proper legal processes to seek that, whether he was justified in seeking that, or whether he abused the legal processes and was not justified in seeking that, will be arguments over how he sought that aim (with people on here obviously much more the former than the latter), but the aim is not actually in dispute.
The question then becomes how his actions on 6 January can be interpreted. EIther he was still seeking that aim and people did what he wanted, he was still seeking that aim and people went beyond what he actually intended, or he was not seeking that aim but lied to the crowd about it (since he definitely told them it could be overturned and they could do something about it) and then they took action.
Not even the most generous of interpretations, based on him being unable to admit defeat, make the words he stated, on camera, to the crowd, to take action, anything other than incitement.
So when people complain about the rhetoric against him getting a bit too much on how strategic he was being I think it somewhat misses the point - he's not that kind of thinker, but it is irrelevant to what he did and said.
His intentions are only partly relevant. Failure to control something you set in motion still matters.
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
Well that puts a nuclear bomb right to the heart of the argument that "Schools are safe"
Doesn't it just - reading through more of his posts there seems to be more evidence that school closures are necessary - and work in reducing R rate "robustly"
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.
Well said. The Radical Left Democrats - who you manage not to mention here - have no doubt contributed to the partisanship but this should not lead to an attempted far right coup. For that you need a wannabe fascist and goons to follow him.
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.
The first thing I said about it on the day - look up the old thread, if you don't believe me - was that black protestors would have been treated very differently on the steps of the Capitol. So it's nul point on that one.
And the poster who made the comparison to Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems was @Leon, not me.
Pelosi and Pence would have been either killed or kidnapped, probably killed if the mob had got to them yesterday. There's been a bit of a sanitised picture painted about what actually went on there for the most part - this vid shows just how bleak/mad the MAGA mob actually are/were
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 American Presidency ironically is like the Monarchy here, it is based on the assumption that honourable people will occupy the roles.
The moment a dishonourable person has the role things get complicated and dangerous.
We dodged a bullet a few decades, in 1940 we could have as a monarch a racist Nazi lover. Just imagine how WWII could have turned out if we had the appeaser Lord Halifax in charge. You could see Edward VIII ensuring Halifax became PM after the Norway debate. Or at least buggering things up ensuring the war effort got delayed leaving suing for peace as our only otion.
But our monarch doesn't have control over the security of the Palace of Westminster. Also, I think we're less likely to end up with a Trump as head of state with a hereditary monarchy.
This is the sort of stuff Biden has to deal with. Such delusion is not open to reconciliation. The best that can be done is to get some of the waverers back from the precipice.
Such a shame. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. All the questioning of institutions, governments and international structures of the 1960s and 70s, with none of the information, just monetised online propaganda.
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.
Well said. The Radical Left Democrats - who you manage not to mention here - have no doubt contributed to the partisanship but this should not lead to an attempted far right coup. For that you need a wannabe fascist and goons to follow him.
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 American Presidency ironically is like the Monarchy here, it is based on the assumption that honourable people will occupy the roles.
The moment a dishonourable person has the role things get complicated and dangerous.
We dodged a bullet a few decades ago, in 1940 we could have as a monarch a racist Nazi lover. Just imagine how WWII could have turned out if we had the appeaser Lord Halifax in charge. You could see Edward VIII ensuring Halifax became PM after the Norway debate. Or at least buggering things up ensuring the war effort got delayed leaving suing for peace as our only otion.
Fair point. Fortunately things have come along even since then, and I feel pretty confident that parliament would very quickly not stand for even that level of interference from a Monarch if they tried it now. And once the first dishonourable person in the role trips up, the whole edifice could crumble quickly.
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.
The first thing I said about it on the day - look up the old thread, if you don't believe me - was that black protestors would have been treated very differently on the steps of the Capitol. So it's nul point on that one.
And the poster who made the comparison to Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems was @Leon, not me.
Try again, duck.
Och well, I’ll reduce your sentence of not being taken seriously by 6 months. Still decades to go I’m afraid.
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
Well it’s not a message which will appeal to many Democrats. What proportion or possible Republican voters are likely to be persuaded by it seems uncertain.
That photo is never going to leave him. It's going to be in every opponent's ads whenever he runs for anything
He is a Senator from Missouri where Trump got 57% of the vote last year, I doubt it will harm him much with the Trumpite GOP base.
It may not appeal much to swing voters if he ever was on a national GOP ticket but that is a different matter
I was actually referring to his national ambitions.
However I also think you are making the mistake of assuming that the Trump "base" is as large as it was a few weeks ago. You only have to look at the number of formerly loyal senior GOP politicians who are distancing themselves from him, from Pence, to Mitchell to resigning Cabinet Members.
Yes there is still a core of Trump enthusiasts but they were shown up this week as being rather a comical if dangerous bunch of loonies and losers. Even in Missouri I am not sure Hawley's last vote of 57% guarantees victory in the future. At the end of the day he has voted to overthrow the legitimate result of the election and I am not sure that even now more than 25-30% of Americans go along with that.
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.
The first thing I said about it on the day - look up the old thread, if you don't believe me - was that black protestors would have been treated very differently on the steps of the Capitol. So it's nul point on that one.
And the poster who made the comparison to Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems was @Leon, not me.
Try again, duck.
Och well, I’ll reduce your sentence of not being taken seriously by 6 months. Still decades to go I’m afraid.
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
Do we not have to be a bit careful with Pence. Yes he comes out of it with some credit but only really because even in his own eyes it wasn't so much that he could choose to do the right thing so much as it was that there was no wrong thing he really had the option of doing even if he wanted to?
Does it not basically boil down to he did good cos turns out he's not also a fascist like his boss?
This is the sort of stuff Biden has to deal with. Such delusion is not open to reconciliation. The best that can be done is to get some of the waverers back from the precipice.
Such a shame. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. All the questioning of institutions, governments and structures of the 1960s and 70s, with none of the information, just monetised online propaganda.
We've certainly gone backwards if the concept of central banking itself is blowing peoples' minds.
I will always love the 'they're covering it up...so none of this gets out' when apparently this guy has found it all out very easily.
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 American Presidency ironically is like the Monarchy here, it is based on the assumption that honourable people will occupy the roles.
The moment a dishonourable person has the role things get complicated and dangerous.
We dodged a bullet a few decades, in 1940 we could have as a monarch a racist Nazi lover. Just imagine how WWII could have turned out if we had the appeaser Lord Halifax in charge. You could see Edward VIII ensuring Halifax became PM after the Norway debate. Or at least buggering things up ensuring the war effort got delayed leaving suing for peace as our only otion.
But our monarch doesn't have control over the security of the Palace of Westminster. Also, I think we're less likely to end up with a Trump as head of state with a hereditary monarchy.
I believe they do when the monarch visits Westminster.
I remember hearing it as part of the archaic process when the monarch takes a member of the government hostage.
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.
I don’t agree.
David, I always read, without any doubt, Is brilliant writer and commentator. But not today. “He succeeds by playing rugby whilst others playing football.” Is meant as explanation, but actually tells us nothing. Hackneyed I think is the expression.
The whole premise of the article stands or falls on the belief Trump actually wanted revolution, actively sought it. As an argument it leaves no room for Trump merely unable to admit defeat. Admitting defeat is just not the Trump brand, it’s not the thing he can do with his father watching, and he dug himself into a hole by not doing the proper diplomatic thing needed in political defeat.
No, Trump has never been serious about revolution.
In fact, commentary on US politics on PB since the election has been extremely poor. You big up the bad guy as being more strategic than merely incapable, and everything written here is a sigh of relief he’s gone, the politics and issues in US politics today read through those cloudy glasses.
Actually I don't think a sigh of relief at Trump going is the proper response to this because the issue which gave rise to him are still there and need addressing.
Relief and reversion to the status quo ante would be disastrous IMO. There are some hard lessons for the US to learn, as well as the rest of us.
Fun, but if they are willing to do that they might as well just vote to convict themselves, no one would draw a distinction between making it happen and allowing it to happen.
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.
The Talk Radio ban should be very worrying, given they are a formally regulated and licenced broadcaster. If it can happen to them...
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.
Interesting. Would you care to expand on that, say a 50,000 word thesis to start with?
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
At the least it shows that even for those who think he is a bad man, he is the expected, normal level of bad. Much easier to deal with.
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
It might if it were true but unless you are of the Q-Anon persuasion it's bullshit.
That photo is never going to leave him. It's going to be in every opponent's ads whenever he runs for anything
He is a Senator from Missouri where Trump got 57% of the vote last year, I doubt it will harm him much with the Trumpite GOP base.
It may not appeal much to swing voters if he ever was on a national GOP ticket but that is a different matter
I was actually referring to his national ambitions.
However I also think you are making the mistake of assuming that the Trump "base" is as large as it was a few weeks ago. You only have to look at the number of formerly loyal senior GOP politicians who are distancing themselves from him, from Pence, to Mitchell to resigning Cabinet Members.
Yes there is still a core of Trump enthusiasts but they were shown up this week as being rather a comical if dangerous bunch of loonies and losers. Even in Missouri I am not sure Hawley's last vote of 57% guarantees victory in the future. At the end of the day he has voted to overthrow the legitimate result of the election and I am not sure that even now more than 25-30% of Americans go along with that.
HYUFD has a habit of thinking that voting blocs are immutable and unchanging. I remember last year him telling me that my in laws somehow didn’t count as Irish-American because they converted to the United Church of Christ (a liberal Protestant denomination) a generation or two back. His devotion to the idea of an English-American voting bloc is bizarre in the extreme.
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
I'm doing no such thing. But I can see that there might be a desire to paint him in a particularly good light, to show that hey, the constitutional system isn't THAT broken.
And I don't expect the Inquiry to delve too far back in time, but cover the events in the days and hours leading up to the storming of Congress. So again, Pence won't get too much scrutiny. After all, nobody expects much of the Veep anyway. Relative to the President, his powers are tiny. Save in a crisis, when (not wishing to pre-empt that Inquiry) he seems to have been a significant friend of the American democratic process.
And I still think his politics stink. But I am not a voter in the 2024 Presidential election. They may view him as much more acceptable.
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.
"While no-one wants to replicate the violence that preceded those negotiations, the Treaty is in legal and constitutional terms a clear precedent, which shows that a constituent part of the UK can leave and become independent by a process of negotiation after a majority of pro-independence MPs win an election in that constituent part."
Pelosi and Pence would have been either killed or kidnapped, probably killed if the mob had got to them yesterday. There's been a bit of a sanitised picture painted about what actually went on there for the most part - this vid shows just how bleak/mad the MAGA mob actually are/were
Largely agreed, and a horrendous video. As I mentioned yesterday though, it's also important to remember that sadly some of the MAGA movement are just people like this.
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
Do we not have to be a bit careful with Pence. Yes he comes out of it with some credit but only really because even in his own eyes it wasn't so much that he could choose to do the right thing so much as it was that there was no wrong thing he really had the option of doing even if he wanted to?
Does it not basically boil down to he did good cos turns out he's not also a fascist like his boss?
Perhaps I'm oversimplifying.
Pence was playing a cute game, he kept everything he said scrupulously legal, didn't file frivolous lawsuits (As VP he's on the exact same ballot) and came out with tautologies and strap lines at rallies. Legally he never did anything remotely questionable, never once called the election fraudulent. But he did make statements that could be misinterpreted (easily) as support - particularly if you're a MAGA loon. Eventually when he had to depart the train (As he was always going to do on the 6th) the leopards inevitably ate his face.
I daresay Sturgeon will be preparing for a slew of "I've got a covid question but first let me ask you about..." type questions at the next Scottish Government daily briefing. Interesting to see how that goes.
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
It might if it were true but unless you are of the Q-Anon persuasion it's bullshit.
All those Germans who believed that there was a Jewish conspiracy to destroy Germany and drain the blood of their children were ‘morally justified’ in their subsequent behaviour it seems.
It's satisfying to read or hear an argument that so persuasive that it will form your view. I am completely convinced by David's piece. This was a planned coup that seems, fortunately, to have failed.
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.
Hard to beat a squealing unionist, you know they are worried.
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.
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
It might if it were true but unless you are of the Q-Anon persuasion it's bullshit.
That's my point, duh. A lot of the American Right buys into the QAnon stuff, it is remarkably widespread
"A new survey has revealed that Americans increasingly believe in conspiracy theories such as QAnon, which claims that a deep state run by satan-worshipping pedophiles has worked to undermine Donald Trump.
"According to the NPR/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday, some 39 per cent of respondents said they agreed that the president was being undermined in this way.
"When asked whether or not “satan-worshipping elites who run a child sex ring are trying to control our politics and media,” only 47 per cent said the statement was incorrect. "
This is the sort of stuff Biden has to deal with. Such delusion is not open to reconciliation. The best that can be done is to get some of the waverers back from the precipice.
Such a shame. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. All the questioning of institutions, governments and structures of the 1960s and 70s, with none of the information, just monetised online propaganda.
We've certainly gone backwards if the concept of central banking itself is blowing peoples' minds.
I will always love the 'they're covering it up...so none of this gets out' when apparently this guy has found it all out very easily.
Ah, but that’s because he’s clever. I mean really clever. A lot cleverer than you or me.
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.
Mobs get out of hands. Once they start hitting someone, it escalates to kicking them to death very easily.
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.....!
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
Do we not have to be a bit careful with Pence. Yes he comes out of it with some credit but only really because even in his own eyes it wasn't so much that he could choose to do the right thing so much as it was that there was no wrong thing he really had the option of doing even if he wanted to?
Does it not basically boil down to he did good cos turns out he's not also a fascist like his boss?
Perhaps I'm oversimplifying.
Yes. There is a Manichean tendency in modern life to try and categorise all people into good or evil. I’ll give Darth Vader credit for throwing the Emperor down the shaft at the last minute but, let’s face it, he was also complicit in the destruction of Alderaan and killing nearly all the Jedi. So a net negative. As with Pence.
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.
Hard to beat a squealing unionist, you know they are worried.
If you say, "While no-one wants violence, [...]", you are literally saying the violence is fine as long as whatever follows the comma happens. In this case Scotland becoming independent if enough SNP MSPs are elected.
So she thinks Scotland will get carved up into a Free State and a area that remains part of the UK?
I call dibs on Edinburgh for the UK.
They can keep Glasgow
Borders, Edinburgh, Shetlands, Orkneys, I and O Hebrides, West Highlands to UK. The rest to Lesser Pictland?
We would not piss on you if you were on fire, you will be getting zero , zilch , nada. You will be stuck with Wales as your only colony for as long as they hang about.
This is the sort of stuff Biden has to deal with. Such delusion is not open to reconciliation. The best that can be done is to get some of the waverers back from the precipice.
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
It might if it were true but unless you are of the Q-Anon persuasion it's bullshit.
That's my point, duh. A lot of the American Right buys into the QAnon stuff, it is remarkably widespread
"A new survey has revealed that Americans increasingly believe in conspiracy theories such as QAnon, which claims that a deep state run by satan-worshipping pedophiles has worked to undermine Donald Trump.
"According to the NPR/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday, some 39 per cent of respondents said they agreed that the president was being undermined in this way.
"When asked whether or not “satan-worshipping elites who run a child sex ring are trying to control our politics and media,” only 47 per cent said the statement was incorrect. "
When your daily news source is an app that continually repeats, and then even gradually makes more and more explicit and extreme, a particular message for the sake of advertising revenues, it's not too surprising. The entire Qanon narrative itself was constructed to generate those same advertising revenues for its creators, but using a patchwork of anti-establishment concepts from 45 years ago.
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.
"While no-one wants to replicate the violence that preceded those negotiations, the Treaty is in legal and constitutional terms a clear precedent, which shows that a constituent part of the UK can leave and become independent by a process of negotiation after a majority of pro-independence MPs win an election in that constituent part."
So she thinks Scotland will get carved up into a Free State and a area that remains part of the UK?
I call dibs on Edinburgh for the UK.
They can keep Glasgow
Borders, Edinburgh, Shetlands, Orkneys, I and O Hebrides, West Highlands to UK. The rest to Lesser Pictland?
We would not piss on you if you were on fire, you will be getting zero , zilch , nada. You will be stuck with Wales as your only colony for as long as they hang about.
You take this stuff way too seriously, malc. If Cherry is arguing for an Ireland type settlement then why wouldn't people note that parts of Ireland stayed in the UK and extend the analogy? Don't be such a priss.
If you want to get upset at people for extending the analogy, get mad at her for using it in the first place.
Joanna Cherry is dangerous. Her ridiculous rhetoric will be counterproductive for the Independent cause
The 40-55% of Scots who, in recent years, have said in polls or votes that they want to stay in the Union, might also have reason to be aggrieved if they are simply ignored, and their British identity stripped away, without even a 2nd referendum.
Madness.
Hopefully the nuttier Nats will pursue this, as it will destroy the Nat cause.
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
Do we not have to be a bit careful with Pence. Yes he comes out of it with some credit but only really because even in his own eyes it wasn't so much that he could choose to do the right thing so much as it was that there was no wrong thing he really had the option of doing even if he wanted to?
Does it not basically boil down to he did good cos turns out he's not also a fascist like his boss?
Perhaps I'm oversimplifying.
Yes. There is a Manichean tendency in modern life to try and categorise all people into good or evil. I’ll give Darth Vader credit for throwing the Emperor down the shaft at the last minute but, let’s face it, he was also complicit in the destruction of Alderaan and killing nearly all the Jedi. So a net negative. As with Pence.
Yes, yet the Force judged that Vader had made up for 20 years of evil deeds through one act, given he showed up as a force ghost. Dude murdered a guy and laughed about it, he enjoyed killing people, he was past the point of redemption, Star Wars!
So she thinks Scotland will get carved up into a Free State and a area that remains part of the UK?
I call dibs on Edinburgh for the UK.
They can keep Glasgow
Borders, Edinburgh, Shetlands, Orkneys, I and O Hebrides, West Highlands to UK. The rest to Lesser Pictland?
We would not piss on you if you were on fire, you will be getting zero , zilch , nada. You will be stuck with Wales as your only colony for as long as they hang about.
You take this stuff way too seriously, malc. If Cherry is arguing for an Ireland type settlement then why wouldn't people note that parts of Ireland stayed in the UK and extend the analogy? Don't be such a priss.
If you want to get upset at people for extending the analogy, get mad at her for using it in the first place.
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
It might if it were true but unless you are of the Q-Anon persuasion it's bullshit.
That's my point, duh. A lot of the American Right buys into the QAnon stuff, it is remarkably widespread
"A new survey has revealed that Americans increasingly believe in conspiracy theories such as QAnon, which claims that a deep state run by satan-worshipping pedophiles has worked to undermine Donald Trump.
"According to the NPR/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday, some 39 per cent of respondents said they agreed that the president was being undermined in this way.
"When asked whether or not “satan-worshipping elites who run a child sex ring are trying to control our politics and media,” only 47 per cent said the statement was incorrect. "
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.
The guy who took in a bunch of cable tie handcuffs and the guy with the noose might beg to differ.
My take is that none of the leading republicans in politics wanted to risk getting their hands dirty with organising any sort of plan for the coup, so from Trump downwards they simply focused on attracting the crowd and hoping events would take their own course. Trump’s own plan, such as it was, fell down because he hadn’t got Pence on side.
For the protestors, while particular individuals, like the two I mentioned above, likely had their own intentions, there was no leadership - my bet is that most of them expected Trump to appear and tell them what they were supposed to be doing - so most of those who got inside the Capitol milled around taking selfies, without any purpose. Those few who had more sinister intentions were thwarted because the lawmakers were evacuated below ground and the protestors held at bay even after they had penetrated the building.
While that policeman who shot the San Diego vet who tried to climb past the barricaded door inside the capital will likely be put through the ringer, appearing somewhat triggerhappy from the filmed video, his actions may well have been critical in bringing home to a majority of those inside the consequences if they pushed too far over the line.
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
It might if it were true but unless you are of the Q-Anon persuasion it's bullshit.
That's my point, duh. A lot of the American Right buys into the QAnon stuff, it is remarkably widespread
"A new survey has revealed that Americans increasingly believe in conspiracy theories such as QAnon, which claims that a deep state run by satan-worshipping pedophiles has worked to undermine Donald Trump.
"According to the NPR/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday, some 39 per cent of respondents said they agreed that the president was being undermined in this way.
"When asked whether or not “satan-worshipping elites who run a child sex ring are trying to control our politics and media,” only 47 per cent said the statement was incorrect. "
We can see where the alt-right, the Q-Anon loonies etc have taken the American right.
So how would you suggest going about "engaging" with people with those beliefs?
I don't have a clue.
It should also be noted, for balance, that a chunk of the American Left is just as bad: it has been captured by mad identity politics, insane racist Marxism like "Official BLM", proper anarchists like Antifa. Tearing down statues of Abe Lincoln in month-long riots. Not sensible.
America is in a very dark place, as I said yesterday. The polarisation is now so intense it is hard to see a way out. Neither side wants compromise. And they all have guns.
Just had a thought - in the recent SCOTUS case on the census one of the points that went in the Trump admin's favour was that the case against him was
six-justice conservative majority said, the case was not yet ripe for resolution because none of the 23 states or immigrant groups that brought it had yet been injured.
I think this precedent could apply to presidential pardons - if the pardons are granted before any federal charges are laid, then the pardon can't excuse the future charges as those charges were not laid at the point the pardon was brought. I have no idea how many might use this line of argument, but it's there for them should they wish - of course this catch 22 applies very much to Trump himself as no charges can be brought federally whilst he is President. It's a bit wider, it also potentially hooks the likes of Kushner and Don Jr should they be charged after he's out (But attempted to be pre-emptively pardoned)
So she thinks Scotland will get carved up into a Free State and a area that remains part of the UK?
I call dibs on Edinburgh for the UK.
They can keep Glasgow
Borders, Edinburgh, Shetlands, Orkneys, I and O Hebrides, West Highlands to UK. The rest to Lesser Pictland?
We would not piss on you if you were on fire, you will be getting zero , zilch , nada. You will be stuck with Wales as your only colony for as long as they hang about.
You take this stuff way too seriously, malc. If Cherry is arguing for an Ireland type settlement then why wouldn't people note that parts of Ireland stayed in the UK and extend the analogy? Don't be such a priss.
If you want to get upset at people for extending the analogy, get mad at her for using it in the first place.
My mental image of Malc is Father Jack
Excellent. That is now my mental image, too. Thankyou.
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.
An SNP majority is less likely now after No Deal was avoided and the Sturgeon and Salmond civil war.
However UDI without Westminster approval and international recognition would be illegal and irrelevant, see Madrid and Catalonia
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.
I don’t agree.
David, I always read, without any doubt, Is brilliant writer and commentator. But not today. “He succeeds by playing rugby whilst others playing football.” Is meant as explanation, but actually tells us nothing. Hackneyed I think is the expression.
The whole premise of the article stands or falls on the belief Trump actually wanted revolution, actively sought it. As an argument it leaves no room for Trump merely unable to admit defeat. Admitting defeat is just not the Trump brand, it’s not the thing he can do with his father watching, and he dug himself into a hole by not doing the proper diplomatic thing needed in political defeat.
No, Trump has never been serious about revolution.
In fact, commentary on US politics on PB since the election has been extremely poor. You big up the bad guy as being more strategic than merely incapable, and everything written here is a sigh of relief he’s gone, the politics and issues in US politics today read through those cloudy glasses.
But that's my point. Trump has wished for what amounts to a revolution but never credibly aligned his strategy with that goal. He wanted it to drop into his lap. He's agitated for it and, to an extent, prepared some of the groundwork and agitated a mob (but an unled and unprepared one), but never prepared properly for what the logic of his demands required.
Fun fact: the SNP in 2015 received a higher share of the vote (50.0%) across Scotland than did Sinn Fein across Ireland in 1918 (46.9%).
I wonder what share of the vote the SNP would manage on an explicitly abstentionist platform?
Cherry also ignores the fact that after Irish independence, the Irish State was plunged into a hideous Civil War, which saw terrible atrocities. And then, after that, came several decades of impoverishment, flirtations with Fascism, backwater religiosity, purging of Protestants, and so on.
If you want an example of how to guide a country to independence, Ireland is actually one of the worst to choose.
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.
Yes - he might. We must be thankful that he did the right thing at last when it mattered.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
Do we not have to be a bit careful with Pence. Yes he comes out of it with some credit but only really because even in his own eyes it wasn't so much that he could choose to do the right thing so much as it was that there was no wrong thing he really had the option of doing even if he wanted to?
Does it not basically boil down to he did good cos turns out he's not also a fascist like his boss?
Perhaps I'm oversimplifying.
Yes. There is a Manichean tendency in modern life to try and categorise all people into good or evil. I’ll give Darth Vader credit for throwing the Emperor down the shaft at the last minute but, let’s face it, he was also complicit in the destruction of Alderaan and killing nearly all the Jedi. So a net negative. As with Pence.
Yes, yet the Force judged that Vader had made up for 20 years of evil deeds through one act, given he showed up as a force ghost. Dude murdered a guy and laughed about it, he enjoyed killing people, he was past the point of redemption, Star Wars!
Star Wars is full of appalling inconsistencies. They've been putting Star Destroyers on screen for 44 years, through 9 films and endless spin-offs, but have they ever destroyed one single star? Noooo......
Comments
https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1345858404263321600
Honestly who thinks the best way to obtain Scottish independence is to follow the Irish model? Does she need history lessons on how bloody that was and the fact it was still bloody on the island of Ireland & in Great Britain nearly eight decades later.
You only have to spend 5 seconds in MAGA world online to know they'd kill her. According to individual psychosis they literally believe she is a Chinese agent (right up your street), possesed by demons or trafficking children.
David, I always read, without any doubt, Is brilliant writer and commentator. But not today. “He succeeds by playing rugby whilst others playing football.” Is meant as explanation, but actually tells us nothing. Hackneyed I think is the expression.
The whole premise of the article stands or falls on the belief Trump actually wanted revolution, actively sought it. As an argument it leaves no room for Trump merely unable to admit defeat. Admitting defeat is just not the Trump brand, it’s not the thing he can do with his father watching, and he dug himself into a hole by not doing the proper diplomatic thing needed in political defeat.
No, Trump has never been serious about revolution.
In fact, commentary on US politics on PB since the election has been extremely poor. You big up the bad guy as being more strategic than merely incapable, and everything written here is a sigh of relief he’s gone, the politics and issues in US politics today read through those cloudy glasses.
But of course she doesn't not know it was violent, she's just trying to suggest the same way without violence. That is, a totally different way. I'd suggest we should unify the islands of Great Britain and Ireland under one entity under the Cromwell model. Only without the violence i hope.
I agree with the rest of your post. Trump must be held accountable. I think that will happen after Biden's inauguration.
The moment a dishonourable person has the role things get complicated and dangerous.
We dodged a bullet a few decades ago, in 1940 we could have as a monarch a racist Nazi lover. Just imagine how WWII could have turned out if we had the appeaser Lord Halifax in charge. You could see Edward VIII ensuring Halifax became PM after the Norway debate. Or at least buggering things up ensuring the war effort got delayed leaving suing for peace as our only otion.
https://twitter.com/resophonick/status/1347216449480364032?s=09
Trump clearly wanted to overturn the election, I don't think there can be any realistic dispute about that given all his actions since November. The questions on whether he merely used proper legal processes to seek that, whether he was justified in seeking that, or whether he abused the legal processes and was not justified in seeking that, will be arguments over how he sought that aim (with people on here obviously much more the former than the latter), but the aim is not actually in dispute.
The question then becomes how his actions on 6 January can be interpreted. EIther he was still seeking that aim and people did what he wanted, he was still seeking that aim and people went beyond what he actually intended, or he was not seeking that aim but lied to the crowd about it (since he definitely told them it could be overturned and they could do something about it) and then they took action.
Not even the most generous of interpretations, based on him being unable to admit defeat, make the words he stated, on camera, to the crowd, to take action, anything other than incitement.
So when people complain about the rhetoric against him getting a bit too much on how strategic he was being I think it somewhat misses the point - he's not that kind of thinker, but it is irrelevant to what he did and said.
His intentions are only partly relevant. Failure to control something you set in motion still matters.
Set against that is the fact that he was Trump's loyal vice-President for 4 years. Also what did he say and do in the 2 months since the election to try and stop Trump's behaviour which culminated in this week's events?
Let's get all the facts before rushing to canonise him.
And the poster who made the comparison to Jo Swinson and the Lib Dems was @Leon, not me.
Try again, duck.
Be warned, it's not pleasent viewing
https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1347749675777011714
It was the clear case for deciding to close schools before the government was finally forced to.
Note that government had much of this information well before it was released to the public.
So school closures more effective than shutting shops it seems?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDQeei8q4ek
However I also think you are making the mistake of assuming that the Trump "base" is as large as it was a few weeks ago. You only have to look at the number of formerly loyal senior GOP politicians who are distancing themselves from him, from Pence, to Mitchell to resigning Cabinet Members.
Yes there is still a core of Trump enthusiasts but they were shown up this week as being rather a comical if dangerous bunch of loonies and losers. Even in Missouri I am not sure Hawley's last vote of 57% guarantees victory in the future. At the end of the day he has voted to overthrow the legitimate result of the election and I am not sure that even now more than 25-30% of Americans go along with that.
https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1346899021621813249
Anyway, a lamb lunch beckons. Good day.
Does it not basically boil down to he did good cos turns out he's not also a fascist like his boss?
Perhaps I'm oversimplifying.
I will always love the 'they're covering it up...so none of this gets out' when apparently this guy has found it all out very easily.
I remember hearing it as part of the archaic process when the monarch takes a member of the government hostage.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-27697207
(not in that video, but I'll try and dig it out.)
Relief and reversion to the status quo ante would be disastrous IMO. There are some hard lessons for the US to learn, as well as the rest of us.
As I wrote here - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/01/07/dangerous-myths/
And I don't expect the Inquiry to delve too far back in time, but cover the events in the days and hours leading up to the storming of Congress. So again, Pence won't get too much scrutiny. After all, nobody expects much of the Veep anyway. Relative to the President, his powers are tiny. Save in a crisis, when (not wishing to pre-empt that Inquiry) he seems to have been a significant friend of the American democratic process.
And I still think his politics stink. But I am not a voter in the 2024 Presidential election. They may view him as much more acceptable.
The woman is disingenuous.
And dangerous.
https://twitter.com/wizardenai/status/1347584782075482112
Eventually when he had to depart the train (As he was always going to do on the 6th) the leopards inevitably ate his face.
Edit - Phew, that's the real pornhub, the bet is still live.
"A new survey has revealed that Americans increasingly believe in conspiracy theories such as QAnon, which claims that a deep state run by satan-worshipping pedophiles has worked to undermine Donald Trump.
"According to the NPR/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday, some 39 per cent of respondents said they agreed that the president was being undermined in this way.
"When asked whether or not “satan-worshipping elites who run a child sex ring are trying to control our politics and media,” only 47 per cent said the statement was incorrect. "
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/qanon-conspiracies-trump-election-poll-b1780528.html
Joanna Cherry is stupid and dangerous.
https://twitter.com/BBCSport/status/1347905452479283203?s=19
"The Chinese government is funding British YouTube stars to produce pro-China propaganda videos, an investigation by The Times can reveal."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/beijing-funds-british-youtubers-to-further-its-propaganda-war-x5gqp5fg0
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1347910919804887041
Does that include those that sent them there?
I wonder what share of the vote the SNP would manage on an explicitly abstentionist platform?
If you want to get upset at people for extending the analogy, get mad at her for using it in the first place.
Madness.
Hopefully the nuttier Nats will pursue this, as it will destroy the Nat cause.
So how would you suggest going about "engaging" with people with those beliefs?
My take is that none of the leading republicans in politics wanted to risk getting their hands dirty with organising any sort of plan for the coup, so from Trump downwards they simply focused on attracting the crowd and hoping events would take their own course. Trump’s own plan, such as it was, fell down because he hadn’t got Pence on side.
For the protestors, while particular individuals, like the two I mentioned above, likely had their own intentions, there was no leadership - my bet is that most of them expected Trump to appear and tell them what they were supposed to be doing - so most of those who got inside the Capitol milled around taking selfies, without any purpose. Those few who had more sinister intentions were thwarted because the lawmakers were evacuated below ground and the protestors held at bay even after they had penetrated the building.
While that policeman who shot the San Diego vet who tried to climb past the barricaded door inside the capital will likely be put through the ringer, appearing somewhat triggerhappy from the filmed video, his actions may well have been critical in bringing home to a majority of those inside the consequences if they pushed too far over the line.
It should also be noted, for balance, that a chunk of the American Left is just as bad: it has been captured by mad identity politics, insane racist Marxism like "Official BLM", proper anarchists like Antifa. Tearing down statues of Abe Lincoln in month-long riots. Not sensible.
America is in a very dark place, as I said yesterday. The polarisation is now so intense it is hard to see a way out. Neither side wants compromise. And they all have guns.
Eek.
six-justice conservative majority said, the case was not yet ripe for resolution because none of the 23 states or immigrant groups that brought it had yet been injured.
I think this precedent could apply to presidential pardons - if the pardons are granted before any federal charges are laid, then the pardon can't excuse the future charges as those charges were not laid at the point the pardon was brought.
I have no idea how many might use this line of argument, but it's there for them should they wish - of course this catch 22 applies very much to Trump himself as no charges can be brought federally whilst he is President. It's a bit wider, it also potentially hooks the likes of Kushner and Don Jr should they be charged after he's out (But attempted to be pre-emptively pardoned)
FECK! ARSE! TURNIP!!
However UDI without Westminster approval and international recognition would be illegal and irrelevant, see Madrid and Catalonia
Cruz, Hawley, Trump and everyone else involved should be impeached.
Which is why he failed.
If you want an example of how to guide a country to independence, Ireland is actually one of the worst to choose.