6 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

I believe that they realise the dangers in what he is doing, when all of the dust settles, someone is going to have to try to govern the country, and  undermining the democratic system in place is going to make it a whole lot more difficult. I also think that Trump really doesn't care though, for him winning at all costs is all that matters.

 

The idiocy of it is that if he went with any degree of dignity, he still has quite a large base of supporters (currently 69 million have voted for him although 73 million have voted for Biden) so if the Democrats put up another weak candidate in 2024, there is nothing preventing him from standing again.

Yes of course he can stand again but he would have to get the Republican party nomination again. Not impossible for sure but more difficult than where he was this time as the current president. The other potential barrier will be his age in 4 years time.  The rather puzzling stats for me in the election is that trump has increased the percentage (about 3% I think) of black votes for him. This seems rather odd against the "Black lives Matter" campaign.

 

On the matter of age if Biden does get in it seems unlikely to me that he will go for another term.  I think it will be interesting how much of a role Harris plays as Vice president.  If she seems to come to the fore and take some load from Biden it will be a sign that she may be the next Democratic candidate.

@churchward

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/pennsylvania-republican-shoots-down-trumps-baseless-claims-of-voter-fraud-in-state/ar-BB1aLoi3?li=AAnZ9Ug

 

And here is an example of the mainstream media manipulating the narrative. This is the same interview, and it highlights all the points which would show Trump in a bad light, which I agree in some instances he brings on himself. But, and it is a big but, not a single mention in the report regarding the allegation the senator himself alluded to of unconstitutional, therefore illegal rule changes.

2 minutes ago, churchward said:

Yes of course he can stand again but he would have to get the Republican party nomination again. Not impossible for sure but more difficult than where he was this time as the current president. The other potential barrier will be his age in 4 years time.  The rather puzzling stats for me in the election is that trump has increased the percentage (about 3% I think) of black votes for him. This seems rather odd against the "Black lives Matter" campaign.

 

On the matter of age if Biden does get in it seems unlikely to me that he will go for another term.  I think it will be interesting how much of a role Harris plays as Vice president.  If she seems to come to the fore and take some load from Biden it will be a sign that she may be the next Democratic candidate.

I think Biden is just the patsy to get the Democrats over the line. Expect President Harris to emerge late in 2021 or early 2022.

23 minutes ago, Phil. said:

This is the interview I was referring too. Yes I accept that Trumps language is inflammatory, personally it would be far better if he toned it down and was just cool and calm in his statements. The senator highlighted the irregularities, and indicated where it has to go to be resolved. I note you don’t address the second issue I made, what do you suggest happens if Trump wins the argument that changing rules was a breach of the law, and many thousands of Biden votes are suddenly no longer valid.

If there are valid concerns and evidence can be produced that is another matter but there is none presently. The democratic process and rule of law must prevail. All legitimate votes counted and no interference from any partisan force.

 

You miss the point that Pat Toomey is saying he thinks there are no irregularities in the Pennsylvania election process in this election. 

Edited November 6, 20205 yr by churchward

10 minutes ago, Phil. said:

@churchward

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/pennsylvania-republican-shoots-down-trumps-baseless-claims-of-voter-fraud-in-state/ar-BB1aLoi3?li=AAnZ9Ug

 

And here is an example of the mainstream media manipulating the narrative. This is the same interview, and it highlights all the points which would show Trump in a bad light, which I agree in some instances he brings on himself. But, and it is a big but, not a single mention in the report regarding the allegation the senator himself alluded to of unconstitutional, therefore illegal rule changes.

I think Biden is just the patsy to get the Democrats over the line. Expect President Harris to emerge late in 2021 or early 2022.

And you are making no mention of Pat Toomey's comments that the Pensylvania election process is valid.

 

Pat Toomey has said

 

"“There is simply no evidence that anybody has shown me, or anyone else I’m aware of, of any kind of corruption or fraud,”

 

I do not think Biden will be anyone's patsy. You underestimate the amount of real power a US president holds.  I do think it is possible for Harris to be promoted as the potential next president.

 

 

Edited November 6, 20205 yr by churchward

4 minutes ago, churchward said:

And you are making not mention of Pat Toomey's comments that the Pensylvania election process is valid.

 

Pat Toomey has said

 

"“There is simply no evidence that anybody has shown me, or anyone else I’m aware of, of any kind of corruption or fraud,”

 

 

I think I did, I accept the interview in its entirety, not how the mainstream media dealt with it, by making no reference to the potential unconstitutional behaviour of the Pennsylvania court. This is the problem with edited content. It is too easy to manipulate and mainstream media, if it is to trusted should not be doing it.

Edited November 6, 20205 yr by Phil.

Just now, Phil. said:

I think I did, I accept the interview in its entirety, not how the mainstream media dealt with it, by making no reference to the potential unconstitutional behaviour of the Pennsylvania court. This is the problem with edited content. It is too easy to manipulate.

It was in the post and account I put up.

 

I think the point of whether the decision about the postal vote prior to the election was unconstitutional will be moot and it is not clear how that would be so in any case.

30 minutes ago, churchward said:

It was in the post and account I put up.

 

I think the point of whether the decision about the postal vote prior to the election was unconstitutional will be moot and it is not clear how that would be so in any case.

Well that’s because neither you or I are constitutional lawyers, but Toomey seems to think the Pennsylvania court went beyond it powers in changing rules it is not permitted to do. The only place that can be resolved, if it is a case is the US Supreme Court. I assume that if the Supreme Court finds the rule change unconstitutional, any ballot cast in contravention of the previous rules, will be invalidated. Having said all this, I still don’t think Trump will prevail, but that does not mean it should not be addressed, and properly reported. You may have put it up in your post. The point I was making is the the independent newspaper didn’t, and that is dishonest reporting.

Edited November 6, 20205 yr by Phil.

Pointless pondering.

What happens on January 20th, the day the new President is sworn in, should Mr D Trump refuses to leave the White House?

 

Bod.

2 hours ago, blackrose said:

Trump is just a sore LOSER. Such a loser (in a Trump voice)

He even cheats playing golf too.    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/apr/02/donald-trump-golf-28-club-championships

2 hours ago, Phil. said:

Well how many more do you want me to highlight. I have pointed you in the direction of Arizona over three thousand suspect, I say again suspect cases, although at least one appears to be a dead person. I have pointed you in the direction of Pennsylvania, where the allegations are not only the same but also includes potentially unconstitutional behaviour. This can only be resolved in the court that has jurisdiction over the US constitution. It either will be unconstitutional in which case Trump wins, or it won’t and Biden wins. It seems the only people who don’t wish to even establish the fact, are those who would like to see Biden win. I guess so long as the left win and Trump loses, it doesn’t matter how it is achieved.

So you are implying that it is basically only Democrat states are the ones that are acting illegally.
You are so blinkered you can't see what is staring you in the face!! 

1 hour ago, Phil. said:

@churchward

 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/pennsylvania-republican-shoots-down-trumps-baseless-claims-of-voter-fraud-in-state/ar-BB1aLoi3?li=AAnZ9Ug

 

And here is an example of the mainstream media manipulating the narrative. This is the same interview, and it highlights all the points which would show Trump in a bad light, which I agree in some instances he brings on himself. But, and it is a big but, not a single mention in the report regarding the allegation the senator himself alluded to of unconstitutional, therefore illegal rule changes.

I think Biden is just the patsy to get the Democrats over the line. Expect President Harris to emerge late in 2021 or early 2022.

Only you could see that link being the media manipulating things!!

54 minutes ago, Phil. said:

Well that’s because neither you or I are constitutional lawyers, but Toomey seems to think the Pennsylvania court went beyond it powers in changing rules it is not permitted to do. The only place that can be resolved, if it is a case is the US Supreme Court. I assume that if the Supreme Court finds the rule change unconstitutional, any ballot cast in contravention of the previous rules, will be invalidated. Having said all this, I still don’t think Trump will prevail, but that does not mean it should not be addressed, and properly reported. You may have put it up in your post. The point I was making is the the independent newspaper didn’t, and that is dishonest reporting.

Even if that were so and it is highly unlikely the votes are unlikely to be voided and even then Biden is likely to win even without Pennsylvania. 

 

All that is happening is Trump (mainly) is throwing poo at the fan in the hope some of it sticks or worse that other groups not tethered by democracy will take up the cause.  They have presented no evidence.  

 

It cannot be lost that Trump discouraged voters from using postal votes and Biden encouraged it.  It says a lot about why Trump wishes to stop counting postal votes.

56 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

So you are implying that it is basically only Democrat states are the ones that are acting illegally.
You are so blinkered you can't see what is staring you in the face!! 

I’m not implying anything, but there is no point doing nefarious things in all states, just the important ones.

47 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

Only you could see that link being the media manipulating things!!

If a newspaper references an interview, highlighting all the individual points raised in said interview, but excludes the sole point contrary to their narrative and you don’t think something is wrong with that kind of reporting, then I can’t help you.

2 hours ago, Phil. said:

I’m not implying anything, but there is no point doing nefarious things in all states, just the important ones.

If a newspaper references an interview, highlighting all the individual points raised in said interview, but excludes the sole point contrary to their narrative and you don’t think something is wrong with that kind of reporting, then I can’t help you.

Yeah, right!
I shall repeat, you are so blinkered you cannot (and will not) see what is staring you in the face.

5 hours ago, churchward said:

Yes of course he can stand again but he would have to get the Republican party nomination again. Not impossible for sure but more difficult than where he was this time as the current president. The other potential barrier will be his age in 4 years time.  The rather puzzling stats for me in the election is that trump has increased the percentage (about 3% I think) of black votes for him. This seems rather odd against the "Black lives Matter" campaign.

 

On the matter of age if Biden does get in it seems unlikely to me that he will go for another term.  I think it will be interesting how much of a role Harris plays as Vice president.  If she seems to come to the fore and take some load from Biden it will be a sign that she may be the next Democratic candidate.

More likely I would of thought is that he would support one of his sons standing. Worked for the Bushes.

 

Supposing Biden does get in, Trump has another twelve weeks as president to really foul things up.  

14 hours ago, Bod said:

Pointless pondering.

What happens on January 20th, the day the new President is sworn in, should Mr D Trump refuses to leave the White House?

 

Bod.

They covered that eventuality on the news last night. IF Biden wins, at noon on January 20th Trump ceases to be President period. Whether he barricades himself in the White House is irrelevant, he will no longer be President so it will be much the same as any member of the public barricading themselves into a room in the White House. One would rather hope that even Trump isn't that stupid.

9 hours ago, dor said:

More likely I would of thought is that he would support one of his sons standing. Worked for the Bushes.

 

Supposing Biden does get in, Trump has another twelve weeks as president to really foul things up.  

Whatever he may try to do will still need to get through the House of Representatives and Senate, the more likely option will be for his transfer of power team to give no assistance to the Biden team, defying all precedent.

 

One interesting thought was put up on a comedy programme last night in that Trump, if eventually forced to to concede, will just resign and hand over to Pence who will then become a 12 week President. At the end of a Presidency they are allowed to grant a pardon to offenders, so Pence could potentially give a Presidential pardon to Trump relating to the various pending investigations into him (mainly tax), an interesting way of avoidnig future embarassment

 

Watched a bit of Fox news. Astonishing. And people think the poor old BBC is biased. Some unelected people have really done a lot of damage, Murdoch, Farage etc.

47 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Whatever he may try to do will still need to get through the House of Representatives and Senate, the more likely option will be for his transfer of power team to give no assistance to the Biden team, defying all precedent.

 

One interesting thought was put up on a comedy programme last night in that Trump, if eventually forced to to concede, will just resign and hand over to Pence who will then become a 12 week President. At the end of a Presidency they are allowed to grant a pardon to offenders, so Pence could potentially give a Presidential pardon to Trump relating to the various pending investigations into him (mainly tax), an interesting way of avoidnig future embarassment

 

That was on The Last Leg, Channel 4, and very interesting.

39 minutes ago, Bee said:

Watched a bit of Fox news. Astonishing. And people think the poor old BBC is biased. Some unelected people have really done a lot of damage, Murdoch, Farage etc.

Do tell us what Fox has been spraying around, for those of us who don’t have it available.

11 hours ago, dor said:

More likely I would of thought is that he would support one of his sons standing. Worked for the Bushes.

 

Supposing Biden does get in, Trump has another twelve weeks as president to really foul things up.  

That is quite possible too although his son would still have to win the Republican nomination.

 

The normal convention is that the outgoing presidential team pass all new decisions through the new team and the president elect also concentrate on the handover process.  However, there is no guarantee of course Trump will observe that convention.  There is also the Senate and house of representatives to keep thing sin some kind of order.  In the end as well as convention there are legal matters.  There is a law that governs the transition too, currently The Presidential Transition act 1963 and 20th amendment o the constitution 1933.

 

Trump although marked as a "lame duck" once it is known he has lost does retain a lot of power until Jan so could make a lot of mishief via exec orders etc.

1 hour ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Whatever he may try to do will still need to get through the House of Representatives and Senate, the more likely option will be for his transfer of power team to give no assistance to the Biden team, defying all precedent.

 

One interesting thought was put up on a comedy programme last night in that Trump, if eventually forced to to concede, will just resign and hand over to Pence who will then become a 12 week President. At the end of a Presidency they are allowed to grant a pardon to offenders, so Pence could potentially give a Presidential pardon to Trump relating to the various pending investigations into him (mainly tax), an interesting way of avoidnig future embarassment

 

Exec orders do not need to go through the normal paths to law and are law until they are revoked, cancelled or judged to be unlawful.  The supreme court can judge them to be unlawful if brought to them and new laws that would negate the exec order proposed by the houses but these can be veto'd by the President.  There are ways to remove the exec orders but it is convoluted and the President can drag it out over an extended period. A new President once sworn in can cancel any previous Presidents exec order.

 

Pardoning could be an apt conclusion to a corrupt presidency.  Ford did it for Nixon.  

Edited November 7, 20205 yr by churchward

2 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

They covered that eventuality on the news last night. IF Biden wins, at noon on January 20th Trump ceases to be President period. Whether he barricades himself in the White House is irrelevant, he will no longer be President so it will be much the same as any member of the public barricading themselves into a room in the White House. One would rather hope that even Trump isn't that stupid.

I heard somebody say that he would be removed.

 

I think Trump might be that stupid.

55 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

I heard somebody say that he would be removed.

 

I think Trump might be that stupid.

He would indeed be removed once the power has transferred to the new incoming president the security forces could act against Trump.  The new commander in chief would be the new president.  There can only be one President in power and the legal process is quite clear who that is once a result is declared and the new President sworn in and how that power is transitioned.

 

I think this would be an extreme end of the possible outcomes though and quite unlikely.

Edited November 7, 20205 yr by churchward

3 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Whatever he may try to do will still need to get through the House of Representatives and Senate, the more likely option will be for his transfer of power team to give no assistance to the Biden team, defying all precedent.

 

One interesting thought was put up on a comedy programme last night in that Trump, if eventually forced to to concede, will just resign and hand over to Pence who will then become a 12 week President. At the end of a Presidency they are allowed to grant a pardon to offenders, so Pence could potentially give a Presidential pardon to Trump relating to the various pending investigations into him (mainly tax), an interesting way of avoidnig future embarassment

 

Now wouldn’t that be a jolly wheeze. Perhaps he could pardon Julian Assange and Edward Snowden in the process just to upset crooked Hillary.

1 hour ago, Richard10002 said:

I heard somebody say that he would be removed.

 

I think Trump might be that stupid.

It won’t get to that point.