Most recent activity
-
Listening to Boris' customs plan, I can't think of a project less likely to succeed than a brand new government IT system with no precedent in the world, politically motivated and spanning governments, countries, land masses and unions (all of the above) not to mention a necessarily aggressive time frame. It beggars belief.
OK back to feral student pranks
-
RNC raised $125m in Q3, over a year out from the election.
-
Primaries begin in Feb. When do you think they hold a vote on the articles of impeachment?
Againnnn
-
Though I understand he was almost certain to be convicted - it would have run all the way.
I doubt the current Senate would even hold the trial, let alone convict. It seems this investigation is more about forcing Republican reps to go on record endorsing Trump's actions via vote. Remains to be seen if that's a winning strategy or will backfire badly..
-
It's the preliminary stage, makes it a formal investigation so they have a pretext to issue subpoenas etc. They may decide to hold a vote on impeachment which (I think) requires just a simple majority. If that passes, the president is impeached (as was Clinton). Then the Senate is supposed to hold a kind of trial with a judge, prosecution and defense followed by a vote on whether to convict which requires 2/3rds to pass. Given the current Senate it's pretty unlikely they'll hold the trial let alone vote to convict - afaik no president has ever been convicted following impeachment.
-
Announcement in 15 mins apparently.
So this gives more excuses to issue subpoenas.. which the Whitehouse will ignore as usual?
-
FT politics podcast today had a fella weighing in on it, concluded "too close to call". There is no direct precedent so there are several hurdles to making a substantial legal case.
-
To be fair, USA voted for Clinton. Unfortunately that alone isn't sufficient there.
Pretty bold. Wonder if congress will force the issue legally, or just pout for a while and pull together other testimony instead.