Forum Topic

Donald Trump's Impeachment ~ Acquitted

Nothing more to say.

Sue Hammond ● 1899d40 Comments

Getting back to the original topic, there's in fact a lot more that's likely to be said - in the US criminal and civil courts. It'll keep the lawyers off the streets for a while, wouldn't like to see them going hungry! https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-criminal-civil-investigations_n_602a9397c5b680717ee98725

Michael Ixer ● 1897d

Looking at an election with less Brexit influence: the 2017 election Englan's votes were split: 45.4% Conservative 41.9% for England.

Ed Robinson ● 1898d

47% per wiki....https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_England

Mike Warman ● 1898d

Serious question If the other 3 nations of UK were excluded what would the % of the vote have been for the Tories in last election.

Andy Pike ● 1898d

Pizza Express???Thank you for the links which I shall read shortly.However, and this however is a big one, what about the Rees-Moggs avoiding tax?  Is this any different or even acceptable?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1898d

Some details here Ivonne - although I couldn't find the Pizza Express one :https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vetted-more-than-1000-laws-via-queens-consenthttps://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealthhttps://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/09/prince-charles-vetted-laws-that-stop-his-tenants-buying-their-homes

Ed Robinson ● 1898d

Apologies for the duplication!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1898d

Ivonne Holliday ● 1898d

Ivonne Holliday ● 1898d

Is the clue on laws that may affect them financially but not on country laws?I remember the blow they endured when Britannia was decommissioned and when they were asked to pay income tax.  Britannia was a blow for the whole country I think; an emblem that advertised Britishness to its core.Paying income tax, particularly after the fire at Windsor Castle, may have come as a blow.Pity the Rees-Moggs of this country do not do the same.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1898d

The royal family have a veto over laws they don't like/may affect them financially and have used them a number of times in the past.

Matt Palmer ● 1898d

JonathanYes I agree that to tories seem more reluctant and are also leasing in the polls.  I think that lead may increase if Scottish independence comes before the next election, although as we’ve seen implementation can take a long time of course!I would think polls and public opinion could change significantly over the coming few years given the after effects of COVID and lockdowns, although in what way hard to tell.  Remember also that Nigel garages nee pressure party on the right will also be pushing for PR which whilst niche will be the first time I think a right wing party has promoted.With PR care is still needed in the design to try and avoid being in permanently hung parliaments

Mike Warman ● 1898d

"..whether it will become a manifesto commitment.."I'm not sure Starmer will be leader after the May local elections - unless he does well.Without policies - it looks like people are switching to the smaller parties quicker than he can pick up his so called target voters. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw the return of Blair - who already has been advising the government I believe.There is a general consensus building on PR with people like Clive Lewis trying to get support from across all parties. Perhaps single issue movements are the way forward??

Ed Robinson ● 1898d

Hello Ed,The latest impeachment result was not one that has benefitted the US democracy one iota.  A senator saying that Trump had incited to violence, others agreed too, then proceeded to vote for his acquittal...  Not too healthy in my view.  I am not saying that any system is free of fault by any stretch of the imagination.  Is it not possible to improve on what we have instead of copying another system because "the grass is greener on the other side?" Or are we looking at Greece and Italy as examples too?As for the 50 and 100 year secrecy rule, there is nothing in principle to change these.  Obviously, Gove is trying his best to eliminate the FoI Act.  But it is also true to say that, wherever there are politicians, it is very easy for them to be economic with the truth or to twist facts to suit their agenda. Should we do away with politicians altogether?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1898d

Mike, on your final point it is clear the beneficiaries of FPTP are the two major parties.As I understand it PR is being touted within the Labour Party though whether it will become a manifesto commitment is quite another thing.  AT least they are thinking about it.  The problem is that a party committed to PR first has to win a FPTP election and currently the Tories look pretty comfortable - if you believe the polls - and they certainly don't want to change what works so well for them.

Jonathan Callaway ● 1898d

Ivonne I can see how they compare. The US have impeachment several presidents over the years. Does the UK have such a process?The system in the UK will work as follows:Those involved in any scandal will set up an inquiry by appointing a Lord (who was not independently or democratically elected to be a Lord and may even be connected to those that appoint them to lead the inquiry). They will also set the terms of the inquiry.Several years or even a decade will go by giving those responsible the best opportunity possible to hide or destroy evidence (it's only cricket!). Witnesses will pass away or even become part of the system. After many years a watered down report will appear with no real consequences for those involved.The UK simply does not wash it's laundry in public. The fact that the US does should be taken as a sign of a health democracy IMO. The 50 & 100 year secrecy rules are there to prevent anyone seeing our washing!

Ed Robinson ● 1898d

So should we move to a two house system with clear definition of responsibilities and an elected president like in other countries?Seems sensible to me (i also find the queen as head of state anachronistic but I’m sure it made sense when she became monarch in the past) but not perfect (as we see elsewhere) I would like to see an elected upper chamber (but with that it would need to have its powers and responsibilities defined differently to now) and also PR, although naturally neither labour nor conservatives are fans.  Don’t forget Tony Blair won the 2005 election with a majority on just 35% of the vote!

Mike Warman ● 1898d

“ If you’re going to express an opinion in a public space, you shouldn’t be able to hide behind fake identities.”Let us hope that comes.  I think alongside the more disturbing comments from all sides that most people are less guarded or more easily wound up/ extremitised on social media than they would be if discussing with people in person, it seems the nature of the medium.I think this is being looked at but seems difficult.  It would be better if all accounts were verified to a person (that would also help with the bots) and if a standard level of behaviour requirement were agreed and evenly applied.  I can see it becoming more difficult....Might be a while but I think more open-ness will come (it has to really)Social media in general is a little like the Wild West - for those with Netflix check out the social dilemma for comments around standard manipulation online and some of its consequences.

Mike Warman ● 1898d

I agree with Jonathan about having a democratically elected upper house and PR for the Commons. At heart I thing any hereditary position in a position of power is anachronistic in the 21st century but I must admit the current monarch has performed a reasonably good job over the years. However, if its true the monarchy had vetoed or interfered with legislation then in a democracy that must be transparent to its citizens, and might dilute any pragmatic support I have for the monarchy.On the topic of social media, then in a democratic society it's not unreasonable that subscribers should be identifiable but I can see in some jurisdictions that would be dangerous. There needs to be some form of moderation of postings and sanctions against transgressors of decency or laws; my personal opinion is that should be independent of the providers. The providers are attempting to use AI to identify or block posts so they can grow subscribers to increase advertising income without increasing staff cost to vet content. So government intervention to force changes seems inevitable.

Michael Ixer ● 1898d

I totally agree with you Craig.Distortion of truth is very much in fashion in many places, as is the repeat, repeat, repeat of them, unfortunately.  As for the BBC, it is surprising how it is being attacked for being a left-wing and right-wing follower at the same time...

Ivonne Holliday ● 1898d

I am a constitutional monarchist without a doubt.After living in a so-called democratic republic and following the recent shenanigans in the USA, I can see the enormous benefits of having a Head of State that is not Head of Government.I am not too sure the Queen has vetoed that amount of laws but would not surprise if she has not done so once or twice.But she did give assent to laws after being unashamedly lied to by the Head of Government.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1899d

Careful Matt - Trump is a useful distraction from our own faulty system. Our Emperor clothes are the finest even if we do say ourselves!

Ed Robinson ● 1899d

...oh and something that finally sorts our trolling too.  If you’re going to express an opinion in a public space, you shouldn’t be able to hide behind fake identities.

Craig Fordham ● 1899d

Perhaps we could also stop the queen having an effective veto over our laws? Take back control and all that.

Matt Palmer ● 1899d

It’s a giant mess, but something has to be done to both police the internet and safeguard mainstream media.  Trump’s trick was to create classic echo chambers - a tactic employed by dictators throughout history.  Rather than silence critics, simply discredit them frequently and repeatedly as liars, traitors and fake.  Whatever they say, whatever evidence they provide will then be dismissed by your followers as fake news - whether it’s a tiny inauguration crowd or a democratically held election.  At the same time point people towards unregulated websites and social media platforms that support you and tell them that they’re the only places where the truth can be found.  Repeat again and againIts a bigger problem in the US, but it’s definitely a growing issue here - go on to social media and look at how many people are trying to discredit our mainstream media.  Whether that’s boycotting advertisers who support certain newspapers or defunding the BBC, there are numerous campaigns running to silence our media.  I may not be the biggest fan of the Daily Mail or the Guardian, but having different views is important in a functioning democracy and ensuring they have rules and standards about what they can and can’t print is vital.  Somehow we need to make greater efforts to regulate websites and social media that deliberately distort the truth and prey on the angry and disaffected.

Craig Fordham ● 1899d

Completely I agree Jonathan with the electoral reform. I'm not so sure about the BBC. Johnson seems to have got an easy ride for years - you have to ask how and why? - eventually!Likewise I agree with your comment on democracies. A reminder that our freedom should never be taken for granted (as I sit indoors during the nth lockdown :-). I would just add history has shown that the UK and US doesn't alway value democracies in other countries.

Ed Robinson ● 1899d

Our democracy looks in need of a makeover in my opinion.  Starting with an elected upper house.  And a form of proportional representation instead of First Past The Post.  How can it be right that a party that only gets 43% of the national vote gets an 80 seat majority?As for Trump he could still be charged with all sorts of criminal offences, not to mention civil action by the families of those killed in the insurrection/riot/spontaneous demonstration that he clearly incited.Possibly the most serious problem American democracy has is the absence of an impartial media.  We fortunately still have the BBC, already under sustained attack from the political right despite their control of much of the printed press and increasingly a number of radio stations (plus one if not two about-to-be-launched TV "news" channels).Worrying times for liberal multicultural pluralistic democracies.

Jonathan Callaway ● 1899d

I don't think democracy has died in the US but it isd hanging on by a thread. The main thing the new government has to saddress and fix is voter suppression - at least that's what my US friends tell me. What's concerning is not so much Trump's lies about the election results - the courts have seen through that by throwing out all his law suits, most senior Republicans seem to accept the results  and it will be interesting to see what damages the voting system suppliers recoup in their defamation cases - but the fact that so many  Trump supporters believe the QAnon fantasy that he's a saviour! That started life as an alternative reality game around five years ago and grew legs before being subverted for commercial and political purposes. One wonders how the law suits Trump may face if New York and Georgia will progress ...

Michael Ixer ● 1899d

One should point out that "shoot" in this cartoon is an expression of disappointment, not a command to action. (Just in case) (but it is the US).

David Ainsworth ● 1899d

"Democracy of the decent kind died in America yesterday"The fact that they have twice impeached him shows that their democracy is very alive but not perfect.If we are going to measure the US by the outcome and not the process how does the UK democracy stand up to the same test?

Ed Robinson ● 1899d

Richard Carter ● 1899d

Trump lies, he is a racist and demagogue who victimises the disabled, is responsible in my view for the murder of 5 people when Congress was stormed, and I despair for his apologists. Democracy of the decent kind died in America yesterday. Putin must be laughing his head off.

Clifford Cowell ● 1899d

Very sad indeed.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1899d

The decision was political not judicial. Most of the Republican senators were considering how Trump supporters would vote the next time not whether Trump had incited his supporters and been responsible for a riot caused resulted in six deaths. A sad day for democracy?

Michael Ixer ● 1899d

Yes, I agree, Trump got off on a technicality.I do not know much about US law, but if it is agreed that Trump did incite violence, is this not against the law?As the offence was committed on 6 January while he was POTUS, surely the fact that two weeks later he was out of the office, it does not make him innocent?

Ivonne Holliday ● 1899d

Listening to McConnell, I’d say Trump got off on a technicality.  Even he recognises the man and his supporters are vile

Craig Fordham ● 1899d

57 guilty to 43 not guilty seems more of a "not proven" than "innocent" verdict ... 

Michael Ixer ● 1899d

Too soon to say.

David Ainsworth ● 1899d

Both good results achieved by different methods.

Sue Hammond ● 1899d

Apparently, they needed 67% of the vote in order to succeed in impeaching Trump. Unlike the simple majority vote in our Referendum which took the UK out of the EU.

David Ainsworth ● 1899d