Thanks Paul

Yes I did mention "the required 2/3rds of the Senate" above.

But thanks for bringing up the option of Republican Senators absenting themselves (effectively abstaining) from an impeachment vote.

So http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States#Federal_impeachment indicates "Concurrence of two-thirds of the [Seanators] present"

If (say) 8 Republican Senators absent themselves from a late April 2021 vote. This makes it much easier for the 51 odd Democrat Senators + 10 Republican Senators to amount to a 2/3rds majority.

This might be sufficient to stop Trump-16 from ever running for President again.

Noting "Trump-16" is a disease that started infecting in 2016...

Cheers

Pete

DECLASSIFIED LAST WEEK US SECRET/NOFORN DOC ON US ALLIANCES RELEASED

Here is a declassified SECRET/"NOFORN" (ie. US Eyes Only) document http://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20449107-us-strategy-document-on-indo-pacific titled "A Free and Open Indo-Pacific". It is a US national security briefing prepared by White House staff.

The document contains a Cover Letter and US National Security Council further action description that were missing from the "US Strategic Framework..." 000174 Attachment http://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/IPS-Final-Declass.pdf (that was released by the White House on January 5, 2021).

The Cover Letter refers to some documents that may be still classified, such as "U.S. Campaign Plan for Countering China’s Malign Influence in International Organizations." Much in the Attachment is worth discussing.

The White House released the whole document on January 13, 2021 to Australia's ABC "7.30 Report". The US aim may be mainly to show Trump/the White House did have a working Indo-Pacific alliance strategy after all.

Reading the document reveals the alliance objective is mainly to contain China.

India, Japan, Australia, North and South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines and Thailand are all mentioned in this document. It is useful to use the search function in it - to identify country mentions.

Here is an Australian ABC News summary of its import http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-12/details-of-trump-administrations-indo-pacific-strategy-revealed/13052216.

Hi Joe

The following indicates any Impeachment proceeding that extend AFTER TRUMP LEAVES OFFICE WON'T WORK.

A Washington Post Opinion of 13 January 2021 http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/12/once-trump-leaves-office-senate-cant-hold-an-impeachment-trial/

Can "a former president can be impeached after he leaves office.

The Constitution itself answers this question clearly: No, he cannot be.

Once Trump’s term ends on Jan. 20, Congress loses its constitutional authority to continue impeachment proceedings against him — even if the House has already approved articles of impeachment.

Therefore, if the House of Representatives were to impeach the president before he leaves office, the Senate could not thereafter convict the former president and disqualify him under the Constitution from future public office.

The reason for this is found in the Constitution itself. Trump would no longer be incumbent in the Office of the President at the time of the delayed Senate proceeding and would no longer be subject to “impeachment conviction” by the Senate, under the Constitution’s Impeachment Clauses. Which is to say that the Senate’s only power under the Constitution is to convict — or not — an incumbent president.

The purpose, text and structure of the Constitution’s Impeachment Clauses confirm this intuitive and common-sense understanding."

The book 1984 is again on the Amazon best seller list. Those who can see things for how they really are want to read about their nation's future.

My favourite 'seen' in 1984 is where we have a rally against Eurasia. Oceania is at war with Eurasia and Eastasia is an ally. Then mid-speech the speaker is informed that things have changed. Eastasia is now the enemy. Mid-sentence the speaker changes and the crowd suddenly realise their banners and placards are denouncing the wrong side. There is a massive effort to destroy the now-incorrect posters.

Oceania is at war with Eastasia. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

Violent protest is wrong. Violent protest has always been wrong.

The BLM looting, burning, murder never happened and wasn't supported by the Democrats. It was never supported by the Demcorats. The antifa attack on the Whitehouse never happened. The attack on the Capitol building was insurrection. The attack on Federal buildings in Portland....never happened.

Violent protest has always been wrong. When I point out that SR had supported violent BLM protests he didn't deny it or try to explain it. He just ignored it. It never happened. Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

I suspect Plantagenet, LM et al have the same memory loss. A personal memory hole.

More from the good book:
“Orthodoxy means not thinking–not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”

“The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power.”

We have not seen any evidence yet that trump caused a riot, just blame because he called the rally, but there were elements there that did not follow the principles of the Republican Party.

Dear mhaze,

Oh there you are, I thought you had gone off sulking again. Anyway good to have you back. Given shadowminister seems to be off flailing himself with birch branches again you are the pick of the bunch, well one of the few who can put more than a single sentence together.

Of course I supported BLM protests. It has been a pivotal moment in US history and one that has led to significant reform across literally thousands of police departments in the country.

However you will need to show where I supported the violence and looting because I didn't. I feel I have some inkling of the anger involved and some of reasons why things got ugly at a very small percentage of some of the protests just as I do for the rioters at Capitol Hill. That is all. I certainly don't support looting, or burning of buildings just like I don't support insurrection over a legitimate election result or the beating to death of a police officer and the injuring of so many others.

You using unwarranted and inflammatory words like “subversion” and power being illegally seized while giving lip service to not supporting violence does run pretty thin though.