That's why I didnt include it, you guys arent that special for that reason anymore : p I can just go a few states over now
I agree with this and I blame the media in part for getting him elected. They focused on his antics and gave him too much free press during the election and continue to do so during his presidency. And the focus is almost always on his antics. Rarely do you see any in depth examinations of the ramifications of his actual policies
Actually I think what is happening to the press in america poses more of a danger to freedom in our country than any president could
Like Asmo said, I guess there weren't enough good fierce mammals back in the day for country symbols. Russia swiped up Bears, you guys and the Sweeds and British all fought over Lions. The French had to settle for Frogs!
No country in Europe has anything like it so it is useful to keep us apart from the viking descendants in the mark And because Germany had the eagle you guys had to settle for a bald eagle
fun fact most of the european monarchies can be traced back to the vikings. also the discovery of America a couple of hundred years before the portugeese guy Columbus only our ancestors called it Vinland. And for those who watched the tv show oh boy could I confuse you
Which tv show? Vikings? I skipped that (even though i love the subject/setting). I did massively enjoy Norsemen though
Yes vikings I skipped it for a long time as well untill I got currious because I heard some people sadly danes having their history and even geografy of scandinavia all wrong
Not a chance. Not a question worth serious discussion. We could discuss "Should he be impeached", but we've already discussed that plenty on the "Will he be impeached" thread.
It's all a matter of what a charade McConnell and the Senate make the trial. It is a question of law, but the Republicans don't take it seriously and they may just go too far with the lack of gravity they give it.
Sometimes a view from the outside can be helpful. I am always interested when I see stories from foreign publications about Canada - sometimes they bring in a new angle that isn't really being discussed in the media here.
One intriguing hypothetical (which will never be tested, cuz there isn't a snowball's chance Trump will be convicted), is whether or not he could still run in 2020 if he were--i.e., does disqualification from future office necessarily happen. The Constitution provides for disqualification as part of the penalty, but in the case of lower federal officials, it's voted on separately and takes a simple majority to impose the penalty. In the case of the Prez, the Constitution is silent. If the Senate follows the same procedure for disqualification that it does for other impeachments, and requires a separate vote, Moscow Mitch might not hold that vote, or the Republican majority might vote No. What then? God help us all!
Does anyone know if there is any sort of timeframe for when Pelosi has to forward the impeachment documents to the senate?