dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

Wondering if "think mirror" and the new "America Last" agenda, is that the USA will be the last one to get drained. instead of the first after SA.

Sweden's government topples as prime minister loses no-confidence vote

Sweden's prime minister, Stefan Lofven, on Monday morning became the first leader in Sweden's history to lose a no-confidence vote in parliament, leaving him just one week to decide whether to hold snap elections or resign.

Of the parliament's 349 members, 181 supported the vote, 109 opposed it and 51 abstained, with Lofven's red-green coalition voted down by an unusual combination of the former Communist Left Party, the far-Right Sweden Democrats, and the right-wing Moderate and Christian Democrat parties.

"The Left Party has linked up arms with the right-wing conservative bloc and used that to create an unholy alliance to fell the government," Annelie Karlsson, the Social Democrat's parliamentary leader, told parliament before the vote.

Mr Lofven, a former union dealmaker, has skillfully kept a weak Social Democrat-led coalition afloat since January 2019, enacting just enough of the liberal economic reforms necessary to keep his promises to the two minority centre-right parties, while at the same time keeping the unions and Left Party on side.

But he was wrong-footed last week by Nooshi Dadgostar, the Left party's new leader, who said she would back a no-confidence vote if Lofven did not scrap a planned liberalisation of rent controls for new-build apartments – even if that meant voting alongside the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats.

Before the vote, Ms Dadgostar reminded parliament that her party had made rent controls its red line from the moment it allowed the government take power.

"We have done something unusual in politics – stood by our word," she said.

"It is not the Left Party that has abandoned the Social Democratic government, it is the Social Democratic government that has abandoned the Left Party and the Swedish people," she added, claiming her party had "compromised more than any other during this mandate period".

Sweden's parliament put coronavirus restrictions on hold for the vote, which had been called by the Sweden Democrats on Thursday, calling all members of parliament for the first time in months.

Mr Lofven has not said whether he plans to hold a snap election or to resign, saying he would only do "what is best for Sweden".

If he resigns, the speaker of parliament will then appoint a party leader to try and assemble a coalition which more than half of the parliament will not vote against.

Jimmie Akesson, leader of the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats, lavished rare praise on the Left Party, saying Ms Dadgostar was "worthy of respect" for deciding to "stand up for its voters and not allow itself to be deceived by Social Democrat power games".

Lofven has proven himself a canny player of Swedish bloc politics, staying in power since 2014 through a period when the rise of the populist Sweden Democrats has deprived the two left and right blocs of any chance of a majority.

Over the last two years, he has so far managed to enact just enough of the liberal economic reforms promised to the two minority centre-Right parties in return for their support, while at the same time keeping the unions and Left Party on-side.

Nicholas Aylott, Associate Professor at Stockholm's Sodertorn University, told the Telegraph that until last week most had expected Lofven to maintain his balancing act up until the 2022 election.

more

https://www.yahoo.com/news/swedens-government-topples-prime-minister-085900738.html

>>13951081

They have a choice.

Expose, or BE Exposed.

Decades of Deception are over.

Anonymous ID: 263edf June 21, 2021, 8:43 a.m. No.13951140 🗄️.is 🔗kun >>1235

>>13951109

Article III Courts

https://www.fjc.gov/history/courts/courts-brief-overview#:~:text=There%20are%20currently%20four%20Article,Article%20III%20courts%20over%20time.&text=Not%20all%20federal%20judges%20are%20Article%20III%20judges.

There are currently four Article III courts: The Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. courts of appeals, the U.S. district courts and the U.S. Court of International Trade. Congress has abolished, combined or reorganized several other Article III courts over time. Such courts include the U.S. circuit courts, the Court of Claims, the U.S. Customs Court, and the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.

Since the mid-twentieth century, Congress has occasionally authorized temporary or specialized courts or adjudicatory bodies staffed by judges from existing Article III courts. Some of these bodies, such as the Special Railroad Court or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, are courts in their own right and call on judges to exercise a wide range of traditional judicial powers. Congress has also formed bodies, such as the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation or the Special Division for the Appointment of Independent Counsel, that are not designated as courts and typically serve more circumscribed roles.

Not all federal judges are Article III judges. Some non-Article III judges work as “adjuncts” to Article III tribunals. In 1968, for example, Congress authorized district courts to appoint magistrates (the title was changed to “magistrate judge” in 1990). These judges conduct many aspects of the pre-trial process and can preside over most non-felony trials, but are appointed to renewable four or eight year terms rather than holding their offices during good behavior.

ALSO

COVER LETTER

May 21, 2020

Sent via Facsimile & E-Mail

Hon. Mitch McConnell

Majority Leader

U.S. Senate

S-230, The Capitol

Washington, DC 20515

Hon. Nancy Pelosi

Speaker

U.S. House of Representatives

Rayburn House Office Building

Washington, DC 20515

Re: Converting Guantánamo Bay Military Commissions Into An Article III Court

Dear Majority Leader McConnell and Speaker Pelosi:

The U.S. Military Commissions in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba were created to provide legal proceedings for “enemy combatant” detainees. Their purpose was to bring perpetrators to swift justice within the bounds of due process and provide closure to the victims’ families. However, the Military Commissions have fallen far short of these goals.

The proceedings are slow, ineffective, and lacking in transparency. Pre-trial proceedings alone are approaching two decades without resolution and half of the convictions by Military Commission have been reversed on appeal. Prosecuting detainees in Military Commission proceedings means accepting that victims’ families may never see cases resolved, that defendants will not receive a speedy trial, and that Guantánamo will have another excuse to remain open despite overwhelming justification for its closure. In stark contrast, Article III courts have delivered fast, fair, and effective justice to nearly 700 terrorism cases since 9/11.

The solution to this problem is typically framed as binary: either permit detainees to come to the United States to be tried before Article III courts or continue to hear their cases in Military Commission proceedings. Indeed, the New York City Bar Association has advocated for Guantánamo detainees to be tried before federal courts in the United States. However, Congress has prohibited these detainees from being transferred to the U.S. for trial in Article III courts. We propose a third solution: bringing Article III proceedings to Guantánamo. The enclosed report explains the potential benefits and legal support for this plan, and also considers the logistical issues it presents.

While this approach would restore efficiency and integrity to the Guantánamo proceedings, the plan also presents political and logistical challenges. Congress would have to appropriate funds for infrastructure improvements. Currently, members of the press and legal observers are required to stay in tents when visiting; both the prosecution and defense counsel lack adequate, sanitary office space to build their cases; and habitable housing is in very short supply. Establishing a federal court at Guantánamo also risks legitimizing the continued existence of Guantánamo’s detention center.

more

https://www.nycbar.org/member-and-career-services/committees/reports-listing/reports/detail/converting-guantanamo-bay-military-commissions-into-an-article-iii-court