The Impeachment of President Trump

[Tiassa]

Idiot Convention: Click for stomp, stomp, stomp.​

Then why do it?
Pandering?
To whom?

Do you, then, propose that the President's behavior is acceptable, and that future presidents of any given political party should do the same?

If not, then you have your answer: Do it because we must.

Oblige U.S. Senators to do the right thing or else sign their names to infamy for all history to witness.

Majority Leader McConnell, the senior U.S. Senator from Kentucky, would appear to be preparing to surrender the Republic. And, gosh, y'know, imagine that. A patriot. Of the party that says government doesn't work. From Kentucky, of all places. Where they've been trying real hard, lately, to make up for failing the Confederacy.

 

[sculptor]

...

​

Do you, then, propose that the President's behavior is acceptable, ... .

What is acceptable behaviour?
Replacing elected governments with dictators?
Destroying other countries , and leaving the people to suffer religious extremists and warlords?
Using bombs as diplomacy?
Sacrificing your country's citizens' well being to the greed of special interests---including the m.i.c.?

Perhaps, a better question would be: What do you propose to be unacceptable behaviour?

 

[iceaura]

Perhaps, a better question would be: What do you propose to be unacceptable behaviour?

Betrayal of the US for personal gain. Violation of one's sworn oath of office. Various statutory crimes such as bribery and sexual assault.

That'll do for starters. We can deal with the race baiting and encouragement of violence and abusive cruelty toward the vulnerable and so forth later.

 

[iceaura]

Ok
Then why do it?

Among the many:
To slow and curb and weaken a dangerously destructive and terminally corrupt Presidency.

To highlight and clearly present, in public, unmistakably, the moral and ethical and professional character of this President's supporters and defenders, for informational purposes in an election year.

To fulfill one's sworn oath of office and perform one's sworn duties as an elected member of Congress.

Is that ok by you?

what are the odds that 2/3 of the the senate will vote for impeachment?

One must give them the chance to do the right thing. That's only fair.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Then why do it?
Pandering?
To whom?

After all this is over and it will be over at some point... and the dust has settled and all the massive costs involved with the Trump presidency are ascertained perhaps electoral reform may be possible.
Especially the criteria for "who" can nominate for POTUS.
Mandatory voting. ( citizenship obligation)
Electoral college reform.
etc...
"No change with out pain"

 

[iceaura]

What phone security breaches?
How did Iran help Reagan?

So you are posting here in near complete ignorance of the relevant facts and historical context.

Nope, the trend of the southern realignment long predates Nixon and the Civil Rights Acts, and if anything, slowed with time.

Nixon caught a wave - sure. The northern Dems were not delivering the racist policies desired by the southern ones. Nixon saw the opportunity.
And the trend slowed with accomplishment, of course - a logistic, like most such things. There are only so many pig-ignorant racial bigots and fundies in the US.
(Meanwhile, your graph there shows Nixon's Southern Strategy innovation and the Reagan consolidation of the core racial bigots even without measuring the right variable - just as a side effect. That's how strong it was. )

Trump didn't even win all the votes that Romney got when he lost to Obama.

This is what you were replying to:

Trump won the same vote Reagan won - the same people, for the same reasons.

Try to bear down a bit, ok?

Exactly what an anti-Semite would say.

Nope. Anti-Semites usually equate Zionism with Judaism - exactly as you are attempting to do here. (It's called "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" for a reason, eh?).
- - - - - -

Economically illiterate people think loans can account for the longest period of economic growth in US history, record low unemployment, and the lowest minority unemployment in US history.

Whereas it takes a much more complete and willful ignorance than mere economic illiteracy to credit any Republican, much less Trump, with any of the good stuff that is real.
Again: employment, not unemployment, is the statistic you need. Economic inequality is the frame you need. And so forth. You have drowned in essentially meaningless statistical bs - one of the penalties for having no reality based (your term is "leftist") source of information.

Cute. Now replace "Trump's" with "Obama's" in that exact same search:

Your link helps illustrate the difficulty of recovering from a Republican Crash (in this case, while fighting an expensive Republican war and dealing with natural disasters left to rot for years by incompetent Republican government). Even in the bullshit stats, it clearly took Obama years to make even partial and modest progress.

It took Clinton eight years to recover from Reagan/Bush, after all, and that was a much smaller economic disaster - and he had more cooperation in Congress (not much, but some). (He paid for it, of course - with GATT, NAFTA, "welfare reform", New Deal rollbacks of various kinds, and other items on the Reaganomic agenda). That cooperation price seems to have been what delayed the Clinton recovery for so long; at any rate, the attempt at a similar approach visibly hampered Obama.

 

[Tiassa]

That'll do for starters.

What really stands out, though—

What is acceptable behaviour?
Replacing elected governments with dictators?
Destroying other countries , and leaving the people to suffer religious extremists and warlords?
Using bombs as diplomacy?
Sacrificing your country's citizens' well being to the greed of special interests---including the m.i.c.?

—is that this is what it comes to, and this is where we're at.

It's one thing to suggest some of us, to some degree or another, knew the whole time, but now they're just out front with it. They were always sick of what they support, just in time for the white hoods and terrorism. At least they've made it clear what the Republic is worth, to them.

 

[whynwhynwhy]

So in a choice between the White Walkers and the Human Beings, you would be neutral - no preference.

Right, let both meet their destinies. I'm not their destinies. Most Americans are actually.

 

[sculptor]

What really stands out, though—

sculptor said: ↑
What is acceptable behaviour?
Replacing elected governments with dictators?
Destroying other countries , and leaving the people to suffer religious extremists and warlords?
Using bombs as diplomacy?
Sacrificing your country's citizens' well being to the greed of special interests---including the m.i.c.?

—is that this is what it comes to, and this is where we're at.

... .

it's come to this,
Yes it's come to this,
And wasn't it a long way down,
Ah wasn't it a strange way down?

.........................
(when ya gotta borrow: Borrow from the best)

 

[Schmelzer]

as/re impeachment, I keep thinking:
what are the odds that 2/3 of the the senate will vote for impeachment?
I suspect that a person with an IQ of 90 could have figured out that this would likely go no-where?
Ok
Then why do it?

My hypothesis is that those Dems who started this simply want to get rid of Biden. Force the Reps to present their evidence for Biden corruption during the primaries, so that the only result would be that not Biden but some other Dem wins. The situation would be much worse if all that corruption evidence would be presented after the primaries, when the only opponent of Biden is Trump.

 

[iceaura]

My hypothesis is that those Dems who started this simply want to get rid of Biden

1) Republicans started this.
2) You have no idea who those Dems would be, of course - any more than you understand that Biden has little chance of getting the nomination barring organized fraud and Party muscle. He's polling on name recognition and the focus on "electability" and "bothsides" by the rightwing corporate media. (The Dem "leadership" seems to have caught on at least a little - hence the desperation entry of Bloomberg, stuff like that).

The situation would be much worse if all that corruption evidence would be presented after the primaries, when the only opponent of Biden is Trump.

So Trump has been acting as an agent of the Dems who were trying to impeach him. That's your hypothesis.

All the actual Ukraine corruption evidence against Biden - facts and timelines and such - was presented a long time ago; there wasn't much. Hiring his kid was of course an attempt at buying influence, but that's pretty small potatoes compared with Trump's family dealings - not the kind of thing the Republican Party wants in the media anytime near the vote.

The bizarre fantasies running now are just the familiar Russian media and internet tries Trump has been somehow persuaded to disseminate, apparently (judging by the timing) in those meetings he had with Putin in which no American translators or other witnesses were permitted - only Russian ones.

 

[Schmelzer]

You have no idea who those Dems would be, of course - any more than you understand that Biden has little chance of getting the nomination barring organized fraud and Party muscle.

There are enough other candidates, and there is no reason for me to care about names. AFAIK looked not that bad in the polls for the primaries, and organized fraud is what the Dems are known for. Whatever, I don't care much about those primaries. It is simply a question which warmonger will win.

So Trump has been acting as an agent of the Dems who were trying to impeach him. That's your hypothesis.

LOL.

All the actual Ukraine corruption evidence against Biden - facts and timelines and such - was presented a long time ago; there wasn't much.

Enough that everybody with sufficient common sense knows that Biden is corrupt. Whatever, as I have said many times, a POTUS known to be corrupt can be a good thing for world peace too. Hunter Biden was already involved in some Chinese firm, if necessary the Russians find a Russian firm to invite him too.

 

[Quantum Quack]

There are enough other candidates, and there is no reason for me to care about names. AFAIK looked not that bad in the polls for the primaries, and organized fraud is what the Dems are known for. Whatever, I don't care much about those primaries. It is simply a question which warmonger will win.

LOL.

Enough that everybody with sufficient common sense knows that Biden is corrupt. Whatever, as I have said many times, a POTUS known to be corrupt can be a good thing for world peace too. Hunter Biden was already involved in some Chinese firm, if necessary the Russians find a Russian firm to invite him too.

What makes you think any candidate, either Republican or Democrat are not as corrupt as each other?
Why the focus on any ?

 

[Schmelzer]

What makes you think any candidate, either Republican or Democrat are not as corrupt as each other?
Why the focus on any ?

The probability is, of course, high that the president will be corrupt. But nonetheless one cannot be sure. In the case of Biden, corruption is for sure. In this sense, Trump against Biden would be ok.

 

[Tiassa]

My hypothesis is that those Dems who started this simply want to get rid of Biden. Force the Reps to present their evidence for Biden corruption during the primaries, so that the only result would be that not Biden but some other Dem wins.

Well, at least we have a "hypothesis".

Sure, it comes as Biden struggles to stay relevant, riding name recognition and Donald Trump's idiocy. Biden was never going to be the nominee, and one apparent thing, here, is that Donald Trump is trying to choose his opponent, just as Republicans sought for fifteen years to have a chance to run against Hillary. Trying to pack a quarter-century of willing cooperation from newspapers of record into a few months just isn't a good idea, especially when one prong of the electoral strategy is to carry on a rolling ego-defense firefight with news media.

In a way similar to another of our neighbors who will grasp after any whiff of a thesis or pebble of a potsherd in defense of the Trump administration and populist-authoritarian movement claiming a mantle of American traditionalism, there comes a point at which the any-D-will-do earnestness in serving the crankiest of tinfoil chokers is so laughable it would hurt your feelings.

The short summary is that people are not obliged to run your unbound conspiracism to earth, and the entertainment value of whatever novel fancy you might invent next does not really justify the spectacle.

 

[iceaura]

Enough that everybody with sufficient common sense knows that Biden is corrupt

Everybody on the left has known that for thirty years. That does not make the nonsense being plastered all over the media by Russian disinformation any more credible.
Like this comical stupidity:

My hypothesis is that those Dems who started this simply want to get rid of Biden. Force the Reps to present their evidence for Biden corruption during the primaries, so that the only result would be that not Biden but some other Dem wins.

As noted, that argument amounts to claiming Trump is acting as a major promoter or agent his own impeachment, forcing the reluctant Democratic leadership to play their stronger hand.
That is of course a possible argument or approach (one could argue that he's a psychologically disturbed man, whose entire normal or "good" being, whatever is left of it, has been cornered in a high pressure situation with no good way out). But I doubt it was an argument, or even intentional - it looks like a typical post-Reagan trap caught Republican media feed or shit fling, in which the inevitable self contradictions are just another source of the intended confusions and smokescreens. That's what we've been seeing all along, anyway, especially from the Russian influence, so that's the likely read - this, basically:
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RI6zVCsG...l53EJ1wCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/ALLYOURBASE_Putin.jpg
- - - - - -

What makes you think any candidate, either Republican or Democrat are not as corrupt as each other

Bothsides is bullshit.

Write it down, tape a note to self on your computer screen, whatever it takes to avoid getting played like that.

Trump is far more seriously corrupt than even Biden or Schumer - as is the rest of the Republican Party. When dealing in American politics it's a central trap: Never allow yourself to be led into the false equivalence that has been the standard Republican Party lifeboat strategy for your entire adult life.

Fascism is not in any useful sense equivalent to ordinary politics, especially when it takes power in a democracy with liberal aspirations. Its goals are too different, encompassing as they do the destruction of liberal democracy itself (rather than the establishment of different policies, etc).

 

[iceaura]

There are enough other candidates, and there is no reason for me to care about names.

Once again you make that claim I and others have so frequently endorsed - even made for you, when you forgot. Of course. We assume that, in your case. I was perfectly safe in claiming you had no idea who was doing what in this matter.

Nobody on your "side" (read": faction, Party, etc) cares about such things. Who, what, why, where, when, etc, are the concerns of journalists and scientists and so forth - all that stuff is just liberal whinging, to the folks in your faction.

As noted in all the rest of your posting here, in dealing with domestic American issues or general scientific matters with capitalist corporate implications you have instead every reason to avoid physical facts of any kind - they are nothing but impediments to you, as you have explained many times to us, explicitly.
(Not only explained, but boasted - as with all the corporate US rightwing authoritarian defenders and apologists here, you regard careful attention to the physical and historical facts of American politics and culture as a sign of stupidity, partisanship, leftism, naivety, pedantry, ignorance, weakness, etc).

 

[Schmelzer]

Answering my

Enough that everybody with sufficient common sense knows that Biden is corrupt

I read the following:

Everybody on the left has known that for thirty years.

Interesting admission. Too lazy to search, but I vaguely remember for having been attacked here (not by somebody from the right) for saying that the evidence against Biden is sufficient for everybody with common sense to show that he is corrupt.
Even more interesting is the consequence: It means, the whole impeachment is really directed against Trump doing something in the interest of the US, by trying to start investigations against some politician known even by the left to be corrupt.

As noted, that argument amounts to claiming Trump is acting as a major promoter or agent his own impeachment, forcing the reluctant Democratic leadership to play their stronger hand.

Nonsense. Trump could not know that the Dems would be so stupid to attack him for suggesting Selensky to investigate the Biden corruption case. That means, the Dems would allow him for free to present himself as fighting the corrupt Dem politicians, the swamp, and defend that corrupt politician with all their might. So, doing this was completely safe for Trump even if it would have been illegal, simply because nobody with common sense would use this for attacking him.

Bothsides is bullshit.
Write it down, tape a note to self on your computer screen, whatever it takes to avoid getting played like that.

That you hate "bothsides" argumentation is well known, so that you don't have to repeat it all the time. You know it is a very dangerous idea, given that those who follow it will not play the "American democracy" show anymore, recognizing that they have been played. I acknowledge that this is a hard job, given those Dem politicians you have, to explain the sheeple that they are much better than those same guys on the other side.

Trump is far more seriously corrupt than even Biden or Schumer - as is the rest of the Republican Party.

Because you say so, it has to be true. I prefer to judge about such things using common sense. This tells us that corruption depends much on what you already own. So, rich people are less corrupt, not because of their higher morals (democratic politicians in general don't have morals, except for election campaign speeches) but because you have to pay much more to buy them to get much less. Instead, usually politicians are not that rich and therefore have to care about the time after the next election. So, they will sell themselves much cheaper.

Of course. We assume that, in your case. I was perfectly safe in claiming you had no idea who was doing what in this matter.

As a mathematician, I care about what is necessary to check my hypothesis. All what the hypothesis requires is the existence of some people interested in getting rid of Biden.

Moreover, most of the job is done by a simple "cui bono". That his corruption will remain in the news during the whole impeachment procedure obviously and certainly harms Biden's chances to become president. Instead, if it harms Trump or helps him is much less clear. Last but not least, the public message is that the Dems have accepted that the whole anti-Russian hysteria and the Mueller investigation have given nothing worth to start an impeachment, and that now the impeachment has been started because Trump has tried to start an investigation against the obviously corrupt Biden.

Further primitive defamation disposed of.

 

[iceaura]

Because you say so, it has to be true.

You have it backwards, as always.

I prefer to judge about such things using common sense.

You lack common sense to a remarkable degree - you have far less than average.
Instead of common sense, you post fantasies like this:

So, rich people are less corrupt, not because of their higher morals (democratic politicians in general don't have morals, except for election campaign speeches) but because you have to pay much more to buy them to get much less.

For starters: The guy offering the bribe is not corrupt, on planet Republican.
Neither are Russian oligarchs or Middle Eastern princelings or organized crime bosses.

As a mathematician, I care about what is necessary to check my hypothesis. All what the hypothesis requires is the existence of some people interested in getting rid of Biden.

And we see your "common sense" in action once again.
The same stuff that has you arguing Trump is working in cooperation with "the Dems". to impeach himself.

Trump could not know that the Dems would be so stupid to attack him for suggesting Selensky to investigate the Biden corruption case.

So his emergency attempts to cover up what he did, when he found out he was caught, are kind of strange, no?

Too lazy to search, but I vaguely remember for having been attacked here (not by somebody from the right) for saying that the evidence against Biden is sufficient for everybody with common sense to show that he is corrupt.

It isn't. Not the stuff you've been parroting.
Not the Republican Ukraine fantasy. That's just Russia being Russia.

Interesting admission.

It's a correction of your frame.
Which is the same as the Republican frame.
Which is evidence that they know Trump is guilty - meanwhile, yet more documentation of Trump's personal involvement in the attempted extortion from Ukraine, etc.

 

[Schmelzer]

Iceaura's fantasy land is too far away from what the international media write, probably they are all under Rep control, even if all the Western ones present themselves as anti-Trump, this must be some false flag operation to post Rep disinformation. Whatever, happy new year in your fantasy land.