US Politics May 2019: " If I was burned at the stake, I would ask for a mirror"

He should be impeached to set a precedent for what lind of behavior is acceptable from presidents. He should be impeached even though it won’t lead to his removal from office

Also it needs to be done as a loud counternarrative to the administration’s notion that he has been “exonerated” by mueller

he should be impeached because when the dog is shitting all over thanksgiving dinner, someone should at least express the view that it is wrong

(i know i have used that analogy before. i am sorry.)

how often did Puffy shit on your turkey growing up?

The Starr investigation resulted in Clinton having to publicly apologize for lying to the country for months on end--something I doubt we'll ever see Trump do.

― Muswell Hillbilly Elegy (President Keyes),

hence why most analogies to the boom-boom '90s are overstated

how often did Puffy shit on your turkey growing up?

0, but tbh i think i spent a lot of time thinking "if i shit on this dinner, is anyone really going to stop me?" at thanksgiving dinners as a kid. never did it, but even then i knew that someone should have stopped me if i tried it

What Robert Mueller basically did was return an impeachment referral. Now it is up to Congress to hold this president accountable.

We need to start impeachment proceedings. It's our constitutional obligation.

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) May 29, 2019

Mueller’s statement makes clear what those who have read his report know: It is an impeachment referral, and it’s up to Congress to act. They should.

— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) May 29, 2019

Ok, now we just need to get a bunch of house reps to run for president so they can agree

Even Beto agrees...

There must be consequences, accountability, and justice. The only way to ensure that is to begin impeachment proceedings.

— Beto O'Rourke (@BetoORourke) May 29, 2019

Every time you read "impeached" add "and exonerated" because that's what the Senate is going to do (unjustifiably, but they'll do it).
Impeached and exonerated. The "exonerated" will be timed by McConnell for maximum election impact.
The best option is to slow roll impeachment so that the Senate doesn't have time to exonerate.

what I dont understand about impeachment is that once you decide to impeach on subject matter x (ie russia obstruction) can you add the evidence of all the other fucking crimes thats going to come out in the future or are you locked into x?

Articles of impeachment are introduced for specific crimes

Clinton was charged on multiple

Multiple articles of impeachment were passed in committee vs Nixon. Several were defeated (eg the secret bombing of Cambodia).

The Dems can hold impeachment hearings in the House and they can last right up to November 2020 if they want them to, just unearthing all kinds of shit. If they have the gumption. Tell the voters that the 2020 election is the de facto impeachment vote since Senate Republicans are guaranteed to torpedo it. Hold the actual impeachment vote in the House the week after the elections.

Again and again these past couple of years we're reminded that the rules and constrictions of the constitution presume good faith. But we're so far beyond that into total dysfunction that plays right into Trump's hand. If they don't go for impeachment he can say, see, if they had something on me then why didn't they impeach? And if they do impeach and the senate does not convict (or does nothing), he can say, see, total exoneration.

Would that the founder had foreseen the inevitability of turkey-befouling dogs.

founder-ZUH

there is no Dana there is only ZUH

One positive effect that would come out of tying a House committee's investigation directly to impeachment is that it would nullify the argument that the administration is currently standing on, that they need not honor subpoenas or provide documents, because they serve "no legislative purpose". They'd need to find another excuse for stonewalling.

Apologies if this point has already been made, but it seems to me that beyond the impeachment talk, Mueller’s statements heighten the electoral stakes for Trump. If the only thing that is keeping him from being indicted is being president, and that is sure what Mueller seemed to be saying, then the only way he can continue to not be indicted is to get reelected. It also means that he will try even harder to keep any of the investigative materials from getting into anyone else’s hands, because obviously they could be used for a future criminal prosecution.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will deliver remarks hours after former special counsel Robert Mueller made his first public statement on the Russia probe. Pelosi is scheduled to speak at 3 p.m. ET today.

obviously they could be used for a future criminal prosecution.

Gerald Ford took care of that precedent for us. As a consequence of his tender mercy, those national wounds sure as hell healed up lickety-split, didn't they?

I’m still mad at Tom Brokaw for saying unequivocally , sometime in the 90s on whatever news show I happened to catch, that Ford’s decision to pardon Nixon was a good and necessary one for the nations healing. I was too young to know the truth and surrounded by parental idiots, and it took me years to realize that the while Nixon/Ford pardon thing was actually very controversial and was arguably a really shitty decision

I was wondering the same thing - if Trump loses in 2020, does he just immediately get arrested? Is it okay to do crimes while in office or does being in office just prevent you from being indicted?

There is a long tradition among the ruling class that the very fact of being kicked out of power in disgrace is such a harrowing and horrible experience for a head of state that the humiliation and loss of reputation by themselves constitute a sufficient punishment. This tradition emerged when heads of state were mainly kings or tyrants. Needless to say that history doesn't say much about how the peasant class viewed these things, except for a few anecdotes, the authenticity of which are vouched for by members of the ruling class or their mouthpieces.

This tradition seems to be alive and well among the US ruling class and its mouthpieces in the media. The fact that a solid majority of US citizens disagreed in 1974 has been swept under the rug.

Apologies if this point has already been made, but it seems to me that beyond the impeachment talk, Mueller’s statements heighten the electoral stakes for Trump. If the only thing that is keeping him from being indicted is being president, and that is sure what Mueller seemed to be saying, then the only way he can continue to not be indicted is to get reelected. It also means that he will try even harder to keep any of the investigative materials from getting into anyone else’s hands, because obviously they could be used for a future criminal prosecution.

― a man often referred to in the news media as the Duke of Saxony (tipsy mothra),

Heh. I've long thought that this is the only reason Trump seeks reelection. This and to show the world his first election was no fluke.

his election was closer to a lutefisk.

Did Pelosi speak about this at 3pm Eastern?

She had a whole press conference about 3am Eternal, didn't know what the fuck she was going on about.

Nadler straining *extremely hard* not to undercut Pelosi or get out ahead of her, but the exertion is palpable.

— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) May 29, 2019

I just passed a man shrieking about the Mueller Report to no one in particular at the top of his lungs. Shriek shriek shriek, wait patiently for the light to change, cross the street, shriek some more.

Kindred spirit.

did you at least buy Karl Malone a drink?

but no one will *glug glug* read the report, *glug* if they would just read it then they would know *trips down the stairs* the truth

My man.

Pelosi's verbal mush on impeachment: "Many constituents want to impeach the President, but we want to do what is right and we want to get results."

— Jeffrey St. Clair (@JSCCounterPunch) May 29, 2019

tbf who can argue with results?

results can be good or bad

she's defining it as Senate removal

she aint doing it

she looks forward to working with the president to improve the conditions in the child jails at the border

if congress does begin impeachment, what's the likelihood they can time the hearings to run into the next election? I know the republicans would be able to do it because they're ruthless, but I have my doubts about the democrats

Congress can take as long as it wants.

if Trump loses in 2020, does he just immediately get arrested?

By whom and for what? Be specific.

I don't mean to imply he doesn't deserve it, but this fantasy is lacking in detail.

(Anyway he'd still be pres until inauguration, but that's a small point)

for obstruction & the myriad of crimes committed while in office (didn't Michael Cohen directly implicate him in a felony?), by...well I dunno. I guess that's the problem, isn't it?

I suppose he refers to the Southern District of New York and its own busy little elves.

i was led to believe throughout 2017 and 2018 that mueller was analyzing trump's finances

did he push that stuff off to other investigations?

I share the longing. But normally one gets arrested on, like a specific charge, violation of a specific law: say, 18 U.S.C. 1621.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34303.pdf

And if you're suspected of committing a Federal crime and you happen to be on the grounds of the Capitol, say (as an outgoing president might well be on Inauguration Day), then I guess Capitol Police or perhaps Park Service Police would have jurisdiction. Or FBI agents, I guess.

But presumably a warrant would help, and all Federal judges would have been the President's subordinates until the oath is administered to the new pres. One presumes most of them would not sign such a warrant until the term officially ended.

Trump would presumably get wind of the plan and have some kind of White Bronco waiting somewhere with Bannon at the wheel. A car chase through gridlocked special-event-day DC would be an amusing end for the saga. Fiery crash? Careening into the Potomac? Standing at the railing of Memorial Bridge, screaming "You'll never take me alive, suckas!"

screaming "You'll never take me alive, suckas losers!"

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/29/energy-department-molecules-freedom-fossil-fuel-rebranding