Impeach Trump Y/N

the playground argument reaches the crucial moment of "nuh uh!"

Ignorance of law excuses not. Unless you're prez, in which case shine on, you crazy diamond.

New USA Today poll:

Americans support House *impeaching* Trump by 45-38

They support *Senate conviction and removal* by 44-35 (!)

Note: 30% of Republicans say pressure on Ukraine to smear Biden is an abuse of power.

And it's early. More will come out.https://t.co/nIaJRZgP7E

— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) October 3, 2019

mitt romney has 45% concerns

McConnell not sure about steak or chicken for dinner.

do the bidens even have any connection to china? or is it just that every country in the world should be investigating them?

― mookieproof, Thursday, October 3, 2019 1:21 PM (five hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

*tim heidecker voice* investigate the china connection!!!

re: mookieproof's “do the Bidens even have any connection to China?” I'm not knowledgeable about financial matters but I found this:

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/trump-says-hunter-biden-walks-out-of-china-with-1-5-billion-bidens-lawyer-says-thats-not-true/

“Hunter Biden did travel with his father on Air Force Two to China on Dec. 4, 2013.

Twelve days later, Hunter Biden joined the board of a just-formed investment advisory firm, known as BHR, whose partners included Chinese entities. Affiliates of the advisory firm said they planned to raise $1.5 billion.
Some media reports over the past five years have described Hunter Biden as an owner of a private equity company that sought to raise that amount.

However, George Mesires, a lawyer for Hunter Biden, said in an interview earlier this year that his client’s role has been misconstrued. He said Hunter Biden was on the board of the advisory firm that did not directly invest, but instead advised those who did.

Moreover, Mesires said, it was not until October 2017 that Hunter Biden acquired a financial stake in BHR. Hunter Biden bought a 10 percent equity interest that was worth $430,000 in July, Mesires said. At least half of the firm’s stake is owned by Chinese entities, according to business records.

Mesires, asked about the matter in July, said: “To date, Mr. Biden has not received any return or compensation on account of this investment or his position on the board of directors. The characterization of Mr. Biden as owning a $1.5 billion private equity firm funded by the Chinese seriously misconstrues Mr. Biden’s role with BHR.””

Is anyone else feeling an increasing sense of dread the more this shit spins out of control? It seems like the prevailing mood is "aha, we got him now!" but these blatant calls for foreign intervention are forcing Republicans into a position where they either have to accept straight up lawlessness and a Trump dictatorship or go against their team. We all know which way they'll go.

NEW: Text messages from Kurt Volker (US Special Envoy to Ukraine), Bill Taylor (top US diplomat in Kyiv), Gordon Sondland (US ambo to EU), Andriy Yermak (advisor to Zelensky).
1. Taylor relays Z’s reluctance to become “instrument in Washington domestic, reelection politics.” pic.twitter.com/WhfAnu8ktd

— Michael Weiss (@michaeldweiss) October 4, 2019

🚨 🚨 Bill Taylor to Sondland: "Are we now saying that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations?" pic.twitter.com/sAEETFY51Q

— Jacqueline Alemany (@JaxAlemany) October 4, 2019

come on!!

Republicans would never accept an outright dictatorship, they will just accept varying degrees of the President breaking the law and simply say he isn't.

Xxpost

If you say so...

That isn't less scarier per se

At a certain point, "let the president do whatever he wants while the majority of Americans become disenfranchised" is indistinguishable from a dictatorship.

"Is anyone else feeling an increasing sense of dread the more this shit spins out of control? " yes definitely

Is anyone else feeling an increasing sense of dread the more this shit spins out of control? It seems like the prevailing mood is "aha, we got him now!" but these blatant calls for foreign intervention are forcing Republicans into a position where they either have to accept straight up lawlessness and a Trump dictatorship or go against their team. We all know which way they'll go.

claiming this is a coup and flirting with the idea of Civil War really does scare me, think shit has the potential to get really bad before it'll get any better

jesus those texts... grudging credit to sondland for knowing what not to commit to recoverable media

It just so obviously flagrant and out in the open, but the line is going to be that the president can ask a country to investigate election interference and that's that.

only if it's a Republican though

Well, yeah. But the way I look at it, this is all so blatant and clear as day that if Republicans accept it, we essentially are now a dictatorship and we shouldn't worry about another party taking power any time soon.

At least the Mueller report was long and convoluted enough to where you could semi-reasonably pretend that it was 200 pages of criminal activity.

*wasn't

Well, yeah. But the way I look at it, this is all so blatant and clear as day that if Republicans accept it, we essentially are now a dictatorship and we shouldn't worry about another party taking power any time soon.

There's a really fringy element out there who might initiate violence, which would of course be a very bad thing, but there's nothing in Trump's agenda comparable to the slavery issue that could foment another full-blown US civil war if he's impeached and successfully removed from office (fat chance of that), unless that war is a couple of decades of further deepened divisions from now. What we're more likely to get are smoldering resentments that play out in tribal national politics for a while until new issues finally intervene to make all this look like ancient and irrelevant history.

Look how long people actively resented Clinton's impeachment and the 2000 'hanging chad' election. Maybe three years, with a lingering tail for a decade at most. Look at the Merrett Garland affair and how much it affects politics today. Not much at all, except for the general sense of Republicans as dirty players who hit below the belt.

I don't necessarily think an all out war will happen, but I think a peaceful transfer of power following a Democratic victory next year may not happen either.

Look how long people actively resented Clinton's impeachment and the 2000 'hanging chad' election. Maybe three years, with a lingering tail for a decade at most...

aw c’mon I still actively resent that bullshit

I keep thinking about a recent Adam Serwer article that spelled out the fact that Republicans see their own unlawful actions as justified because they view Democrats and Democratic power as intrinsically illegitimate.

Speaking of impeachment...

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/10/02/were-looking-near-raw-bribery-house-dems-investigating-whether-groups-tried-curry

I keep thinking about a recent Adam Serwer article that spelled out the fact that Republicans see their own unlawful actions as justified because they view Democrats and Democratic power as intrinsically illegitimate.

obv the model where one geographical half of the country neatly divides itself from and fights a war with the other half is not going to happen again but if democratic collapse is not reversed i do think we can expect more and more political violence, mostly from expanding police occupation (w support from various kinds of brownshirt) and solidifying resistance to it. eventually it will be at a point where if you dropped someone in from 2000 they would be like "wow it almost seems like there's a civil war going on" but there's not gonna be a fort sumter.

despite ample opportunity trump does not seem to me to have actually cultivated the institutional support that would allow him to remain in office after losing an election, unless of course the result can be sent to a republican supreme court again.

"ample"'s a bit of an overstatement there. someone could prob have done it tho

Look at the Merrett Garland affair and how much it affects politics today.

Merrettless Garland

Not much at all, except for fundamentally, in ways that have shifted the entire function of the government in America

mitt romney has 45% concerns

― mookieproof, Friday, October 4, 2019 2:15 AM (five hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

and a mitch is one

I recommended a really good podcast about these potential for civil war on esbys civil war thread and was mocked as a "paranoid white liberal" for my efforts.

yeah he does that

No, not esby.

I recommended a really good podcast about these potential for civil war on esbys civil war thread and was mocked as a "paranoid white liberal" for my efforts.

― ☮ (peace, man)

hi! i post to this thread too!

honestly peace, man, you weren't the target there, it was more of a self-clown. i worry about this shit too, i would look at syria and i would think "oh my god that could be america", and i genuinely did/do appreciate the podcast and plan on listening to it more because it's great at demonstrating the mistakes i make when i go off on these civil war jags.

it's sort of what we were taught, as white americans. we were taught to believe in the system, to believe in objective principles, to believe in liberty and justice for all, and we were taught, at least implicitly, that it was the only alternative to anarchy, not the cool guy fawkes mask sort but syria.

americans who aren't white get taught those too, but it's easier for them to see what a complete lie the Princples they're taught are. black americans are taught about the "virtues" of founding fathers who owned slaves and wrote a constitution to protect that "right", that "freedom". in america today a police officer can kill a person of color for any reason and face no consequences. this is not novel.

you want to call it a civil war? you want to look at people who literally cannot bring themselves to even say that black lives matter, let alone live those principles? the fear you feel now is the fear millions upon millions of americans have felt every day of their lives for as long as they can remember. get used to it. and for god's sake, put away your guns, they aren't going to help "defend your freedom" here.

guys Garland's name is Merrick

xp: Thanks for responding more in depth, rushomancy! I definitely don't want to push off the horrors that black americans and other persecuted minorities have been feeling all this time. I grew up in a very utopian, "united colors of benetton" suburb, so the increased awareness in the last decade or so of the problems that EVERYONE else has been facing all this time has been sobering, and a bit of a stumbling block for me but I'm working on it.

However, I do think that things have been getting increasingly worse year after year in the past decade and have the potential to continue getting that trajectory before they get better.

One of the things the guys says at one point during the series is that for certain groups on the radical right and the vulnerable populations they prey on, in many ways the war has already begun. And while he mentions his own gun ownership at a number of points, the series is definitely not specifically a call to arms to defend your freedom with them.

This has all been a lesson in the perils of pervasive corruption, from a practical standpoint. With the involvement of Pence or even Pompeo (lots of Ps in this post) the Dems have been pushed into an almost untenable position. Getting rid of Trump was always a long shot, but getting rid of Trump *and* Pence *and* Pompeo *and* even Barr, perhaps? And installing ... Pelosi? Absolutely no way will that happen. But I'm not sure what choice there is. Say Trump were removed and Pence installed. Is Pence suddenly tolerable, even though he is linked to the same stuff that (hypothetically) took down Trump? Would or will Pompeo and Barr tolerated in any administration? It's a total constitutional mess that we probably all saw coming, just not in this exact clusterfuck form.

I don't really get why that is a problem for Dems, though?

Because they can't wipe out virtually the entire top line of the GOP administration *and* automatically take back the White House in the same move without playing in to all the current bs talk of a coup. Constitutional or no, taking out the president, VP, AG and SoS all at once seems impossible. So does leaving any of them where they are.

As if the Senate would convict!

I know, exactly. If anything, the Senate's unwillingness to convict, like I think I said days back, gives the Dems cover to go forward, because they get to impeach without having to deal with the headache of getting rid of all these people. And yet in the end, they (and we) will still be stuck with all these people, which is pretty bad. There's your 2020 campaign slogan: vote for the democrat or all these assholes will get even worse.

For sure it worked last time ...

That's always been my wish.

And in that case they get a good slogan out of it? It's really not a problem for Dems that the Trump administration is so absurdly corrupt that they can't just easily cut it out. To both sides it a bit, it's like in Virginia, all three top Dems in the line of succession should have probably resigned, but then none of them did. That's a win for Republicans.

Leaving them where they are isn’t a problem for the Dems, it’s a problem for GOP Senators up for re-election in 2020, when the vote comes around and they have to decide that the most unpopular president in living memory is actually OK and not at all guilty.

Also, IF everybody really wanted to leave a GOPer in power, isn't the solution pretty easy: Begin by going after Pence, have Trump name a new vice president, then have him resign? Kinda like what happened in 74

In this administration we'd get an Acting Vice President.