US Politics, October 2019 — I guess statement you could say with thread. I made a thread. The thread was PERFECT.

“They say it’s only $10 billion, I’m supposed to be happy,” Trump said. “Oh, let’s see can we give Texas an extra $10 billion for some crazy thing that may work or it may not?”

hmm...this reminds me of some other really big, stupid wall that costs billions more than that, and that everyone says is really crazy and probably would not work...no, i must be making that up

A majority of voters say the Trump administration should cooperate with the House impeachment inquiry, according to a new Hill-HarrisX poll.

The survey, released Friday, showed 63 percent of voters saying the White House should comply with congressional requests for testimony and documents related to President Trump's dealings with Ukraine.

Thirty-seven percent said the White House is well within its powers to reject Democrats’ requests and claim immunity under executive privilege.

Eighty-three percent of Democratic voters said the administration should comply with the congressional requests, compared to just 37 of Republicans who said the same. Independents sided with Democrats, with 65 percent saying the White House should cooperate.

A majority of Republican voters — 63 percent — said the administration can claim executive privilege in denying requests for documents and testimony, while only 17 percent of Democrats and 35 percent of independents agreed.

The survey comes a week after the White House announced it would refuse to cooperate with the impeachment probe. In a letter to top Democrats, White House counsel Pat Cipollone dismissed House Democrats’ impeachment as unconstitutional and strictly partisan.

Trump is threatening to sue CNN for being mean to him.

This week, right-wing hoaxster James O’Keefe launched the latest of his series of secretly recorded videos, which purport to prove various conservative conspiracy theories but fail. The new version involves a CNN contractor recording employees grumbling about various complaints about the network, none of which establish the plot O’Keefe set out to prove, and some of which suggest the opposite (an employee complains that CNN covers Trump rallies but not Biden ones, which are too boring).

Even some of the conservative movement’s dimmest stars came away unimpressed. The project nonetheless seems to have left an impression on Donald Trump, a devoted follower and purveyor of nearly all the right’s conspiracy theories, a fanatical devotee of cable news, and, incidentally, the president of the United States. Trump has directed his lawyer to threaten a lawsuit against CNN on the basis of O’Keefe’s flimsy video.

The letter claims that O’Keefe has personally disproven CNN’s claim to be a news network dedicated to reporting facts. “In the Footage, your employees
appear to state that CNN attempts to make its reporting appear neutral and unbiased, when in fact its reporting is far from neutral and highly biased against the President.” The letter then moves on to its true complaint, stating (without any evidence whatsoever), “Never in the history of this country has a President been the subject of such a sustained barrage of unfair, unfounded, unethical and unlawful attacks by so-called ‘mainstream’ news, as the current situation.”

Continuing from this extremely shaky factual foundation, Trump’s letter proceeds to a ludicrous legal argument: CNN has violated the Lanham Act, which controls truth in advertising. Therefore, by claiming to be a real news network while subjecting Trump to hours of critical coverage, it has misrepresented itself. For some reason Trump claims he is personally entitled to financial compensation from CNN as a result. Trump plans to “seek compensatory damages, treble damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, reimbursement of legal costs, and all other available legal and equitable remedies.”

Independents sided with Democrats, with 65 percent saying the White House should cooperate.

i was just looking at this pew piece on political leanings of independents, since "independents" always strikes me as an odd third political category, since it encompasses both far left and far right people.

https://i.imgur.com/bMGrF01.png

17% of all americans are "independents" who lean democratic (a view that might describe many people here), 13% lean republican, and only 7% have "no lean" (which i would assume covers both the mythical "centrist" voter as well as people who completely fucking hate both parties (a view that might describe many people here).

so of that "independent" cohort which covers 37% of american voters, 45% lean democratic, 35% lean republican, and 19% have "no lean".

which brings us back to Independents sided with Democrats, with 65 percent saying the White House should cooperate.

65% of independent is basically the 45% that lean democratic + the 19% that have "no lean". that means the only independents who don't the white house should operate are the ones that lean republican anyway. in other words, the same polarization exists with independents as with the two main parties - it's not that democrats and republicans are polar opposites, it's that the republicans are polar opposite of pretty much ANYONE

the only independents who don't the white house should operate

i'm sorry, a mini-boss throwing giant javelins made of steel just bombarded my home while i was typing that. it should say "the only independents who don't think the WH should cooperate are.."

git that money

President Trump’s reelection campaign on Friday started selling T-shirts with the slogan “Get Over It,” a reference to recent remarks made by acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

The campaign rolled out the shirts a day after Mulvaney told reporters at a White House press conference that there’s “going to be political influence in foreign policy” and people should “get over it.”

I'm still not convinced independent voters exist

corruption: actually fine

photo from Trump campaign shirt:

https://www.nydailynews.com/resizer/6D9QOIgPy6ARTgH9YwnaGx9LzrM=/800x538/top/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/IDIUDXTUAD7UXLSUZWVUON5WBY.jpg

i hate donald trump

well, yeah

it's a violation of sacred oaths of data journalism to make charts that show independents in between the two parties, like this:

https://i.imgur.com/RNKmXjn.png

1. many(/most?) of the independent leaners hold views that go beyond the DEM/GOP's positions. they should be visualized as blocs on the outside edges of the chart pulling the parties away from each other, not pulling them inward toward the "center"
2. Independent "leaners" should be split into two distinct groups for each party: far and near groups.
3. putting the political parties on the edges visually reinforces the idea that the two parties represent the edges of acceptable political policies

(it's also a violation to put the republican party on the left side and the democratic party on the right)

this is a pet peeve of mine that started back during the obamacare era when numerous pollsters would ask versions of "do you approve of the obamacare plan" without taking into consideration that there were tons of people who didn't approve of obamacare because they wanted something MORE liberal (public option, M4A, etc)

COME ON PEW, DO YOUR JOB WELL

I mean they're called "Pew"

I'm starting to uh... not doubt that impeachment may happen:

After hearing Mulvaney's comments, I now believe that @realDonaldTrump should be impeached by the US House and face a trial in the US Senate.

This is not a decision I've made lightly, but it's clear now that a line was crossed. This is an abuse of power. Action must be taken. pic.twitter.com/5p3QGmp8YN

— John Kasich (@JohnKasich) October 18, 2019

allow trump to remain president if he can accurately write a 1000 word paper all by himself about the origin of the phrase "cross the Rubicon" and then present it out loud without a prompter to a group of scholars who can generally agree on its accuracy.

Just because this is going to be going on for a long time and for clarity's sake, can we get straight on the terminology?

Impeachmen is a foregone conclusion. The president will be impeached. Convicted by the senate is something else.

ugh -t

Gonna start a barbershop quartet called The Impeachmen

be sure to do a version of Impeach the Presidnet

Impeachment is a foregone conclusion.

is it though? I may be more skeptical than you thought at first glance.

The Impeachmen gonna take down that elephant thing HARDCORE. DAMMMNNN.

oh my god

https://shop.donaldjtrump.com/products/get-over-it-tee-navy

No one could ever have predicted a future this stupid.

Mike judge did

Rep. Francis Rooney (R-FL) said that he could not rule out impeachment while saying Mulvaney laid out a “clear” quid pro quo.

“Whatever might have been gray and unclear before is certainly clear right now,” Rooney told CNN’s Poppy Harlow on Friday morning. “That the actions were related to getting someone in the Ukraine to do these things. As you put on there, Senator Murkowski said it perfectly: We’re not to use political power and prestige for political gain.”

Harlow, meanwhile, wanted to know if Rooney felt this rose to the level of an impeachable offense.

“That’s something I can’t answer,” the Florida lawmaker replied. “I’ve been reading about this impeachment business. I’m not really—I went to law school but didn’t practice law. I did read something today. That impeachment is whatever the House members and majority say it is. I guess anything is.”

This prompted the CNN anchor to press Rooney on the issue of impeachment, noting that he had said it was “very clear” there was a quid pro quo as it relates to Ukraine.

“I don’t know. I want to study it more,” he responded. “I want to hear the next set of testimony next week from a couple more ambassadors. But it’s certainly very, very serious and troubling.”

Harlow continued to grill Rooney on why he was still unsure on the matter, causing the Republican congressman to say he still wants to see if this is “grave and serious” enough to impeach the president.

“I don’t think this is as much as Richard Nixon did,” Rooney continued. “But I’m very mindful of the fact that back during Watergate everybody said it’s a witch hunt to get Nixon. Turns out it wasn’t a witch hunt but it was absolutely correct.”

wow i think tulsi just locked up the morbs vote

Great! Thank you @HillaryClinton. You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain. From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a ...

— Tulsi Gabbard (@TulsiGabbard) October 18, 2019

Harlow, meanwhile, wanted to know if Rooney felt this rose to the level of an impeachable offense.

“That’s something I can’t answer,” the Florida lawmaker replied. “I’ve been reading about this impeachment business. I’m not really—I went to law school but didn’t practice law. I did read something today. That impeachment is whatever the House members and majority say it is. I guess anything is.”

*BLOODCURDLING SCREAM*

so rooney might be a vote for impeachment...if he bothers to learn how it works

'i'm just a simple caveman'

"fire bad"

oh wait lol wrong Phil Hartman character

"I didn't go to law school" is the gonna be the new "I'm not a scientist"

also dude it's not law it's civics

He did go to law school tho

where’s Schoolhouse Rock when we need it

The learning part of my life is over

Maybe it's time to let the old ways die

Like I have to deal with that shit all day every day in my place of work but I'll go ahead and say that it's 100% inexcusable for an elected official to not understand the workings of the body to which they've been elected.

Or, y'know, it used to be. Even just base-level sentience is optional these days.

he's just a man of the people, not some Fancy Schoolin' Boy

I'm not a scientist
I will not understand things
hastening calamities
and evils yet unknown

I'm not a lawyer
I'm not sure what the law is
seems like it is malleable
and no one else can cave like me

And I know what's right
but I can't indict
or I'll lose, the seat I just eked out
by a ruse
To just pretend I'm blind
Yeah, and just pretend I'm blind

:-/

100% inexcusable unless the very reason you were elected was not to understand

Diaper-spotting for Dan:

People are talking about Trump's protuberant diaper-driven frontbutt in this video, and deservedly so, but spare a minute for his steadfast refusal to let his wife anywhere near his giant golf umbrella. https://t.co/MtlEq4BjyL

— David Roth (@david_j_roth) October 18, 2019

Between Mulvaney saying the quiet parts out loud and McConnell's Washington Post op-ed, I predict a rage-tweetin' weekend.

mook, I don't even hate washed-up Auntie Hil as much as I do her 'husband' or Biden

maybe not even Bootyjudge

i know trump is vain but sometimes ppl have incontinence issues especially old ppl, it's not really much of an own to clown them for it

would agree w/r/t every other human being on the planet

i know trump is vain but sometimes ppl have incontinence issues especially old ppl, it's not really much of an own to clown them for it

I cite it here in the same context as a few months ago, not to make fun of the clown man for looking silly

"clowning" on ppl is often (usually?) done on topics the clownee is sensitve to, not the clowner

(I do agree that making fun of Trump's appearance has been fine for at least thirty years, in light of his extreme vanity and boasting)