The August 2019 US Politics Thread is dumb (stupid}

ok I think I'm just gonna block this lady she's been going nonstop on "85% PERCENT OF CRIME IS BLACK ON WHITE WHY DOESN'T DON LEMON CARE!?!?!?!?!?" and so on

You think?

Like that's a block invitation yo.

Scoop: The deputy director of national intelligence, Sue Gordon, will leave her position following a meeting in Oval with Trump today, sources tell me. https://t.co/0hptsRz0dE

— Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) August 8, 2019

I wanna puke

Here’s the video of CNN reporting that Trump forced that now-orphaned baby, whose parents died shielding him during the mass shooting, to come back to the hospital for a Trump publicity event after the other victims refused to meet him. pic.twitter.com/CKDlxa8xMz

— John Aravosis 🇺🇸 (@aravosis) August 8, 2019

my god this is fucking grotesque

From the First Lady’s twitter account, this appears to be the baby both of whose parents died shielding him from the El Paso shooter. The baby in question was discharged the day before and brought back for Trumps visit. Child is not id’d on @flotus account. But appears to... pic.twitter.com/17L6XQROMS

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) August 9, 2019

don't wanna get all emotional about our dumbass president but this photo has broken my soul

i think we just wrapped up 2019 folks

No such luck.

frogbs otm, that is horrifying

why the fuck is that motherfucker smiling and giving the thumbs up

seriously i wake every morning with the fervent hope he died in the night

I always used to think it was so facile to refer to someone as 'evil'.

Extremely not looking forward to the 'where are they now' story in 15 years about this kid

Wait, are we sure that this is real? Not that I'm putting it past him, I'm just taken aback, even now.

Atrocious.

Thumbs down.

What a piece of shit. And that “smile” which shows he has never had the insight to find anything funny ever.

It falls a little short of Congressman Stillson's employment of a child but here's to hoping it has a similar effect.

I'm a bit appalled by the Latinos who must be consciously taking part in the misleading nature of that photo surely.
I know there are words for similar relationships to the prevailing power in other situations but that seems to exemplify it.
Is it part of the duty of whatever role that is to do things like that?
I'm just thinking this is a couple of officials working for child care or something since the child's parents are dead. Would think that any immediate relative would be appalled by the idea of instrumentalising a child like that.

the grandfather was asked...?

Yes, the child's relatives, uncle and grandfather anyway, seem to have approved of the photo and Trump's visit.

xpost The fact that this poor child has relatives as awful as the president doesn't obviate Trump's disgusting behavior. I mean, you do realize that unless he'd gone and physically abducted the kid for the sake of a photo op that there were other parties involved in making that happen.

The uncle brought the baby back to the hospital because Trump demanded it for his photo op. He has been stealing from children’s charities for decades; his presidency was always going to reach this place.

I hear the baby told Trump that he was a better President than Obama and that Socialism makes him cry

The baby called him sir, too.

I'm pretty disappointed in everyone who got into these photos and smiled (there are pictures of the Daytona hospital staff all grinning as well). Fuck those people.

chuds gonna chud

if it helps it seems like most victims didn't want to meet him. all these photos seem to be set up for the sake of the photo op itself. the media wasn't let in.

https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/hospitalized-victims-of-el-paso-mass-shooting-refused-to-meet-with-president-trump

Somebody enabled Trump to use a potentially already traumatised child in what appears to be a publicity photograph to help dispel the idea that he was a major cause of the situation. I would have thought the natural response to the suggestion would be a polite (or not so polite) refusal, would have thought that was well within the family's rights.
& i would think the only reason the baby wouldn't be traumatised was that it was too young to know what was going on around it.

Returning the baby to hospital involves some kind of agency on the relatives' part surely.
So can't understand the idea of going along with that, other than acquiescence to power which seems an awful idea.

Americans are trained to eat shit at their jobs every day, but this is arguably the most extreme example.

You guys say Mr. President ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE OFFICE

the Office is among the most consistently disgusting in the history of democracy

More like demoCRUDcy

It's a bunch of crud

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Thursday that his House panel is conducting an impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

Nadler added that the committee will decide by the year's end whether to refer articles of impeachment to the House floor.

“This is formal impeachment proceedings,” Nadler said in an interview with CNN's Erin Burnett. “We are investigating all the evidence, we're gathering the evidence. And we will at the conclusion of this — hopefully by the end of the year — vote to vote articles of impeachment to the House floor. Or we won’t. That’s a decision that we’ll have to make. But that’s exactly the process we’re in right now.”

mmmm, decisive

I wonder if the result is going to be a stern warning, a resolution of censure, or -gasp- something going on his PERMANENT RECORD

I mean there may be a result but let's not be too hasty because there could also not be a result. Which isn't to say that there definitely WON'T be a result.

Deep state at it again, amirite?

honestly let's focus less on the fact that they were able to find one Republican to wave an orphan under Trump's grinning mug and more on the fact that the hospitalized shooting victims banded together and with one clarion voice told Trump he could fuck off back to the golf course

I'm going to say this once and then let it go because some of the assumptions here are tiresome/stupid, but I would think it's obvious that from a practical and political power perspective, it's best for the Democrats if impeachment charges/votes are brought up *during the 2020* campaign, ie in the summer/fall. That way they build as deliberate and airtight case as possible (hopefully with court rulings on their side), they build consensus in the party, and hopefully they build support in the court of public opinion, which is not currently on the side of impeachment. If articles of impeachment were introduced and voted on now, even if they passed the House the articles would die in the Senate, and then Trump would appear invulnerable moving into the 2020 election - it would be a huge boost to his re-election campaign, "see, they tried to get me with their nonsense, and I BEAT THEM". BUT, if hearings are held and articles are introduced in the summer/fall, Pelosi can slow walk it so that it becomes a central campaign issue, with Dems wielding it as a weapon to gin up turnout.

That's how it currently looks to me, anyway.

lol so what's the vision, holding the election, trump losing, then the senate having enough sack to actually impeach when trump is lame-ducking it

I'm not sure it would really be much of a boost - I would imagine everyone in the country who's even the least bit politically informed knows that right now the Republican party exists solely to run cover for Trump

but I do agree that impeachment is destined to fail no matter what so they might as well deploy it strategically

(xp) The vision is Trump losing. It's a good vision.

Rush Lumbago began his radio show warning that "there are people in the West Wing" pushing Orange Grifter to "compromise" with the Dems on gun control... always a mistake, says Rushie, bcz "they want to wipe us out."

he also sez "We know not to pay attention to what Trump tells the media... so don't panic."

checks out

I would imagine everyone in the country who's even the least bit politically informed knows that right now the Republican party exists solely to run cover for Trump

not so sure about that. very few people are informed, first of all. i think to the casual observer, the thought is "if he was actually doing crimes, he would have been impeached by now", and if their brain stem has managed to pick up signs of the name "mueller", maybe add "and mueller would have recommended impeachment"

take the most idiotic thought possible and multiply it by 3, and that is what the casual observer thinks