Impeach Trump Y/N

gold

https://queenseagle.com/all/2019/12/19/queens-man-impeached

I haven’t been keeping up with the day to day stuff much, because I value my sanity, but was there really no legal mechanism available to compel the white house to release documents and make available witnesses that had been subpoenaed? I’m confused about that

― k3vin k., Wednesday, December 18, 2019 10:32 PM (three days ago) bookmarkflaglink

this is the thing. there is, but it's convoluted. House dems don't want to risk public attention being diverted from impeachment while the subpoenas are sussed in in the courts. meanwhile, this stalling tactic has WORKED AMAZINGLY for the gop, in that it has allowed them to push the narrative that the impeachment effort has been 'along partisan lines,' as if their obstructive non-involvement somehow constitutes being left out of the conversation. That they're not being called out more loudly on this by mainstream news outlets is fucking sad and dumb.

so, what's she doin again?

More Senate Democrats call on Pelosi to send over the articles of impeachment against Trump, saying the party has little to gain from further delay. https://t.co/WwmByZfW3f

— Capital Journal (@WSJPolitics) January 8, 2020

if you ask me, the main reason for withholding the Articles of Impeachment from the Senate was to allow time for the public to absorb the idea that McConnell was abusing his power as Senate Majority Leader by rigging the rules under which the trial would take place and that the Democrats objected to this abuse. the slender hope was that public displeasure might lead McConnell to soften his position, but the more realistic hope was that it would alienate a few more 'moderate' voters from supporting the Republican party.

courageous mitt romney takes a stand, grabs a crisp ice water, then promptly sits back down:

Mr. Romney is one of a handful of Republicans who have said they would be open to a vote on whether to call witnesses, something the Democrats have been demanding. In his statement, Mr. Romney said he would not support efforts to hold a vote on whether to call witnesses until after opening arguments are complete, which, under the majority leader Senator Mitch McConnell’s plan could be next week.

On Monday, Mr. Romney said he supported Mr. McConnell’s proposed rules.

also, it's kind of a sad lol that on the morning of the president's impeachment trial, there's pretty much nothing to say because the results have all been foreseen for months

We're all going to die?

i wd rather be skinned alive than listen to the imminent McConnell speech

bad news. shockingly, there aren't enough GOP 'moderates' to force testimony from bolton, giuliani, mulvaney, etc

McConnell counts enough votes to defeat any Democratic changes to the trial rules.

Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said in a news conference that he would demand that the Senate subpoena both witnesses and documents for the trial — including any records of President Trump’s call with the leader of Ukraine, and any records relating to the White House decision to withhold military aid from Ukraine.

But his Republican counterpart, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, has said he counted 53 votes in favor of his rules, suggesting that any Democratic plan to change them would probably fail.

man, no one is ever going to find out if this Trump guy did crimes

They should impeach him.

Announcing his vote count ahead of time is McConnell's attempt to save his less enthusiastic senators from having to cast that vote or have it pinned to their shirt come November. In terms of elective politics, voting on a rules change is rarely a live issue with the public, but the Democrats are playing a weak hand and the issue of witnesses is simple enough to encapsulate in a sound bite that it is the one tactic that might register in their favor among low-info voters.

what do you mean it's a weak hand

Trump very clearly committed crimes. The GOP is very clearly trying to cover this up by any means necessary.

one thing democrats utterly failed to do: put the focus on the handful of republican senators who are facing tough re-elections in november. the last 3 weeks should have been all about putting them in the spotlight - gardner, mcsally, tillis, fucking susan collins, ernst, etc. the headlines after the vote, if as expected it leads to no new evidence can be admitted despite how obviously wrong that is, should be about those specific senators failing the country. everyone who lives in those states should remember what they did.

xp

it's a weak hand in that democrats don't have the votes. they need at least a few republican senators - i don't know, say, gardner, mcsally, tillis, fucking susan collins, ernst, etc - to get past 50 votes for admitting obviously relevant new evidence and subpoenaing people who could obviously provide more firsthand information.

and since those handful of republican senators are just as scummy as the rest of the party, they deserve to be held especially accountable for what they did (or didn't do, in this case)

you're just jealous that scum rises to the top

dammn yooooou pierre delectoooooo!

This is the way the 'States end
Not with a yam but a turtle

turtles are people too, my friend. Yertle the Turtle, for example, was very unfairly maligned, and would have had a wonderful kingdom if that short-sighted and ungrateful Mack hadn't undermined him.

pierre, i don't remember who you are, but i humbly request that everything you say be typed with an outrageous french accent

Just had a flashback to when everyone (well, not everyone) was saying that Trump would be a mere stress test and that democracy would undoubtedly come out on top thanks to the Founding Fathers' unmatched foresight.

I don't know, maybe it is still early but I think a strong case can be made that the system *has* worked, or at least has so far. Things could have been so much worse. After asshole was elected, I seriously brainstormed all options, including moving to another country, to escape his policies. Now, are things great? No, but I'm not sure the country and its laws are significantly worse than they've ever been, and they are certainly much better than they've been at their worst. I think everything just seems so dramatic because Trump himself is a horrible person, an embarrassment, a tragedy. But if he were replaced by a "normal" Republican, I'm not sure how much anything would be different. McConnell's assholery, for example, stretches back way before Trump's election, and him stealing that Supreme Court seat remains more audacious and destructive than anything Trump has done or been able to do, imo. I think just about everything else Trump has done is reversible, save all the federal judges, and they would have been pushed through by any GOP president.

In some ways I think a Trump second term would or at least could be a relief. He'd be a lame duck, which would (at least in theory) make him even *less* effective than he's been, with a clear end in sight. As always the big exception is the Supreme Court, but we've already seen what a disaster that can be even with Obama as president.

Trump has appointed something like 200 judges so far. It's not just the supreme court.

For this and countless other reasons four more years would be a catastrophe.

I'm not sure the country and its laws are significantly worse than they've ever been

https://newrepublic.com/article/155363/trump-meatpacking-processing-plant-rules-upton-sinclair-jungle

In some ways I think a Trump second term would or at least could be a relief.

the voice of privilege

What I'm saying is that any GOP president would do the same, and I'd love to hear why you'd think otherwise.

Trump's election itself proved how fundamentally fucked up and fucked this country is, and whether or not he is removed won't change that.

Like, I get it, I want him gone as much as anyone. And I totally concede my privilege. In other ways, though, I am not privileged, but I feel on that front that Trump has only amplified what has always been here.

Don't feel like I'm catastrophizing to posit that another four years of Trump would decisively shift America from dysfunctional to unworkable. I guess it remains to be seen whether the electorate continues to lose their taste for him or whether they're eventually brought around by his endless VINDICATION!!! tweetstorm when impeachment ultimately goes nowhere. I don't know that I'd be comfortable putting money on the notion of enough of us having learned a valuable enough lesson from the last four years.

xp I agree w/yr second sentence there, he is the symptom not the cause

any GOP president would do the same

this is not what I would define as "a relief"

Tbf he can be both a symptom and a cause.

true

Re: things like judges, those seats were not filled *under Obama* just as the SC seat was stolen *under Obama.* Trump is illustrative of disfunction, but he's not the root of the rot, he's the end result. If/when Trump loses the election, he's not going anywhere, and his supporters are not going anywhere. He will keep having rallies (autocorrect tried to change that to rabies), he will keep threatening, on a daily basis, to *run again.* And he possibly would, and would possibly *win* again.

A relief in that we now knew we were in Hell and no longer had to worry about whether we were going there.

That's about the extent of the 'relief'. Then your head goes back into the cesspool.

I guess we'll find out, one way or another. Even beloved presidents get dismissively tagged and treated as lame ducks on day one of their second term. And people *hate* Trump.

josh this line of argument is boneheaded and i'm not sure why you're making it. "trump is the symptom not the disease" is an argument leftists have been making since he got elected, and you seem to have contorted it into "well even if he loses we're fucked forever so he might as well win"

Reagan didn't start institutionalizing his evil until he had Ed Fucking Meese as AG suggesting Federalist Society morons for lifetime appointments for fuck's sake.

I’m not putting money of RBG living another four years so a second trump term would be a disaster in that regard.

on pain of antiquity

With the Senate sergeant-at-arms uttering the proclamation “All persons are commanded to keep silence, on pain of imprisonment,” the 100 senators are now held to a vow of silence and confined to their chairs for the duration of the day’s proceedings.

with duct tape

If Trump is defeated there will at least be the sense that governing as he did will lead to defeat. If he is re-elected his presidency will be the model of success that will be followed by the GOP until long after we're all dead.

I don't want him to win, and him gone would be a good thing. But I think him losing would be a shortsighted victory. As much as Obama winning, twice, turned out to be a shortsighted victory as well. All I can do is vote, convince others to vote, protest, and convince others to protest.

you are making literally no sense

It would also depend on Who he beats. If Bernie were the nominee and lost to Trump then there will never be another leftist nominated.

But I think him losing would be a shortsighted victory. As much as Obama winning, twice, turned out to be a shortsighted victory as well.

There is no symmetry to be had here.

so what's going on in the hearing ? i haven't been able to follow it today. Mitch is making concessions ?

xpost The symmetry as I see it is that Obama winning twice perhaps convinced people to let their guard down, enabling Trump to win. I'd worry (I worry a lot) that Trump losing could do the same. I want more than anything the GOP getting their ass handed to them in dramatic fashion, convincingly, for years to come, but apparently that's not going to be in the cards for at least several local and national elections.

xp

at the very last minute, the rules that mcconnell is putting up for a vote had some major revisions:

each side would get 3 days to present their argument, instead of 2.
the house evidence would be admitted without a vote, instead of requiring a vote.

apparently susan fucking collins played a role in getting him to relent on these

If Trump is defeated there will at least be the sense that governing as he did will lead to defeat. If he is re-elected his presidency will be the model of success that will be followed by the GOP until long after we're all dead.

― Muswell Hillbilly Elegy (President Keyes), Tuesday, January 21, 2020 2:46 PM (twelve minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

if for no other reason, this^

one of the many things i don't like about trump is that he never really does anything unexpected. it's just variations on narcissistic cruelty or pure dumbassery.

It would leaven my faith in the potential of humanity if, just once, he showed up unannounced at a tribute to Toni Morrison, spoke briefly and eloquently about how Sula taught him the true meaning of friendship and then left quietly.

a shortsighted victory

perhaps you meant short-lived? there was nothing shortsighted about it that I can see.