US Politics Thread |OT| SAD TRUMP

[agrajag]

https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1137763534442500096

AOC bless

[agrajag]

https://twitter.com/aseitzwald/status/1137782957811359744

[Nintex]

https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1137763534442500096

AOC bless

listen to your dutch masters.

But Rutger. Trump is the craziest motherfucker around. So if change starts with crazy, my man you are fucked. 

[ToxicAdam]

 

The Mueller Report is not only so clear and definitive on crimes and obstruction committed by Trump, but does ALL of the legal and case work for congress already, with every argument for and against each charge with details information on precedents and case law for every one of them, every possible legal challenge that could come up, every outcome and possibility already laid out for them. Any Democrat (and really, any elected official of any party) that doesn't push for impeachment should 100% be voted out of office the next time they're seat is on the line, and in general the Democrat party is completely useless, pathetic, and enabling if they don't do this.

The US government is beyond repair if they let this shit slide for political reasons on either side. Genuinely fucking bonkers.

From a strategy standpoint it makes sense.

If you believe that Trump is a weak candidate in 2020, you don't want him going anywhere and you don't want to give his supporters any fire going into the election. These people (Dem leaders) remember what happened when Clinton was impeached, he became more popular than ever.

So, what is there to gain besides it being a political footnote?


Impeachment only makes sense if you believe that Trump is sure to win in 2020.

[shosta]

stopping the insane trade war with china

[agrajag]

https://twitter.com/rcbregman/status/1137763534442500096

AOC bless

listen to your dutch masters.

But Rutger. Trump is the craziest motherfucker around. So if change starts with crazy, my man you are fucked. 

Shut up you dumb bih, you're one of the morons with an irrational hatred for AOC, your Dutch lord just cucked you.

[agrajag]

The Mueller Report is not only so clear and definitive on crimes and obstruction committed by Trump, but does ALL of the legal and case work for congress already, with every argument for and against each charge with details information on precedents and case law for every one of them, every possible legal challenge that could come up, every outcome and possibility already laid out for them. Any Democrat (and really, any elected official of any party) that doesn't push for impeachment should 100% be voted out of office the next time they're seat is on the line, and in general the Democrat party is completely useless, pathetic, and enabling if they don't do this.

The US government is beyond repair if they let this shit slide for political reasons on either side. Genuinely fucking bonkers.

From a strategy standpoint it makes sense.

If you believe that Trump is a weak candidate in 2020, you don't want him going anywhere and you don't want to give his supporters any fire going into the election. These people (Dem leaders) remember what happened when Clinton was impeached, he became more popular than ever.

So, what is there to gain besides it being a political footnote?


Impeachment only makes sense if you believe that Trump is sure to win in 2020.

further permanent weakening of Congressional oversight.

[Nintex]

There are many things that we miss out on if Trump is impeached.

However, the chances of accidently stumbling into nuclear war are significantly reduced even if Mike Pence takes over.

[shosta]

further permanent weakening of Congressional oversight.

[story about Trump lifting threat of tariffs]
So is just political theater from both Obrador and Trump? 

Quoting these two together because they're related. I had forgotten at the time boredfrom posted because I was still seeing red from having my like ripped from my hands, but just that weekend, the White House had a closed door meeting with Republican senators to brief them on the proposed tariffs on Mexico and dissent ripped through the ranks. There was a major threat of a mutiny on the Senate floor. Trump, as usual, had not even thought to workshop a strategy that had actual support in congress, and so the administration dropped the whole within days with that weak ass excuse that they had made "significant progress" #tiredofwinning. The point is that the Senate did shut him down, and, yes it takes political will, but the oversight is still there.

Impeachment is inseparable from political expression. It is a tool for exercising power. If Democrats impeach Trump, they rally their base but they lose having the worst opposition president ever who is a total failure. 2018's wave was a vote against Trump and there's another one coming in 2020. Republicans, in turn, get to rid themselves of an extremely toxic presidency without most of them getting their hands dirty and "betraying the party", and go into 2020 with a decent guy who has none of Trump's idiosyncratic issues. Look how well Ford did in 1976, especially relative to the 1974 Watergate midterms. Now consider that the Democrats are still internally divided over what their election platform is. This is a classic setup for "the opposition has no message and fails to win the election".

Impeachment is now in the realm of possibility and usable if they need it, but they choose not to use it. That's clearly different from oversight having been "lost".

tldr stop being an austy over "justice"

[shosta]

Then you'll get four more years to stroke your hate boner and impeach him anyway, so I don't see what the rush is

[team filler]

tulsi on establishment politicians playing politics with impeachment "Fuck that shit" 

https://youtu.be/ttQlm0O5ql0?t=1651

stro was in new york asking the tough questions 

[benjipwns]

Why even pretend we have a real government if you're just going to let the president repeatedly break the law

That's how you know it's a real government.

[ToxicAdam]

Stro, in a vacuum you're right of course. But you have to remember that the American public hates this government and has for 20+ years now. Public trust is nearly non-existent.

So, crimes like obstruction don't really move the needle for the average American because they already believe the average Congressperson is capable/guilty of far worse.

Impeachment proceedings are a circus. The media turns it into Congress v President and the people pick a side. Congress will always lose because people have hated them my entire life. Public sentiment matters too, because the people voting on this will have an election they have to run for soon. That's why so many Republicans crumbled during the Clinton impeachment.

 https://www.people-press.org/2019/04/11/public-trust-in-government-1958-2019/

[agrajag]

You take a completely debatable assumption that impeaching gives Republicans a political win as some self-evident fact.  Meanwhile Nancy and co. are letting Trump walk all over her, but internet experts like you think she's playing 4 dimensional chess because she did a funny clap that one time. You're Kirblar.

[agrajag]

Furthermore, impeachment need not be premised on obstruction. They can use the sum total of his transgressions to demonstrate that he is not fit for office. Everything needs to be out in the open, it needs to be dragged out, and if you think Trump wants that you are on crack.

https://twitter.com/RepMGS/status/1138112702931509248

[shosta]

I find it gross and pathetic.

Likewise, I find it juvenile and kind of pitiful that some people are intransigent in their religious pursuit of indictment.

SAD! even that it's even up for discussion to just let shit slide so you can maybe win an election.

"Let shit slide" is the indicative phrase, here. This is a blood feud. The goal here seems to be to make sure that officials suffer consequences for misdeeds in office. That is concomitant with the idealist's theory of governance but there's no absolutely no reference to the real, practical issues here in the protracted political war between Republicans and Democrats.

It shouldn't even be a partisan issue.

It's the head of state. Every action or inaction will have significant consequences. Let's not be naive.

Trump brazenly and repeatedly obstructed justice and every possible reason his lawyers could challenge any of the offensives have already been established by precedent and constitutional law that it wouldn't defend him. Mueller and his team have already done all the work for them.

He did, but
1) he didn't obstruct justice covering up a bigger, more substantial crime. There wasn't enough evidence of criminal conspiracy. You may think this is just some kind of semantic distinction because we live in a nation of laws and obstruction of justice is a crime just like any other but there is a significant, qualitative difference in the nature of abuses between (1) illegally wiretapping your political opponents, (2) flouting the explicit will of congress by covertly funneling arms to an embargoed state and then laundering that dirty money to fund a terrorist group in latin america, and (3) firing the FBI director because you have the maturity of a toddler and everything related to a specific investigation makes you feel insecure about your dumb fluke of an election win.

2) pursuing those charges puts Democrats at a serious electoral disadvantage.

He is the democratically elected head of state and hypothetically represents the popular will. Fuck with that office at your own risk. And if you do, you better be able to convince most people that he absolutely had to be removed.

Nerds are just gonna let it all slide because "well maybe we'll win this election if we don't do it" or "We're both Republicans, lol gonna own the libs". Why even pretend we have a real government if you're just going to let the president repeatedly break the law, done as often in private in via illegal channels as it was openly in public. He's ADMITTED to obstruction in public multiple times for fuck's sake

Because impeachment is a tool, not an end by itself, unless you're the kind of person who hate watches the news. The only difference between Trump being indicted (and then pardoned) and Trump losing the election is that in the former case you get to vindicated by the history books and in the latter, the bad man got away with it. On the other hand, the tangible differences between losing 2020 and winning 2020 are really quite significant. It's your choice which one you want to prioritize.

[ToxicAdam]

>impeaching gives Republicans a political win as some self-evident fact.


Even if it's only a 20-40 percent chance, why leave yourself open to needless risk?

Why risk it if you are going to 1) win the election in 2020 or 2) win more seats in congress to strengthen your impeachment push in a possible second term 3) potentially open up the Republican field in 2020 to a better candidate?

Assuming this process takes 5-7 months, you get rid of Trump for less than a year but his administration will still carry on his wishes. They don't go away also.

(Democrats faced a similar dilemma in 2006 when they won Congress and many members were pushing to impeach Bush. It was largely a waste and Pelosi recognized it as such.)

This isn't 4d chess, this is a simple risk/reward scenario and I don't think it's a particularly close choice.

[shosta]

You take a completely debatable assumption that impeaching gives Republicans a political win as some self-evident fact.  Meanwhile Nancy and co. are letting Trump walk all over her, but internet experts like you think she's playing 4 dimensional chess because she did a funny clap that one time.

You really want to argue that President Pence has a worse chance than President Trump at winning 2020? Besides, I do have historical evidence on my side. Compare the 1974 Watergate midterms to the 1976 presidential election.
 

You're Kirblar.

I'm not the gay, former mod and partisan apologist Kirblar, I'm the bisexual, former mod and partisan apologist Kristoffer. Comparing the two is totally ridiculous.

[agrajag]

that's cute that you think it's a given that Dems are winning in 2020. Also cute that you think there are more attractive candidates in the republican field for the Trump base. Remember the 2016 R primary? Pence? 

[agrajag]

Dude no one gives a puck about Pence. He's nobody without Trump.

[shosta]

I'm saying there's a good chance and Trump is a huge part of that.

[agrajag]

Also, I don't think most people calling for impeachment are naive enough to think that it will lead to removal, so let's just drop that disingenuous aspect of the debate altogether. I am saying that it's 1) the constitutional duty of congress to provide oversight 2) it's a symbolic gesture that let's constituents know that at least one party is doing its job, part of which is to provide checks and balances to the executive branch 3) it lets the D base know that their reps haven't given up and rolled over 4) it is bad PR for Trump. Any time he's been involved in a long, drawn out scandal his numbers have gone down. It's just that he has an insane, rabid base that will stick by their man no matter what, but those aren't the people you're trying to sway.

[ToxicAdam]

Nothing is a sure thing, but the odds of a Democrat winning in 2020 are far greater than the odds of impeaching Trump (or the process of it ruining his 2020 campaign).

My only hedge would be if Biden wins, then I think Trump probably has a better chance to win again.

If removal is unlikely then why not wait until 2021 and do it? There is no expiration on his obstruction.

[agrajag]

If Biden wins the nomination, Dems are screwed. But I'll go even further, I might not even care that much if Trump wins if it's against biden. I will become the cynical 2016 Jimmy Dore voter.

[shosta]

advocating for the democratic equivalent of repealing obamacare 57 times is not going to endear me to your argument

[shosta]

Good thing the report makes clear, repeatedly, that there doesn't need to be an underlying crime to be charged with and found guilty of obstruction.

I did, in fact, read the report the day it came out and finished it the following day. My point is that obstructing an investigation that doesn't reveal a crime is totally different from obstructing one that does, and that matters to many people.

If Biden wins the nomination, Dems are screwed. But I'll go even further, I might not even care that much if Trump wins if it's against biden. I will become the cynical 2016 Jimmy Dore voter.

I'd love for you to sit down with some of my friends in California and Nevada who are undocumented immigrants or family members of undocumented immigrants and explain your #protestvote to them, should that be the case.

Biden, for me, is a half-good, half-bad candidate.

good: resolutely liberal. stands up for lgbt, immigrants. was deciding factor in keeping obummer out of syria.
bad: cautious about social programs. millennials hate him.
practical: he can swing back wypipo in the midwest who ultimately just want to have their feelings protected

[Nola]

I did, in fact, read the report the day it came out and finished it the following day. My point is that obstructing an investigation that doesn't reveal a crime is totally different from obstructing one that does, and that matters to many people.

Ok William Barr.

[agrajag]

I would still vote for Biden, or Harris, or Gillibrant or whoever the blue nominee is. But excuse the fuck out of me if I feel a certain way about it. So I don't have to explain shit to your immigrant friends. Also, have you forgot about the mass deportations under the Obama admin, which Biden was a part of. You honestly think he's on the left of Obama on this issue?

[agrajag]

Obstruct the investigation making it impossible to definitively prove there is an underlying crime. Claim obstruction charge is bunk if there is no underlying crime.

 

[agrajag]

on a lighter note

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1137112035307773952

[shosta]

And if he had read or listened to the Mueller Report, he would know that isn't the case at all. It literally does not matter if there is an underlying crime. There is no difference in obstruction with or without an underlying crime being obstructed.

I didn't say there was a difference between the prosecutability, I said there would be a difference in trying to get people on your side over it, as well as congressmen in the other party.

I would still vote for Biden, or Harris, or Gillibrant or whoever the blue nominee is. But excuse the fuck out of me if I feel a certain way about it. So I don't have to explain shit to your immigrant friends. Also, have you forgot about the mass deportations under the Obama admin, which Biden was a part of. You honestly think he's on the left of Obama on this issue?

This is some grotesque and ignorant revisionism over what Obama did for the immigrant community and I'm just going to assume you fell for the right wing smears. First of all, saying "mass deportations under Obama" implies that his administration presided over an unusually large number of deportations compared to previous administrations and that's just not true. You can find a detailed explanation of the numbers here but, in one picture, here is Obama's legacy:



Combine that with DACA and trying to get a pathway to citizenship through congress as well as legally recognizing seasonal work. In short, he got authorities to leave new Americans the fuck alone and focused on keeping enforcement up at the border proper or only deporting people with criminal charges.

Biden was in that white house and given his recent unflinching support both for the pathway to citizenship and his vocal condemnation of the new nativism, I'm gonna say, yeah, Biden's as left as Obama on immigration. QED.

[agrajag]

QED nothing, you made a strawman that I was protest voting, you lyin' prick.

[shosta]

How could I assume anything less? You said you wouldn't really care if Trump won over Biden and that you'd become a Jimmy Dore voter. Jimmy Dore's entire thing is screeching at establishment Democrats and threatening to not vote for people because the mainstream left and right are the same. I'm not going to apologize for that inference.

[shosta]

glen is not using my account right now

[agrajag]

 

[Nola]

I did, in fact, read the report the day it came out and finished it the following day. My point is that obstructing an investigation that doesn't reveal a crime is totally different from obstructing one that does, and that matters to many people.

Ok William Barr.

And if he had read or listened to the Mueller Report, he would know that isn't the case at all. It literally does not matter if there is an underlying crime. There is no difference in obstruction with or without an underlying crime being obstructed.

Yeah, the point of obstruction is to.....obstruct. If you don't punish it on its own merits, you pervert the entire system.

But I guess his argument has as much to do with public perception, and to an extent, that's probably somewhat true. Having the full Nixon Tapes was what broke the dam, not all the obstruction leading up to it(though a point worth mentioning is that after a brief spike in 73, Nixon's approval continually eroded as the informal and formal impeachment inquiries ratcheted up).

I think what I take issue with is the whatabouting and this sticky assumption that a formal impeachment inquiry(like under Nixon) and winning 2020 are in critical tension with one another.

[Great Rumbler]

Shosta and agra having the same person as their avatar makes things confusing, especially when they start arguing with each other.

[agrajag]

heh Nixon's very refusal of subpoena to release the tapes was an article in impeachment hearings.

[agrajag]

Shosta and agra having the same person as their avatar makes things confusing, especially when they start arguing with each other.

I feel that our expressions tell a very different story.

[shosta]

Trump is not only the biggest liability for the Republicans, he's the lynchpin of the Democratic strategy. Anyone who disagrees with this is a traitor to the party. If it were up to me, they'd be excomunicado.

fedeli alla linea

[james]

Democrats: A sophisticated international hacking ring + voter disenfranchisement gave the election to Trump

Democrats: The Trump administration is doing everything they can to let it happen again so they steal another victory

Also Democrats = Let's wait until the elections to see if the voters want impeachment or nah

[agrajag]

In other news, NYT is ending political cartoons because Bibi got upset

[james]

Democrats: A sophisticated international hacking ring + voter disenfranchisement gave the election to Trump

Democrats: The Trump administration is doing everything they can to let it happen again so they steal another victory

Also Democrats = Let's wait until the elections to see if the voters want impeachment or nah

This is not what they're arguing, but please proceed, governor.

Which part?

[team filler]

Seriously, FUCK OFF with that comic!

In other news, NYT is ending political cartoons because Bibi got upset

[Nintex]

The Democrats simply #trusttheplan

Which is fool proof. I mean, how can Biden lose an election to Trump. That is frankly impossible.
After all, the blue firewall, changing demographics and our poll which show a 99% win chance for Biden will keep any Republican out of the White House for decades or better yet, centuries to come.

[james]

The Democrats simply #trusttheplan

Which is fool proof. I mean, how can Biden lose an election to Trump. That is frankly impossible.
After all, the blue firewall, changing demographics and our poll which show a 99% win chance for Biden will keep any Republican out of the White House for decades or better yet, centuries to come.

Dont forget that Pennsylvania is the W H I T E  W H A L E

[Nintex]

The Democrats simply #trusttheplan

Which is fool proof. I mean, how can Biden lose an election to Trump. That is frankly impossible.
After all, the blue firewall, changing demographics and our poll which show a 99% win chance for Biden will keep any Republican out of the White House for decades or better yet, centuries to come.

Dont forget that Pennsylvania is the W H I T E  W H A L E

I hear Texas is turning blue.

[agrajag]

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1138062266702733312

[team filler]

https://twitter.com/AdamWeinstein/status/1138207252869984256

https://twitter.com/AdamWeinstein/status/1138223925568135168

 

[nudemacusers]

I had no idea he was gay.

Edit holy shit that uniform is a mess. 

[VomKriege]

An officer and a gentleman.

[team filler]

 

[agrajag]

https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1138387461078474753

[Great Rumbler]

Edit holy shit that uniform is a mess. 

Even his stance and facial expression scream "I'm a 17-year-old wearing my dad's suit to prom."

[james]

DOW over 26,000, the mad man has done it again

[Great Rumbler]

[Great Rumbler]

 

[Skullfuckers Anonymous]

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1138246601309376512

Biden will finally be able to get rid of social security!

[Rufus]

There's your Reagan Republican.

[Trent Dole]

https://twitter.com/dreamoforgonon/status/1138504369429778434