Politics: The Trump Impeachment Thread

[Go Bama]

The public might respond favorably if Joe gets fed up with this crap going after his son and cuts loose one time. The sacrificial lamb might morph into an indignant parent defending his only living child. “Have you no decency?”

Hunter is coming off as a greasy character. He's withheld child support since November 2018 for a child he denied was his until a DNA test proved him wrong, and has denied handing over his financial records to the court. He has yet to produce those financial records.

Of course this has nothing to do with Trump's impeachment but it does place doubt in the minds of voters about his character. The character assassination of his father has been accomplished through association. "If Hunter won't even pay child support, won't claim his child, and he wasn't qualified for the million dollar a year job at Barisma, well you know ... the apple doesn't fall far from the tree." Or something like that.

I hope you are right and I am wrong.

 

[Crimson1967]

I wouldn’t impeach a president for saying he is taking a year off, but I would invoke the 25th amendment.

I don’t have a problem with witnesses. If the measure passes, Republicans can call whatever witnesses they want to as well. So they can prove the corruption they claim Biden is involved in.

Alexander, Collins, and Romney seem possible. Murkowski? She won re-election on a write in after she got primaried by a Tea Party guy in 2010, so she probably isn’t afraid of what might happen.

Anyone else? Would all 47 Democrats be on board?

 

[92tide]

the whole biden/ukraine/corruption nonsense is a completely debunked russian conspiracy theory from a few years back that is being revived as a shiny object to keep folks distracted.

here is a good overview. adam silverman at balloon-juice has been blogging about it for quite a while. he has detailed posts on all of this junk going back a few years.

https://www.balloon-juice.com/2020/...russias-agitprop-to-the-united-states-senate/

The Black PSYOP Part VII: Pam Bondi Brings Russia’s Agitprop to the United States Senate

In every one of the Black PSYOP posts I’ve done, I’ve referenced Paula Chertok’s reporting that the earliest mention of Vice President Biden having a potential ethical and/or legal problem was Russian agitprop first reported in Russian state backed media RIA Novosti. I have also referenced in several of these earlier posts that Secretary Kerry’s step-son was also referenced.* As I’ve explained in these previous posts this was done to begin to dirty up Vice President Biden and Secretary Kerry who were both reportedly considering running for president in 2016.

 

[92tide]

not the whole gop, of course.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1221793327454019584

 

[92tide]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1221930050846711809

 

[CrimsonNagus]

It will be very interesting to see if the dominoes start to fall on roll call. Lamar Alexander will be the first name called and if he votes for witnesses it’s highly likely that the D’s will have the 51 votes they need. We’re pretty sure Mitt Romney will vote for witnesses and Collins of Maine isn’t far down the roll call from Alexander so after her we may see the first evidence of R’s jumping ship by voting for witnesses. If Bolton gets called they may also decide to call Mulvaney.

Nice theory. I don' think a single GOP will jump ship, the vote will go straight down party lines.


So what if Biden is corrupt (not saying he is). Biden isn't president and doesn't hold any office right now. He is not on trial for impeachment. If he's so corrupt then bring him up on charges and prosecute him. Biden's level of corruptness (or lack thereof) doesn't let Trump off the hook for his own corruptness. This is such a stupid argument from the GOP. It's basically every kids argument to their parents "but other kids do it and don't get in trouble". The GOP is basically using a toddler's defense and they are crying and whining like toddlers as well. It's time they be sent to the corner while the adults fix this mess.

 

[chanson78]

Nice theory. I don' think a single GOP will jump ship, the vote will go straight down party lines.


So what if Biden is corrupt (not saying he is). Biden isn't president and doesn't hold any office right now. He is not on trial for impeachment. If he's so corrupt then bring him up on charges and prosecute him. Biden's level of corruptness (or lack thereof) doesn't let Trump off the hook for his own corruptness. This is such a stupid argument from the GOP. It's basically every kids argument to their parents "but other kids do it and don't get in trouble". The GOP is basically using a toddler's defense and they are crying and whining like toddlers as well. It's time they be sent to the corner while the adults fix this mess.

There you go using logic again.

 

[Go Bama]

The R’s argument is that the money was being withheld because of corrupt government and corruption at Barisma, thus the Hunter Biden connection. It’s a flimsy argument that has been repeatedly debunked, but as far as I can tell that’s how they are making Joe Biden relevant.

 

[chanson78]

The R’s argument is that the money was being withheld because of corrupt government and corruption at Barisma, thus the Hunter Biden connection. It’s a flimsy argument that has been repeatedly debunked, but as far as I can tell that’s how they are making Joe Biden relevant.

I know you likely know all this, but given that we have people posting a 7 point defense which is so wildly out of touch with reality, I thought reiteration of the basic facts might make some sense.

The Democrats aren't hammering on the fact that irrespective of what Trump believes, there is a Congressional process for allowing the president to hold up funding. Trump did not use that. He used political appointments to stop the funding outside of the normal channels.

The 1974 Impoundment Control Act

Why The Trump Decision To Delay Aid To Ukraine Is Under Scrutiny

Tim Rieser, who has decades of experience with foreign aid, had a front row seat to the process that unfolded this summer. He is a staff director of the Senate subcommittee that handles funding for State Department programs. He also serves as senior foreign policy adviser to Democratic Sen. Pat Leahy of Vermont.

Rieser usually works behind the scenes advising lawmakers. His Republican counterparts on the House and Senate committees declined to speak with NPR.

The 1974 Impoundment Control Act says a U.S. president can't unilaterally withhold funds designated for spending by Congress.

"They can't just simply decide even though Congress appropriated money for X, we're going to spend it for Y," he explains.

The way the process typically works, Rieser says, the White House can ask for a delay or to halt funding altogether — but it has to tell Congress.

"We recognize that things do change. Elections happen, governments are overthrown. Policies fail, and it makes sense to revisit them," Rieser says.

In July, the White House delayed Ukraine's aid package.

 

[92tide]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1222144339775819783

 

[jthomas666]

The R’s argument is that the money was being withheld because of corrupt government and corruption at Barisma, thus the Hunter Biden connection. It’s a flimsy argument that has been repeatedly debunked, but as far as I can tell that’s how they are making Joe Biden relevant.

It's called The Benghazi Playbook.

 

[NationalTitles18]

For the record, there is also a process to investigate a US citizen and a process to ask foreign governments to help with that investigation. Trump did not follow those processes either, so even if he believes wrongdoing by the Bidens did occur he did not follow the proper protocols that are in place to prevent corruption or the appearance of it. In other words, he brought this all on himself by his attempts to do an end run around the law.

 

[chanson78]

For the record, there is also a process to investigate a US citizen and a process to ask foreign governments to help with that investigation. Trump did not follow those processes either, so even if he believes wrongdoing by the Bidens did occur he did not follow the proper protocols that are in place to prevent corruption or the appearance of it. In other words, he brought this all on himself by his attempts to do an end run around the law.

And the issue at hand is that Republicans are perfectly fine with any Republican President acting and behaving like a king. Fundamentally I think many of them don't actually believe that there will be a Democrat president in the future. Whether it is gerrymandering, voter role truncating, or general vote suppression, I think at the heart of it they fundamentally don't believe that they will ever have to deal with what happens when a Democrat becomes President again. Any other plan makes zero sense and they are running a last minute smash and grab, damn the consequences.

 

[NationalTitles18]

And the issue at hand is that Republicans are perfectly fine with any Republican President acting and behaving like a king. Fundamentally I think many of them don't actually believe that there will be a Democrat president in the future. Whether it is gerrymandering, voter role truncating, or general vote suppression, I think at the heart of it they fundamentally don't believe that they will ever have to deal with what happens when a Democrat becomes President again. Any other plan makes zero sense and they are running a last minute smash and grab, damn the consequences.

Well, the rapture will save us all from the consequences of our sins, right? Isn't that what Jesus said: Don't worry about doing good and caring for the Earth and other people - I'm going to come back and save you from your own stupidity so screw it all! Right?

 

[CharminTide]

Rumors are leaking out that McConnell doesn't have the votes to block witness testimony.

 

[Go Bama]

Rumors are leaking out that McConnell doesn't have the votes to block witness testimony.

WSJ is reporting McConnell doesn't have the votes to block witnesses.

wsj.com

 

[TexasBama]

WSJ is reporting McConnell doesn't have the votes to block witnesses.

wsj.com

Does this assume both Manchin and Jones are locks to vote for witnesses?

 

[Go Bama]

Does this assume both Manchin and Jones are locks to vote for witnesses?

From the NYT:

Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans that he did not currently have the votes to block Democrats from calling witnesses at the trial because some Republicans remained uncommitted, according to people familiar with the meeting.

In making the statement, Mr. McConnell — who had with him a “whip count” of yes, nos and maybe votes — was trying to show his colleagues, many of whom are eager to bring the trial to a quick close, that they did not yet have enough committed votes to forestall witnesses.

But Mr. McConnell and his leadership team are optimistic they will to end up with the votes they need by the end of the week. They are trying to create pressure on wavering senators to join with a majority of their colleagues.

 

[Crimson1967]

Will Republicans be able to call witnesses as well? For the record, I have no problem with it if they do. Put Joe and Hunter under oath if they want.

 

[NationalTitles18]

Will Republicans be able to call witnesses as well? For the record, I have no problem with it if they do. Put Joe and Hunter under oath if they want.

If I were Joe I'd tell them to commit an natural act upon themselves.