|
Post by millring on Dec 10, 2019 18:40:59 GMT -5
They need 2/3's to convict. The only outstanding question is how long will Trump be allowed to piss on Democrat's heads. I assume everyone, even including House Democrats, knows how this will turn out. It’s like trying to get Big Jim Thompson to arrest Al Capone. ...or maybe like trying to get the FBI to arrest Richard Jewell.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Dec 10, 2019 19:16:38 GMT -5
I played racquetball with (against) gov jim thompson once. U-ILL IMPE challenge courts. He stopped by and the usually cutthroat lunch regulars there accommodated him in a couple 'friendly' games (doubles).
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Dec 10, 2019 20:26:56 GMT -5
I'm not very interested in the President. Nothing wrong with a discussion for those who are.
|
|
Dub
Administrator
I'm gettin' so the past is the only thing I can remember.
Posts: 20,025
|
Post by Dub on Dec 10, 2019 22:03:51 GMT -5
I assume everyone, even including House Democrats, knows how this will turn out. It’s like trying to get Big Jim Bill Thompson to arrest Al Capone. ...or maybe like trying to get the FBI to arrest Richard Jewell. Sorry, I invoked the wrong Thompson. Big Bill Thompson was a Chicago mayor in the Capone era.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Dec 11, 2019 8:39:40 GMT -5
Trump is a power mad criminal, but the judge thing is all McConnell Also a power mad criminal, he still ought to get the credit he earned. By the way, how's that emoluments thing working out for you? Still in the Constitution. Still being violated on an ongoing basis. Lavrov strutting around the White House like he owns it- because for now he sort of does- you enjoying that?
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Dec 11, 2019 8:46:15 GMT -5
By the way, how's that emoluments thing working out for you? Still in the Constitution. Still being violated on an ongoing basis. Lavrov strutting around the White House like he owns it- because for now he sort of does- you enjoying that? Yeah. Kinda fun watching the Democrats get their asses kicked.
|
|
|
Post by lar on Dec 11, 2019 9:24:16 GMT -5
The gorilla in the room that nobody is talking about is the fact that after months of news reports, new revelations, hearings, etc. the country is still divided on the subject of impeachment. Both political parties are having a difficult time selling the general public on their point of view.
I've been interested in the impeachment hearings because I thought that what came out might help to crystallize my thinking in one direction or the other. That hasn't happened. On one hand I'm not comfortable with the idea that the president set up what appears to have been a concerted effort to get Ukraine to investigate the Bidens. By the same token, I haven't been convinced that an investigation of Burisma and Hunter Biden's role in the company isn't in order. Given the fact of the circumstances of Hunter's election to the Burisma board and that his father was vice-president at the time, asking questions about a connection between Burisma and the Obama administration wouldn't be inappropriate.
As far as Ukraine is concerned, what I'm left with is the feeling that Trump erred in asking for an investigation into the Bidens. He should have asked for an investigation into Burisma. Even so, I have not yet been able to rid myself of the notion that Trump's request was not entirely political. As much as the Democrats don't want to admit it, the circumstances of Hunter's election to the Burisma board and the fact that his father was vice-president at the time ought to be explored. Asking questions about a connection between Burisma and the Obama administration wouldn't be inappropriate. Even the Washington Post has suggested that an investigation of Burisma ought to be undertaken.
The Democrats have charged Trump with abusing his powers because he sought to enlist the aid of another country into tampering in the U.S. elections. Looking at it through the lens of the Democrats, I understand. Joe Biden is a political rival. If it turned out that Biden was guilty of something it could affect his chances of becoming the Democratic nominee or being elected president. Election meddling. I get it. Hold on a minute! If it turned out that Biden was guilty of something . . . wouldn't it be important to know that? I'd feel a lot better about the whole impeachment thing if Trump had, without any reason at all, asked Ukraine to investigate Mayor Pete.
I question whether impeachment is really called for in this case.
Obstruction of Congress. That's the other thing Trump is being impeached for. As I thought about this I asked myself this question; if I was accused and tried for something I was convinced I had not done how would I react? My view is that when I am attacked unjustly I will fight back with any means at my disposal. You want to take me on, fine, but don't expect any rules of engagement and don't presume that you have the right to judge my response.
Trump has been under attack since the moment he was declared the winner in 2016. There are a lot of people who still believe his presidency in illegitimate. One Democrat or another has been threatening impeachment since Trump took the oath of office. I am convinced that this moment in time was inevitable. The only question was the pretext for the impeachment. Trump's opponents haven't pulled any punches. What makes them think they have the right to stand in judgment of what Trump believes is an unfair attack? Once you open up the can it's a bit to late to decide that you don't like what's inside.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Dec 11, 2019 10:34:00 GMT -5
Trump just paid two million in damages that he was assessed by a NY judge, for misusing money in a charity Trump controlled. Basically, he stole from his own charity.
It's not in the articles, but it is worth remembering that Trump's abuses of power in the White House are part of a long pattern of low life behavior.
|
|
|
Post by TKennedy on Dec 11, 2019 11:44:36 GMT -5
No winners in this cartoon. The short attention span/sound bite epidemic in the public sector will insure that.
Actually some winners. The career diplomats and State Department employees that testified offered a seldom seen look into the world of the dedicated civil servants that live below the radar. The steady folks that actually allow us to have a functioning democracy. To say I was impressed with their intelligence, integrity, and bearing is an understatement.
They function quietly and unrecognized while the political cartoon clowns self-righteously posture, strut about, and regurgitate from their colons.
The founding fathers should have written a numeric asshole index into the constitution. Get above a certain number and it's hat coat and out.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Dec 11, 2019 12:00:55 GMT -5
Obstruction of Congress. That's the other thing Trump is being impeached for. As I thought about this I asked myself this question; if I was accused and tried for something I was convinced I had not done how would I react? My view is that when I am attacked unjustly I will fight back with any means at my disposal. You want to take me on, fine, but don't expect any rules of engagement and don't presume that you have the right to judge my response. Trump has been under attack since the moment he was declared the winner in 2016. There are a lot of people who still believe his presidency in illegitimate. One Democrat or another has been threatening impeachment since Trump took the oath of office. I am convinced that this moment in time was inevitable. The only question was the pretext for the impeachment. Trump's opponents haven't pulled any punches. What makes them think they have the right to stand in judgment of what Trump believes is an unfair attack? Once you open up the can it's a bit to late to decide that you don't like what's inside. But there are rules of engagement, explicit and implicit. The explicit ones start with the constitutional right and duty of Congress to impeach, and the implicit ones have to do with, say, not responding with lies and blackguarding of accusers and even investigators. The latter is a bit of a tightwire act, but for a person in a position of leadership who might be expected to show a little restraint, race-to-the-bottom isn't a good look. (Have you seen the clips from his recent rallies?) Then there's the joker-in-the-deck of "something I was convinced I had not done." Nothing in Trump's civilian history or his in-office behavior suggests that he has any sense of his own fallibility, which means that every accusation is going to be met with outraged (and outrageous) claims of complete innocence--that his behavior has been, like his phone call, perfect. In Trump's mind, every attack is unfair and is met with ferocious denial. "Counterpuncher," yeah. Or maybe the perfect combination of schoolyard bully and barroom brawler in the service of pathological liar and scam artist.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Dec 11, 2019 12:02:54 GMT -5
No winners in this cartoon. The short attention span/sound bite epidemic in the public sector will insure that. Actually some winners. The career diplomats and State Department employees that testified offered a seldom seen look into the world of the dedicated civil servants that live below the radar. The steady folks that actually allow us to have a functioning democracy. To say I was impressed with their intelligence, integrity, and bearing is an understatement. You see the hearings as an Eastern. So does the National press (in fact, that's how they have been presenting it. But that is begging the question. The entire debate the rest of the country is still having is whether this is, in fact, a Western and not the Eastern the Democrats and their press is framing it to be.
|
|
|
Post by lar on Dec 11, 2019 12:21:14 GMT -5
Trump just paid two million in damages that he was assessed by a NY judge, for misusing money in a charity Trump controlled. Basically, he stole from his own charity. It's not in the articles, but it is worth remembering that Trump's abuses of power in the White House are part of a long pattern of low life behavior. I don't like Trump. I don't like the way he operates and his personality is both abrasive and divisive. As our president, I believe that his personal style often gets in the way of his ability to accomplish things he's set out to do. Some of the things he has done seem needlessly cruel to me. For better or worse Trump can't be impeached based on my opinion of his personality traits. He can be impeached based on his actions and that's the way I believe it should be. In this particular case I believe Trump should have handled the matter of Ukraine differently. Does his transgression rise to the level of impeachment? I might agree but I cannot put aside the thought that Burisma should have been investigated and, political foe or not, if Joe Biden was somehow involved that information ought to be known. My thinking on all of this has been heavily influenced by the way in which the Democrats have pressed their case. For the most part when Democratic members of Congress refer to the Ukraine issue their message is that Trump asked Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden and that he solicited the help of a foreign government to interfere in the 2020 election. I believe it to be a fact that Trump did not ask Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden. What he asked for was an investigation. He made no precondition about the result of such an investigation. I think that's an important distinction. As to the question of foreign intervention in the 2020 elections I think the Democrats are being deliberately disingenuous. Assume Burisma is investigated and that it turns out that Hunter Biden is guilty of nothing more than poor judgement and that Joe Biden is completely free of any taint. Would that tend to affect his candidacy for president? Would the effect be greater or less than the effect if it was discovered that Joe Biden was guilty of some misdeed?
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Dec 11, 2019 13:32:25 GMT -5
No winners in this cartoon. The short attention span/sound bite epidemic in the public sector will insure that. Actually some winners. The career diplomats and State Department employees that testified offered a seldom seen look into the world of the dedicated civil servants that live below the radar. The steady folks that actually allow us to have a functioning democracy. To say I was impressed with their intelligence, integrity, and bearing is an understatement. You see the hearings as an Eastern. So does the National press (in fact, that's how they have been presenting it. But that is begging the question. The entire debate the rest of the country is still having is whether this is, in fact, a Western and not the Eastern the Democrats and their press is framing it to be. The whole "dedicated civil servants" meme is also complete horseshit. Sounds like these folks are sacrificing everything (i.e.- their children are starving) to do the right thing. I was employed by the Administrative State and I can tell you nothing could be further from the truth. In my case I started as a GS-14 with a salary of just north of $100K annually- to start. And the benefits are tremendous. The amount of time off is simply silly. And once you're past a calendar year, you virtually cannot be terminated (unless you're the EPA schlub under Gina Whatshername that didn't show up for work for 3 damn years). It should be noted that in these hearings, the displaced diplomats were NEVER unemployed, merely moved around. From the tone of the hearings you'd think these folks had been standing in bread lines for weeks. And the pressure to toe the politically correct line- go along to get along- is huge. I was terminated (literally half a day before my first year was up) because I disagreed with the EPA assessment that CO2 is a pollutant that must be regulated out of existence. Despite the FACT that physics is on my side. Once you get beyond the naive canonization of the Administrative State, things quickly become more realistic.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Dec 11, 2019 13:37:32 GMT -5
No winners in this cartoon. The short attention span/sound bite epidemic in the public sector will insure that. Actually some winners. The career diplomats and State Department employees that testified offered a seldom seen look into the world of the dedicated civil servants that live below the radar. The steady folks that actually allow us to have a functioning democracy. To say I was impressed with their intelligence, integrity, and bearing is an understatement. You see the hearings as an Eastern. So does the National press (in fact, that's how they have been presenting it. But that is begging the question. The entire debate the rest of the country is still having is whether this is, in fact, a Western and not the Eastern the Democrats and their press is framing it to be. I agree with Terry. I thought the career people came off well, for the most part. I'm not sure who you are referring to as the rest of the country. The Red state people will probably fall more towards the western, whereas the blue state people will see it more as eastern; the system can be cured from within. The reality is Trump will not be removed from office by this process. So it's all just theatrics playing each to their own side trying to nudge a few undecideds in the swing states.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Dec 11, 2019 13:58:05 GMT -5
I agree with Terry. I thought the career people came off well, for the most part. That's exactly the difference. Half of America knows the back story on each and every one of those "career people" and why they testified as they did. They were not neutral. They were all partisan.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Dec 11, 2019 14:00:29 GMT -5
...and no, it's not a conspiracy. It never had to be.
They only had to be people who view Trump exactly as you do, and are in a position to do something -- exactly what you would do -- about it.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Dec 11, 2019 14:12:59 GMT -5
No comment on these particular diplomats or the hearings, I haven't been watching the hearings.
A comment on the American diplomatic core in general: I'm sure they are fine, talented, dedicated people who do serve a purpose, but it is my impression that that purpose has been steadily reduced in scope and significance over the last hundred years; diplomats that once were essential are now routinely bypassed.
There was a time before email, telephone, and telegraph that world leaders communicated to each other through their diplomatic corp and essential "war and peace" work was conducted by the respective in-country diplomats. Now communication between world leaders is direct and the serious work that used to be done by a diplomatic corp is now done by a team of the president's own handpicked people led by his personal trouble-shooter. Now the embassy folks that are stationed in any particular country are there largely to facilitate the concerns of tourists and handle routine paperwork. When there is serious work to be done, their primary job is to make sure there are enough chairs and place settings to accommodate those who are flying in on the president's behalf to do it.
People like Henry Kissinger and James Baker may have ended their careers as titular heads of the State Department, but they spent their working lives bypassing the formal diplomatic channels for their respective presidents.
I suspect it isn't unusual for career diplomats to feel they are too-often bypassed and unappreciated. In several regards, they are an anachronism.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Dec 11, 2019 14:16:05 GMT -5
No winners in this cartoon. The short attention span/sound bite epidemic in the public sector will insure that. Actually some winners. The career diplomats and State Department employees that testified offered a seldom seen look into the world of the dedicated civil servants that live below the radar. The steady folks that actually allow us to have a functioning democracy. To say I was impressed with their intelligence, integrity, and bearing is an understatement. You see the hearings as an Eastern. So does the National press (in fact, that's how they have been presenting it. But that is begging the question. The entire debate the rest of the country is still having is whether this is, in fact, a Western and not the Eastern the Democrats and their press is framing it to be. I don't need any "framing."
I watched soldiers, career diplomats and Trump appointees testify that Trump is attempting to ratfuck the 2020 election.
I can believe them or I can believe the giant toddler whose primary defense is to smear people who testified publicly under oath.
It's not remotely complicated.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Dec 11, 2019 14:23:08 GMT -5
You see the hearings as an Eastern. So does the National press (in fact, that's how they have been presenting it. But that is begging the question. The entire debate the rest of the country is still having is whether this is, in fact, a Western and not the Eastern the Democrats and their press is framing it to be. I don't need any "framing."
I watched soldiers, career diplomats and Trump appointees testify that Trump is attempting to ratfuck the 2020 election.
I can believe them or I can believe the giant toddler whose primary defense is to smear people who testified publicly under oath.
It's not remotely complicated.
As I recall, only one of those soldiers, career diplomats and Trump appointees had ever spoken to the President. The rest of them were making it up as they went along. But sure, we'll go with your apoplectic seizure.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Dec 11, 2019 14:47:31 GMT -5
I don't need any "framing."
I watched soldiers, career diplomats and Trump appointees testify that Trump is attempting to ratfuck the 2020 election.
I can believe them or I can believe the giant toddler whose primary defense is to smear people who testified publicly under oath.
It's not remotely complicated.
As I recall, only one of those soldiers, career diplomats and Trump appointees had ever spoken to the President. The rest of them were making it up as they went along. But sure, we'll go with your apoplectic seizure. You can pretend that they were "making it up as they went along," but, if so, they will be subject to charges of perjury.
So would Trump if he had the stones to testify.
|
|