President Donald Trump - Formal Impeachment Inquiry Announced

Overheal

Now there has been a public call to arms for rightwing extremists to hunt down anyone responsible for Trump’s Impeachment.

This is Terrorism.

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/far-right-tv-host-rick-wiles-if-trump-is-removed-his-supporters-will-hunt-down-democrats/

Outlaw Pete

Overheal wrote: »

[insert inconvenient clips of Republicans taking stances back then they pretend don't exist now]

Overheal, that in no way shape or form rebuts my point nor does it contradict the position republicans are taking today and had you watched the Levin clip (or took on board what he said if indeed you did watch it) you would know that.

Republicans refusing to adhere to something amidst this sham today, in no way compares to democrats refusing to adhere in '98 given how fairly they were treated and how involved they were in the process back then. What's happening with this impeachment is on another level entirely.

mcmoustache

Mark Levin is one of those people who makes his viewers dumber*. Could you summarise his points so I don't need to watch it?


*


EDIT: added image. It's from 2012 but things haven't really improved on FOX.

Overheal

So it’s being reported that at least some of the Gaetz Squad literally asked to be arrested while violating federal law in the SCIF

[url]

https://twitter.com/chadpergram/status/1187173332682182656?s=21

[/url]

Seems the attempt at martyrdom absolutely backfired. Would still like to see them censured.

James Brown

Overheal wrote: »

So it’s being reported that at least some of the Gaetz Squad literally asked to be arrested while violating federal law in the SCIF

[url]

https://twitter.com/chadpergram/status/1187173332682182656?s=21

[/url]

Seems the attempt at martyrdom absolutely backfired. Would still like to see them censured.

Take a leaf from Trump's book; right wing extremists who hate America and its democratic process?

SJW Lover

mcmoustache wrote: »

Mark Levin is one of those people who makes his viewers dumber*.

Does he rip out their vocal cords? Sounds painful.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

So it’s being reported that at least some of the Gaetz Squad literally asked to be arrested while violating federal law in the SCIF

[url]

https://twitter.com/chadpergram/status/1187173332682182656?s=21

[/url]

Seems the attempt at martyrdom absolutely backfired. Would still like to see them censured.

Nah. The backfiring Theatrical nature of their stunt will do for me.

Boggles

Overheal wrote: »

So it’s being reported that at least some of the Gaetz Squad literally asked to be arrested while violating federal law in the SCIF

[url]

https://twitter.com/chadpergram/status/1187173332682182656?s=21

[/url]

Seems the attempt at martyrdom absolutely backfired. Would still like to see them censured.

Absolute Cretins.

Overheal

Judge Nap fact-checked the Fox couch this morning to clarify that all the rules that Democrats are using now, are consistent with House rules signed by then majority leader John Boehner.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/napolitano-fact-checks-gop-complaints-about-secret-impeachment-process-schiff-is-following-the-rules/

He also peppered that tough breaks with pointing out that yes, this is exactly how investigators work.

mcmoustache

Overheal wrote: »

Judge Nap fact-checked the Fox couch this morning to clarify that all the rules that Democrats are using now, are consistent with House rules signed by then majority leader John Boehner.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/napolitano-fact-checks-gop-complaints-about-secret-impeachment-process-schiff-is-following-the-rules/

He also peppered that tough breaks with pointing out that yes, this is exactly how investigators work.

Everyone in Congress already knows that. Especially the Republicans who voted in these rules. They know exactly how these investigations work because they either ran these investigations or were aware that these investigations were ongoing.


This is just them talking to Trump's base. They know that these hearings are par for the course but Trump's base will believe anything they say.

begsbyOnaTrain

mcmoustache wrote: »

This is just them talking to Trump's base. They know that these hearings are par for the course but Trump's base will believe anything they say.

No way. Politicians doing stuff to aim to their base? Bloody hell, what next? :pac:

I mean you'd never catch the Dems doing that... Oh wait, just this week you had the whole farce of them stoking up racist fears by crying about the President using the term "lynching" and how evil, racist etc it was... Only to have compilation videos of all the top Dems using that in regards to politics/impeachments in the past :pac:

James Brown

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

No way. Politicians doing stuff to aim to their base? Bloody hell, what next? :pac:

I mean you'd never catch the Dems doing that... Oh wait, just this week you had the whole farce of them stoking up racist fears by crying about the President using the term "lynching" and how evil, racist etc it was... Only to have compilation videos of all the top Dems using that in regards to politics/impeachments in the past :pac:

So it's cancelled out? Grand so. Ethics and morals, huh?

begsbyOnaTrain

Matt Barrett wrote: »

So it's cancelled out? Grand so. Ethics and morals, huh?

You seem to reading things that aren't there. Are you using an up to date browser?

mcmoustache

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

No way. Politicians doing stuff to aim to their base? Bloody hell, what next? :pac:

I mean you'd never catch the Dems doing that... Oh wait, just this week you had the whole farce of them stoking up racist fears by crying about the President using the term "lynching" and how evil, racist etc it was... Only to have compilation videos of all the top Dems using that in regards to politics/impeachments in the past :pac:

There's a bit of a difference though. Sure, the Dems were playing up the outrage but that's fairly standard stuff.

What the Republicans are doing is just making up stuff that they know to be completely untrue. While it's fair to say that both parties appeal to their respective bases, it's interesting that one party just makes stuff up knowing that the base will just believe it.

begsbyOnaTrain

mcmoustache wrote: »

There's a bit of a difference though. Sure, the Dems were playing up the outrage but that's fairly standard stuff.

What the Republicans are doing is just making up stuff that they know to be completely untrue. While it's fair to say that both parties appeal to their respective bases, it's interesting that one party just makes stuff up knowing that the base will just believe it.

Ah here! You seriously can't believe that, can you?

Overheal

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

No way. Politicians doing stuff to aim to their base? Bloody hell, what next? :pac:

I mean you'd never catch the Dems doing that... Oh wait, just this week you had the whole farce of them stoking up racist fears by crying about the President using the term "lynching" and how evil, racist etc it was... Only to have compilation videos of all the top Dems using that in regards to politics/impeachments in the past :pac:

The term was used a lot in the past to my recollection. That doesn’t mean it should be acceptable in 2019 or from the POTUS. We’ve long since pieced together more of our lynching history even culminating in the National Memorial for Peace and Justice.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/us/lynching-memorial-alabama.html

To be fair, the launch of this center has done its job, greatly raising awareness of the lynching history of the southern United States - yes, the same southern United States that was staunchly Democrat before the Southern Strategy.

The National Memorial for Peace and Justice, which opens Thursday on a six-acre site overlooking the Alabama State Capitol, is dedicated to the victims of American white supremacy. And it demands a reckoning with one of the nation’s least recognized atrocities: the lynching of thousands of black people in a decades-long campaign of racist terror.

At the center is a grim cloister, a walkway with 800 weathered steel columns, all hanging from a roof. Etched on each column is the name of an American county and the people who were lynched there, most listed by name, many simply as “unknown.” The columns meet you first at eye level, like the headstones that lynching victims were rarely given. But as you walk, the floor steadily descends; by the end, the columns are all dangling above, leaving you in the position of the callous spectators in old photographs of public lynchings.

The magnitude of the killing is harrowing, all the more so when paired with the circumstances of individual lynchings, some described in brief summaries along the walk: Parks Banks, lynched in Mississippi in 1922 for carrying a photograph of a white woman; Caleb Gadly, hanged in Kentucky in 1894 for “walking behind the wife of his white employer”; Mary Turner, who after denouncing her husband’s lynching by a rampaging white mob, was hung upside down, burned and then sliced open so that her unborn child fell to the ground.

. Mr. Stevenson and a small group of lawyers spent years immersing themselves in archives and county libraries to document the thousands of racial terror lynchings across the South. They have cataloged nearly 4,400 in total

Back to impeachment tho

begsbyOnaTrain

Overheal wrote: »

The term was used a lot in the past to my recollection. That doesn’t mean it should be acceptable in 2019 or from the POTUS.

Oh, at what point did the term become unacceptable, evil, racist etc?

Seems all the major Dems only had a revelation (and subsequent memory wipe of their own usage of it) in Oct, 2019. A real conversion on the road to Damascus moment for them. Funny that. Others might say they're hysterical and are just playing to their own base, in order to frame the President as racist.

Back to impeachment tho

Look just cause you post here enough for it to be your own personal blog, you don't get to tell the rest of us what to chat about and what direction to take.

James Brown

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

You seem to reading things that aren't there. Are you using an up to date browser?

So can you explain your comment, why were you pointing out whataboutery?
Read to me like you were making excuses to dismiss it based on whataboutery.

Mr E

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

Look just cause you post here enough for it to be your own personal blog, you don't get to tell the rest of us what to chat about and what direction to take.

Mod: I can. Back to impeachment discussion please.

Overheal

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

Oh, at what point did the term become unacceptable, evil, racist etc.

The rest of my post, which you ignored, explains your strawman. Can discuss it in politics if you like.

begsbyOnaTrain

Mr E wrote: »

Mod: I can. Back to impeachment discussion please.

Right, so comments by the President regarding the impeachment (or process to engage in) are not up for discussion? In a thread about the impeachment of the president? I'll just leave you guys to it then.

Overheal

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

Right, so comments by the President regarding the impeachment (or process to engage in) are not up for discussion? In a thread about the impeachment of the president? I'll just leave you guys to it then.

That’s kind of the objective though isn’t it: detract from impeachment by getting everyone to circle the wagons about ‘lynching.’ And here you are: taking the talking point, and using it to attack a politician for using the phrase 20 years ago, while banging a drum to insinuate that nothing has changed in the last 20 years regarding race relations and social awareness of human atrocities from our too recent past. At this stage, none of what is being discussed along that tangent concerns impeachment, it concerns lynching.

Just like the Gaetz Gang conspiring to commit felonies yesterday to stage a political stunt - all designed to keep any focus off of Laura Cooper’s testimony, and to impugn the process which, I should add, is perfectly in line with the Constitution, and house rules (ones which were last amended by a Republican Majority), and prior proceedings on sensitive preliminary investigations. Public hearings will happen once the House Judicial Committee is activated for the matter - we ain’t there yet. We will be expectedly by the middle of November - ‘bout 3 weeks, assuming that more hearings are not obstructed.

Mr E

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

Right, so comments by the President regarding the impeachment (or process to engage in) are not up for discussion? In a thread about the impeachment of the president? I'll just leave you guys to it then.

It's a thread about impeachment. If you have a different topic, start a new thread? That's how this place works.

Overheal

Rudy did it again, and shot himself and Trump in the foot - cementing the notion that the attempt to dig up dirt was for the personal benefit of Mr. Trump in a private capacity, and was not an anti corruption agenda for the US State Department. He just admitted to the Quid Pro Quo, in other words.

https://twitter.com/rudygiuliani/status/1187168034835894272?s=21

” The shocking and likely inculpatory acknowledgement comes at a perilous time for Giuliani, who is a central figure in House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry and the subject of federal investigation in the Southern District of New York.

Georgetown University Law Center Professor Marty Lederman, an expert in constitutional law and national security law, explained the significance of Giuliani conceding that he was working for the benefit of President Trump personally and not the United States.

“This merely confirms what was so outrageous: Giuliani wasn’t a representative or employee of the United States; his duty of loyalty was 100% to his (personal capacity) client. And yet Trump told Ukraine it had to dance to Rudy’s tune – a tune designed to advance Trump’s personal interests– in order to remain in the U.S.’s good graces (e.g., to secure access, aid, etc.),” wrote Lederman, a former Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. “This is the highest of high crimes–using the leverage of his position as chief diplomat to advance his own interests—and it’s hard to imagine anything more inconsistent w/Trump’s constitutional oath & duty and more revealing of his utter unfitness for office. And that’d be true *even if there were no quid pro quo* (but of course there was, which makes it all the worse).”

Attorney George Conway, Trump nemesis and husband of White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, appeared astonished that Giuliani, a former federal prosecutor, would so haphazardly implicate himself and President Trump in impeachable and possibly criminal conduct.

“Wow. This tweet is powerful evidence of an impeachable offense—that [Trump’s] dealings with the Government of Ukraine were for his own personal benefit, and not for the nation’s. Keep tweeting and talking,” Conway tweeted.

“Apart from being terrific evidence that his client committed an impeachable offense, this tweet is a fine illustration of why criminal defense lawyers tell their clients to shut up and take the Fifth,” he continued.

CNN legal analyst and former federal and state prosecutor Elie Honig similarly described the comment as exceptionally detrimental to Giuliani and the Trump administration.

“You just admitted you acted solely (‘everything I did’) in the personal and political interests of Donald Trump when dealing with Ukraine, not the national interests of the United States. Lawyer up – for your client’s sake, if not for your own,” Honig remarked.



https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/constitutional-law-professor-in-a-single-tweet-rudy-giuliani-admitted-to-the-highest-of-high-crimes/

Boggles

Seems to be a theory doing the rounds that Trump is trying to get Pence to be impeached.

If Pence goes, next in line for the presidency is the bould Nancy.

Absolutely hilarious if true.

Overheal

Boggles wrote: »

Seems to be a theory doing the rounds that Trump is trying to get Pence to be impeached.

If Pence goes, next in line for the presidency is the bould Nancy.

Absolutely hilarious if true.

Heard that. He wants to tie it together so anti-democrat moderates are on board with him

Igotadose

Boggles wrote: »

Seems to be a theory doing the rounds that Trump is trying to get Pence to be impeached.

If Pence goes, next in line for the presidency is the bould Nancy.

Absolutely hilarious if true.

Source? Seems awfully farfetched... even for Trumpworld.

Imagine if he succeeds, then keels over. Howler.

Spencerfreeman

What has Pence done?

Overheal

Mike Pompeo in 2016 defending the “stalinesque” procedure of closed-door hearings on Capitol Hill

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/throwback-thursday-mike-pompeo-said-in-2016-closed-door-congressional-interviews-were-much-more-effective/

We’re now 4 weeks into the impeachment inquiry and the GOP continues to shoot its shot at procedure; there is no salient narrative for the defense of what Trump actually appears to have done. Gaetz was interviewed this morning and essentially confirmed if Trump did what was alleged he should be impeached - however Gaetz also deflected by saying that is based on “selective leaks by Democrats” perhaps somehow forgetting that literally dozens of republicans sit on those committees and could easily leak any exculpating testimony in favor of Trump if it existed.

KWAG2019

The GOP project is driven by hidden extreme right wing ideology: white supremacist, Christian fundamentalist, uber rich manipulators. The project of the culture war is almost won. They are not concerned with law or constitution or procedure. The calculation is altogether different. It is that if they are forced to remove Trump will the project be delayed for 8 years while a Dem delays it? Trump will be given up if they think they can limit Dem access to power. I don't think people are worried enough about how extreme and ruthless this project is.