The Trump thread: All things Donald

[joan1984]

 Understand Senate rules can entangle every Senator (Juror) during a Senate Trial after House Impeachment.

For one thing, no sitting Senator may campaign for reelection during the Senate Trial...

Would affect directly MANY of the 'gang of 25 or so' Democrat Candidates...

  Timing is everything, eh? Careful what you wish for...

[joan1984]

If indeed ALL Democrats favor Impeachment, why not have The House VOTE.

Not vast majority of Democrats, all of them.  Even Trump whined about how they stick together, but then unprecedented corruption and dereliction of office will unite Democrats and make cracks in the Republican front.

Best thing about this is the country will have Trump’s unfitness for office paraded in their face.

[Jed_]

It’s called ‘due process’.  But I know how confusing that term is to Republicans.

[msslave]

Political cartoons can say so much in a little space.
Here's just another example of how our Congress opperates.
It makes little difference which dodo winds up to be President... with children not playing well with each other in the legaslative branch, we're stuck in a do nothing cycle.

[psiberzerker]

It’s called ‘due process’.  But I know how confusing that term is to Republicans.

Especially president "Take the guns, then go to court" Goldfinger.

[Jed_]

That’s just it, it’s not a court, at least not yet.  It’s analogous to the police interviewing witnesses, and you don’t do that in public.  For one thing, you don’t want witnesses colluding on their story even unintentionally by hearing what others are saying.

There are Republicans in the room, and they act like they aren’t represented.  That they’re frozen out of the process.

Btw, the Republicans has closed door hearings on Benghazi.  But as in all things, it’s OK when they do it.

[psiberzerker]

That’s just it, it’s not a court, at least not yet.

The same rules apply for Due Process:  Confronting your accuser, being able to rebut, or cross examine witnesses...  It's still a judicial Inquiry, even if the House, and Senate (The House Impeaches, and then the Senate can say "You're fired!" if it comes to that) conduct them.

Republicans has closed door hearings on Benghazi.

An Embassy Siege has so many layers of National Security, especially concerning the SoS's involvement, and again, that's played as a strategic failure for political reasons by the GoP.  She's the witch, and she basically had nothing to do with it.  US Embassies aren't even State Department, the Security, and Evacuation thereof is solidly the jurisdiction of DoD.

Again, they were constantly shelled by artillery, for a couple days, and managed to evacuate the entire embassy with only 4 killed.  That is the best casualty rate of a siege in recorded history!  Somebody deserves a medal for that, but they continue using it as a talking point to hunt the witch.

[Lois]

The GOP borrowed a page from Saul Alinsky with their storming of the SKID, demanding transparency and open comittee meetings.  But their plans were fundementally flawed and the execution of their plan reflected this.

Alinsky's tactics involve creating a spectacle to show the powerless that they do in fact have power (as well as convincing those in power that when the poweless speak out they should listen).  In short it's about building the confidence of your people and breaking the confidence of the other side.

In this case it fell flat because the real issue was protecting national security per rules instituted by Republicans and many of the Republican protestors were on the comittee and could have participated it they wished.

But I suppose it did not matter how desperate it made them look, after all it was played for an audience of one:  Donald Trump.

[Honorius]

With 13 months to go before we decide four more years or kick his ass out:

All eyes on Texas. If this state turns blue, and theoretically the Democrats have the numbers, then the Republican Party is finished. I'm assuming no faithless electors and the Rust Belt continues to stick with Trump to deliver a fuck you to the Democrats failure to protect their livelihood.

The trick is getting those people to the polls. Problem is, the Hispanic Population there hates abortion and votes Republican on that issue alone. Unlike Louisiana Democrats who are pro-life and pro-gun and use it to bash the Republicans for their hypocrisy, the Texas Dems hold a pro-choice position and anti-gun position that is fatal to their chances.

Winning the Hispanic Vote will take more than pointing out Trumps inhumane immigration policies, the Democrats also have to give up its pro-choice and anti-gun stance to swing the state blue.

But the ideological identity politics of the Democrat mainstream makes this near impossible. Otherwise the Democrats need to get the Rust Belt back.

Of course Climate Change renders this all moot and this nation won't last much longer past 2028 regardless of who wins.

[_priapism]

I’m with you.  The main problem is that Trump’s anti-Hispanic rhetoric not only energized the Klan, it scares minority and immigrant voters.  Fear of intimidation, fear of investigation, fear of negative consequences.  There seems to be a “things can only get worse” mindset that rationalizes “only bad things happen to people who vote” mentality.  And I can’t promise they are wrong.  I catch shit at the polling place, because I am a registered Democrat.

[psiberzerker]

It's not just anti-hispanic.  It's hate speech, his public treatment of women, especially his own daughter has made sexual harassment so permissable in the government, it set the #MeToo movement back to square one where it counts.  Oh noes, you can't play "Casting couch" in Hollywood any more?  Well, you can get away with gang rape in the postal system!

[joan1984]

Postal workers are gang rapists? I must have missed that one.

[psiberzerker]

Postal workers are gang rapists?

Are you intentionally obtuse?  No, they can get away with gang rape, and now you're making jokes about it.  Classy.

[joan1984]

  Somehow a scandal has passed me by, seems. Has President Trump's postmaster done something? Please enlighten...

[psiberzerker]

Has President Trump's postmaster done something?

No, but your fucking President has, publicly.  That's what I'm saying, of course you didn't hear about it, because there was no scandal, therefore it never happened.  The pussy grabber in chief doesn't care, so there's no oversite.  The same goes for embezzlement, and government spending.  That's what happens when you hire an infamous embezzler to watch the watchers, and he appoints a cabinet to systematically dismantle the agencies they're hired as secretaries of.  Who's secretary of state, this week?  You don't even know, because it's not worth checking your radar.  Anyone can get away with anything.

The government is broken.  If you're willing to overlook him sexually harassing his favorite daughter, and appointing her to the white-house staff, than you're more than willing to overlook anything (Unless Hillary, or Barack is even accused of it.)  Bengazi?  Emails?  Now those are scandals worth obsessing over for a fucking decade!

What ever happened to that alien invasion state of emergency thing?  Did he finish the wall, and that fixed it?  Of course not, now what happened to all that money he raised with that promise?

Didn't hear about that scandal either, did you?  

[joan1984]

WTF are you going on a rant about, PSI?

YOUR reference to post office rape is what I asked you about, and so as usual there is nothing but your twisted 'hearing' and obsession with our President.

Vote the way you wish in November 2020. Perhaps try to break your "news" listening habits, so you can get some REAL news, and perspective by then.

[psiberzerker]

What do you consider "REAL" news, then?

[joan1984]

  Link me to the post office rape you are blaming on President Trump, from your favorite source, please. I have seen not a thing resembling such an issue. TY

[psiberzerker]

No.  What do you consider "Real" news?  Since you're the one giving life advice now.  Where should I go to enlighten myself, professor?

[Lois]

As you may recall, Rex Tillerson former Secretaty of State, had to tell Trump numerous times that he could not do things the way wanted because it was illegal.

Now a similar story comes from former cheif of staff John Kelly.  On a British news talk show he reports, that he too, often had to tell Trump that there were things he could not do because they were illegal.  When he left, he cautioned Trump not to get a "yes man" in the position that would not properly advise the President, because he would get impeached.