A moral obligation to impeach

[DitkasSausage]

I am within my rights to burn my journal & day planner, as part of an effort to cut back on all the clutter in my home or office. If the Feds have subpoenaed my records to verfiy the dates that I met up with Natalia Veselnitskaya, then I'm committing obstruction of justice when I burn that stuff.

This isn't hard, Blah. There's plenty of situations where otherwise-innocuous things become criminal. The Federal obstruction statute is written pretty broadly, and can cover pretty much any act intended to impede a criminal investigation. El Presidente made no bones about his efforts to "impede" (or "shut down completely") the Comey-Muller investigation(s).



This is a lot of time to spent on such a moot point. The Dems didn't include Obstruction in their articles: the issue is over. I think it's a mistake, for both tactical and moral/posterity reasons: but whatevs, Nance doesn't consult me on these things.

I wasn't aware that Trump burned a journal and dayplanner that had his meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya. I did know that she was here under VERY suspicious circumstances. Funny enough, US Attorney Preet Bharara denied her entry in June 2016 because of her involvement with an ongoing criminal corruption trial in the US regarding Russian Oligarchs. Almost every level of immigration denied her entry into the country. All of a sudden... she was here. Poof. When several FOIA requests were sent to the State Department regarding where she got her VISA, they were all denied (meaning that it was top levels of the State Department).

So you don't question this at all? What does this line up with more? That TRUMP was working with Russians or that the current Administration's State Department (Obama) was working with Russians on a set-up of some sort? Think about that. This lady should have NEVER been in the country. All of a sudden, she's here and has phone numbers and contacts for top level contacts in the Trump Admin, and her entry was allowed by the top levels of the Obama State Department. Does that not play a LITTLE into our side that this whole thing was a set up? Can you at least SEE how we could think that?

[ravenmaniac4life]

I wasn't aware that Trump burned a journal and dayplanner that had his meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya. I did know that she was here under VERY suspicious circumstances. Funny enough, US Attorney Preet Bharara denied her entry in June 2016 because of her involvement with an ongoing criminal corruption trial in the US regarding Russian Oligarchs. Almost every level of immigration denied her entry into the country. All of a sudden... she was here. Poof. When several FOIA requests were sent to the State Department regarding where she got her VISA, they were all denied (meaning that it was top levels of the State Department).

So you don't question this at all? What does this line up with more? That TRUMP was working with Russians or that the current Administration's State Department (Obama) was working with Russians on a set-up of some sort? Think about that. This lady should have NEVER been in the country. All of a sudden, she's here and has phone numbers and contacts for top level contacts in the Trump Admin, and her entry was allowed by the top levels of the Obama State Department. Does that not play a LITTLE into our side that this whole thing was a set up? Can you at least SEE how we could think that?

on top of which...

WHO did Veselnitskaya meet with prior to and after her infamous "meeting."

[JimZipCode]

Welp: almost over now.

Nance gained pretty much nothing from delaying the transmission. I think it was always a super long shot. Worth trying, because it was the only club she had left in her bag; but very VERY unlikely to achieve concessions. Mitch is disciplined. An entirely different creature from the Orange Clown.

Of course the other factor was the holiday season. Congressional vacations & downtime made it a perfect time for her to try this delay tactic; but at the same time muted its impact, in my opinion. It was reasonable for Nancy to hope for a slow swell of public opinion to build pressure on Repubs to allow for the calling of witnesses. But it was always a "hope"; and the Christmas / New Year's window is not a great one for heightening political tension.


I was a little disappointed AOC isn't one of the case "managers" for the trial squad. She drives Repubs so fucking CRAZY! Her presence would have been fun. She has also has been an awesome questioner at hearings: crisp, focused and on-point.

But the team itself is obviously chosen for gravitas and experience. The only "young" reps have backgrounds in the law or law-enforcement. It's a group chosen for seriousness. I got no argument.


Obvsly the Repubs are going to allow only the barest minimum of "trial" to let them put a fig leaf on their acquital. How short is long enough? Two days? Three? Such a pathetic display. Mitch's term leading the senate majority is a black eye on the history of this country.

Well, whatever: make them sign their names to it. It's overdue, honestly.



I think history will be baffled that Trump wasn't ALSO impeached for Obstruction and for Emoluments. Both of them are slam-dunk obvious. Sheesh, he instructed McGahn to falsify the record! The Emoluments issues are black-letter Constitutional text; there is zero amiguity about whether he violated them. I hate that Dems have conceded the precedent that those do not trigger impeachment. It's the wrong move for the Republic's sake.

To my mind Nance was making a political judgement there. And I have long felt – OP of this thread makes the point – that political judgement was precisely the wrong lens to look at this thru. But, well: it's her actual job as Speaker to make poltiical judgements. And honestly those judgements have been pretty sound on the whole. Difficult straits to navigate.



Alright Mitch & Co: sign your names to acquiting this criminal. History will judge you harshly. But you put party over country more than a decade ago. All that remains is to make it official.

What a sad fucking spectacle. It's honestly more fun to re-watch the Ravens failing to convert 4th-&-1s vs the Titans, than this abortion of our national ideals.

[JimZipCode]

I wasn't aware that Trump burned a journal and dayplanner that had his meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya.

Um, me neither.

You understand that was a metaphor, right? I concocted a scenario where my journal & day planner had dates of suspicious meetings, and I threw a juicy name on there to punch up the script. Clearly that was a mistake. Too much red meat for you guys to keep your eye on the ball.

Does that not play a LITTLE into our side that this whole thing was a set up? Can you at least SEE how we could think that?

Yes: I see how whenever there is an insane convoluted conspiracy theory that could be construed as supporting Lefty Dem shadiness, you guys instantly believe every abstruse detail of it. IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!

And whenever there is any obvious Occams Razor straight-line in-plain-sight evidence of blatant Trump adminstration misconduct, you guys are are like BUT THERE'S NO SMOKING GUN!!!!

And you aren't the slightest bit self-conscious about your own double-standard, how heavily you lean your thumb – hell, your whole body weight! – on the scales.

It's all very pathetic and disturbing.

[DitkasSausage]

Welp: almost over now.

Nance gained pretty much nothing from delaying the transmission. I think it was always a super long shot. Worth trying, because it was the only club she had left in her bag; but very VERY unlikely to achieve concessions. Mitch is disciplined. An entirely different creature from the Orange Clown.

Of course the other factor was the holiday season. Congressional vacations & downtime made it a perfect time for her to try this delay tactic; but at the same time muted its impact, in my opinion. It was reasonable for Nancy to hope for a slow swell of public opinion to build pressure on Repubs to allow for the calling of witnesses. But it was always a "hope"; and the Christmas / New Year's window is not a great one for heightening political tension.


I was a little disappointed AOC isn't one of the case "managers" for the trial squad. She drives Repubs so fucking CRAZY! Her presence would have been fun. She has also has been an awesome questioner at hearings: crisp, focused and on-point.

But the team itself is obviously chosen for gravitas and experience. The only "young" reps have backgrounds in the law or law-enforcement. It's a group chosen for seriousness. I got no argument.


Obvsly the Repubs are going to allow only the barest minimum of "trial" to let them put a fig leaf on their acquital. How short is long enough? Two days? Three? Such a pathetic display. Mitch's term leading the senate majority is a black eye on the history of this country.

Well, whatever: make them sign their names to it. It's overdue, honestly.



I think history will be baffled that Trump wasn't ALSO impeached for Obstruction and for Emoluments. Both of them are slam-dunk obvious. Sheesh, he instructed McGahn to falsify the record! The Emoluments issues are black-letter Constitutional text; there is zero amiguity about whether he violated them. I hate that Dems have conceded the precedent that those do not trigger impeachment. It's the wrong move for the Republic's sake.

To my mind Nance was making a political judgement there. And I have long felt – OP of this thread makes the point – that political judgement was precisely the wrong lens to look at this thru. But, well: it's her actual job as Speaker to make poltiical judgements. And honestly those judgements have been pretty sound on the whole. Difficult straits to navigate.



Alright Mitch & Co: sign your names to acquiting this criminal. History will judge you harshly. But you put party over country more than a decade ago. All that remains is to make it official.

What a sad fucking spectacle. It's honestly more fun to re-watch the Ravens failing to convert 4th-&-1s vs the Titans, than this abortion of our national ideals.

I think Republicans hate AOC & Ilhan Omar (and you should too) because they are woefully inadequate, and just represent the rot of DC and how useless these people actually are. If you were to look at it from your own point of view, they are akin to the GOP electing Hillbilly Jim, who shows up slapping female interns on the behind, spitting chaw in session, bringing his rusty rifle and screaming nonsense about what Jesus would do. The democrats elected outwardly anti-semitic morons and you rally behind them simply for the pure fact that we point out that you elected a couple moronic racists... I don't find anything about them drives me crazy... I think it is more likely that you should be embarrassed, and you are not out of sheer pride and willfulness. Right now, both are being investigated by multiple levels of intelligence. Ilhan is about to be indicted for committing dozens of felonies, and AOC is constantly battling legal battles because she had no clue how to handle her committee money. Not only that, but they are screwing over the party by keeping their own funds to run progressives against democrats. They are a cancer to your own party. Keep them as long as you'd like from a GOP perspective... they are costing you national elections every time they talk.

Also... I think that he is going to be let off the hook by his lack of committing any crimes or really doing anything wrong... that will probably be more around why he isn't impeached... the whole, "He didn't do anything wrong" angle really has the democrats in a corner on this one. Jim... you are a pretty smart guy. You cannot tell me that what you saw from the house trial has you really convinced this is a legitimate impeachment... do you? That would put you in a pretty small minority of people. No rational person watched that House Trial and said, "Yup... they got him... nailed it!". None. If you did, you seriously need to focus on looking at yourself as a rational person in the mirror.

[blah3]

Alright Mitch & Co: sign your names to acquiting this criminal. History will judge you harshly. But you put party over country more than a decade ago. All that remains is to make it official.

What a sad fucking spectacle. It's honestly more fun to re-watch the Ravens failing to convert 4th-&-1s vs the Titans, than this abortion of our national ideals.

Funny for trump being a criminal they didn’t impeach him on criminal violations

[steelerhater]

Welp: almost over now.

Nance gained pretty much nothing from delaying the transmission. I think it was always a super long shot. Worth trying, because it was the only club she had left in her bag; but very VERY unlikely to achieve concessions. Mitch is disciplined. An entirely different creature from the Orange Clown.

Of course the other factor was the holiday season. Congressional vacations & downtime made it a perfect time for her to try this delay tactic; but at the same time muted its impact, in my opinion. It was reasonable for Nancy to hope for a slow swell of public opinion to build pressure on Repubs to allow for the calling of witnesses. But it was always a "hope"; and the Christmas / New Year's window is not a great one for heightening political tension.


I was a little disappointed AOC isn't one of the case "managers" for the trial squad. She drives Repubs so fucking CRAZY! Her presence would have been fun. She has also has been an awesome questioner at hearings: crisp, focused and on-point.

But the team itself is obviously chosen for gravitas and experience. The only "young" reps have backgrounds in the law or law-enforcement. It's a group chosen for seriousness. I got no argument.


Obvsly the Repubs are going to allow only the barest minimum of "trial" to let them put a fig leaf on their acquital. How short is long enough? Two days? Three? Such a pathetic display. Mitch's term leading the senate majority is a black eye on the history of this country.

Well, whatever: make them sign their names to it. It's overdue, honestly.



I think history will be baffled that Trump wasn't ALSO impeached for Obstruction and for Emoluments. Both of them are slam-dunk obvious. Sheesh, he instructed McGahn to falsify the record! The Emoluments issues are black-letter Constitutional text; there is zero amiguity about whether he violated them. I hate that Dems have conceded the precedent that those do not trigger impeachment. It's the wrong move for the Republic's sake.

To my mind Nance was making a political judgement there. And I have long felt – OP of this thread makes the point – that political judgement was precisely the wrong lens to look at this thru. But, well: it's her actual job as Speaker to make poltiical judgements. And honestly those judgements have been pretty sound on the whole. Difficult straits to navigate.



Alright Mitch & Co: sign your names to acquiting this criminal. History will judge you harshly. But you put party over country more than a decade ago. All that remains is to make it official.

What a sad fucking spectacle. It's honestly more fun to re-watch the Ravens failing to convert 4th-&-1s vs the Titans, than this abortion of our national ideals.

LOL at AOC being a case “manager” for the trial.

As far as a black eye for this country, nothing will ever match Obama weaponizing the DOJ and other departments against Conservatives.

[DitkasSausage]

Um, me neither.

You understand that was a metaphor, right? I concocted a scenario where my journal & day planner had dates of suspicious meetings, and I threw a juicy name on there to punch up the script. Clearly that was a mistake. Too much red meat for you guys to keep your eye on the ball.


Yes: I see how whenever there is an insane convoluted conspiracy theory that could be construed as supporting Lefty Dem shadiness, you guys instantly believe every abstruse detail of it. IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!

And whenever there is any obvious Occams Razor straight-line in-plain-sight evidence of blatant Trump adminstration misconduct, you guys are are like BUT THERE'S NO SMOKING GUN!!!!

And you aren't the slightest bit self-conscious about your own double-standard, how heavily you lean your thumb – hell, your whole body weight! – on the scales.

It's all very pathetic and disturbing.

You are calling our ideas crazy conspiracy theories... yet Maddow is legit? Literally everything the press told you to be factual ended up being lies for the last 3 years, yet you think WE are the wild-eyed fanatics? That is interesting. You can call us pathetic and disturbing all you want... I think it is funny coming from a person who hasn't had one thing end up going politically his way for 3 years, and has jumped on every Maddow segment, every Schiff comment, every conspiracy theory calling us pathetic. I actually compliment you and disagree with you at the same time. If you want to go down the boss road, we can go there... I'd rather not because I actually like you.

[JimZipCode]

Funny for trump being a criminal they didn’t impeach him on criminal violations

TRUE!

Probly I should not have said "criminal". Criminal has an actual definition; and one that is all too near at hand when we are discussin this administration. The impeached offenses are not criminal conduct. I spose the obstruction (from the Mueller report) would've been "ciminal": there's certainly a crime with that name. But (a) it might be fair to question whether a prosecutor would really go after someone for obstruction of an investigation where the underlying matter wasn't criminal; and (b) Trump wasn't impeached for that anyway!

Bottom line: "criminal" was careless shorthand on my part.

I was thinking in the back of my mind of the famous Nixon "I am not a crook" line from his impeachment-era. One day he's "not a crook", and the next he's being whisked away on the helicopter to retirement.

I will try to stick with "crook" for Trump.

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/...erican/crook_1

informal:
someone who is dishonest, especially someone who uses their position of power for their own personal advantage
Ex:
the bunch of crooks who run the government
Syn:
liar, cheat, hypcrite, fraud, conman, politician , bottom-feeder, charlatan, con artist, fake, grifter, hustler, knave, mountebank, rascal, rogue, scammer, scoundrel, sham, shyster, sleaze, sleazebag, stinker, trickster, varlet, viper, weasel, worm

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/crook

informal:
A person who is dishonest or a criminal.
Ex:
‘the man's a crook, he's not to be trusted’
‘The sport, if that's what it is, has seen way more than its fair share of gangsters and con men and other crooks.’
‘Its history is littered with crooks, conmen and charlatans.’
‘Frankly, most voters think most politicians, and their staffs, are a bunch of crooks already.’
‘This evoked from Augustine the sad observation that there are crooks in every profession.’
‘He drew crowds, cared for the marginalised, made friends with prostitutes and crooks, and called ordinary people like you and me to be his followers.’

That's better: less apt for misinterpretation or inaccuracy, in this charged atmosphere.

Also it's one syllable, so will roll off the tongue same as "Orange Clown".

[JimZipCode]

I think Republicans hate AOC & Ilhan Omar (and you should too) because...

Because they are smart self-possesed women who know their own mind, and see Republanism for the rotten lie it has morphed into over the past ~25 years.

The democrats elected outwardly anti-semitic morons...

Yeah, actually that didn't happen. The lie that Ilhan Omar is anti-semitic and AOC is dumb, reveals far more about you people who tell it than about the ladies themselves.

... and you rally behind them simply for the pure fact that we point out that you elected a couple moronic racists...

Written with a straight face while the Orange Crook is in office! WOW.

Not only that, but they are screwing over the party by keeping their own funds to run progressives against democrats.

An interesting take.

Last cycle, I was profoundly pro-Hillary and profoundly irritated with the Bernie Bros and the Jill Stein people etc etc etc. Now it's ~4 years later, and I am a ton more sanguine about the Liz's and the AOCs. My own policy preferences have always been more in line with what you might call "moderate Democrats" from the 90s. But the last ~dozen years, "moderate Democrats" have become appeasers to the furthest-right Fox News fringes. It's appalling.

Still a ways to go in this cycle. But my opinions are trending in the direction voting for someone whose policies are more Progressive than my own. For one, that seems to be the only element of the party that has a a distinct voice and enough balls not to surrender to the far Right. And for two, I think the Overton Window shift would all by itself be a great benefit to the country, even if I am not personally 100% on-board with every policy proposal.

What I'm saying is, where 4 years ago I would have been staunchly "Democrat" against "Progressives", in this false dichotomy trap you want my party to fall into; today I'm much more comfortable with the party moving more towards the Progressives. "Moderate Democrats" failed, because they were too concerned with winning votes and approval from Republicans. Fuck 'em. We can see very clearly the shithole country that Repubs are trying to turn this into: thta movement needs to be opposed. "Moderate Democrats" have proven incapable. Next!

I They are a cancer to your own party. Keep them as long as you'd like from a GOP perspective – they are costing you national elections every time they talk.

Possibly, I guess we'll see.

But there's SO much racism and xenophobia across the Republican Talking Point Establishment, that it's hard for me to see whether what you're saying is actually true, or just what you guys want to be true. Legitimate perspective, or last gasp of a shrinking demographic? Hard to tell from the perspective of today.

I think that he is going to be let off the hook by his lack of committing any crimes or really doing anything wrong – that will probably be more around why he isn't impeached – the whole, "He didn't do anything wrong" angle really has the democrats in a corner on this one. Jim – you are a pretty smart guy. You cannot tell me that what you saw from the house trial has you really convinced this is a legitimate impeachment – do you?

Absolutely 1,000% yes. Trump solicited a bribe from a foreign power, in order to perform official duties that he was legally required to do.

That's the headline. Smaller-type for the law he broke about disbursing funds appropriated by Congress; also his numerous attempts to violate whistle-blower statutes.

Of course it does not help at all that the ground was already eroded:

• The Mueller Report made it clear that he should have been impeached for somewhere between six and fourteen counts of Obstruction of Justice.
• The Trump Hotel in DC (and other venues) made it clear that he should have been impeached for violating the Emoluments Clause.

So he had been on "impeachable soil" for a long time. But yeah, limited strictly to his conduct on Ukraine: it's so obviously a legitimate impeachment, that I think all you Repubs are trolling or gaslighting with claims to the contrary.

That would put you in a pretty small minority of people.

Small minority = everyone who is not a brainwashed Republican.

No rational person watched that House Trial and said, "Yup – they got him. – nailed it!". None. If you did, you seriously need to focus on looking at yourself as a rational person in the mirror.

Blatantly disingenuous attempt to move the goalposts. The House did not conduct a trial. The Senate has the sole power of trying impeachments. The sham trial is thing that's ABOUT to happen; no trial has occurred yet.

The House held hearings to determine whether there was credible evidence to sustain an indictment/impeachment. Despite administration efforts to sequester witnesses and withhold evidence, there was a surfeit of such evidence. And so we move to trial.

The CRAZIEST fucking thing about it, is how the administration obstructs Congress, stonewalls the investigation at every turn, refuses to turn over documents that they're required to – and then you all say "Well the House didn't find proof!" Shyah. That's exculpatory.

The Republican-controlled Senate will cooperate with the administration in every conceivable way to bury evidence; even to the point of not calling a single witness not named Biden. No rational person will watch the upcoming display and say to themselves, "Yup, that's a fair impartial process!" None. When you do, you seriously need to look at yourself in the mirror and recognize that you put party over country many years ago.


I mean, the simplest possible test would be for you to ask yourselves if you woulda been ok with Obama doing anything remotely similar. But even the most cursory glance at your guys' threads about the "dictatorial Obama administration" reveals the answer at once. But it was as stupid question to begin with.

The only fundamental Republican principle in the 21st Century is, it's wrong when Democrats do it.

[JimZipCode]

You are calling our ideas crazy conspiracy theories – yet Maddow is legit?

How did sweet pedantic Rachel stumble into this converation?? I sure didn't reference her.

Literally everything the press told you to be factual ended up being lies for the last 3 years, yet you think WE are the wild-eyed fanatics?

As I'm sure you know, "everything the press told you ended up being lies" needs at least a little more guardrails put around it, to avoid begging the question.

They try to deny it, but every single reporter on Fox News is a member of "the press". If they and – I dunno, MSNBC? – are telling me different things for the last 3 years; has ALL of it been lies? Only the Fox? Only the MSNC? What, exactly.

I think it is funny coming from a person who hasn't had one thing end up going politically his way for 3 years...

Footnote, Dems gained control of the house in the '18 midterms. Picked up some governorships too, if I'm mistaken.

Your larger point remains accurate of course. '16 prez election was a disaster for the country; the '10 midterms were no picnic; etc.

But what on earth do the results of elections have to do with what we've been talking about here? If every single person in this country became stupid and misguided overnight; so what?

...and has jumped on every Maddow segment, every Schiff comment, every conspiracy theory...

I can't bear to follow it that closely. Way to much rage-spiking.

I actually compliment you and disagree with you at the same time.

In most of these posts I'm constantly shifting gears between "you" as in "y'all" and "you" as in "you, Ditka". I personally find you Ditka to be conversable and engaging on these topics. You clearly have a point of view and are willing to discuss it, and at least engage opposing ones.
(I'm not quite ready to leap so far as to call you "open minded" on other points of view: but you'll have a discussion. Darb seems to do the same; couple others.)

At the same time, it's certainly true that "y'all" routinely say shitty things about Democrats and Libtards in your little echo-chamber down here. Profoundly self-satisfied. I make it a point to match the insolent and offensive tone as precisely as I can, on the infrequent occasions I venture down here. Y'all need to hear it; though it may be unwarranted toward specific ones of "you".

If you want to go down the boss road, we can go there... I'd rather not because I actually like you.

Kind of you, thanks. What's "the boss road"?

[JimZipCode]

As far as a black eye for this country, nothing will ever match...

So, (a), this is not a phrase to use. Our country's history contains episodes like the internment of Americans of Japanese ancestry during WW2, Tuskegee airmen, forced sterilization, the current "children in cages" moment, McCarthyism, on and on. We're still the only country in the world to drop atomic bombs on another; and while for most of my life I've accepted the War as sufficient justification, if there's any truth to stuff I've heard recently about how we purposely rejected Japanese surrender overtures, just so we could demonstrate The Bomb to Moscow; that's a shameful episode. Buchanon felt secession was illegal, but he didn't have any authority/power to oppose it. (Huh?!?)

Um: slavery. "Redemption" and Jim Crow.

This country's got PLENTY of black eyes. The "nothing will ever match" language is just insane.

...Obama weaponizing the DOJ and other departments against Conservatives.

And (b): didn't happen.