Me, too OD. I fear for my country, too. The mask has been torn off by President Trump and the Democrats revealed for what they’ve always been, racist authoritarians who think they are still in charge of the plantation and must keep all of us “darkies” in line.
Go ahead and convince me that the Framers intended for impeachment to be used as a political weapon. I still haven’t heard your (or anyone else’s, on RO or elsewhere) answer to just what Trump said that allegedly “incited insurrection” as Pelosi so b—s---tedly put it.
Now you’re just being dumb.
For good reasons.
Apparently, you don’t know what a strawman is.
Apparently, you didn’t read the Muller Report or the Senate report that followed.
No one ever concluded that you’re making that up.
A carryover of the administration before. Remember there were more jobs created under the last three years of Obama than the first three of Trump. A hard FACT that does not comport with your delusions, but it’s true.
All you can do is strawman and make stuff up.
Not a progressive any more than you’ve proven yourself a Trumpublican.
Impeachment is a political remedy, not a legal one.
I think the case of incitement has to be taken in a larger context leading up to the election. But the single biggest is spouting over and over again that the election was stolen from him. That he won every state by “Yuge numbers”.
Then going on to tell people they need to “fight”, taking more than an hour to send help and denying the Maryland National Guard, that was literally on the way to DC, the opportunity to help. I don’t think these were mistakes, I think they were calculated.
Look if mob boss wants those around him to commit heinous crimes, they know how to speak in coded language that creates plausible deniability. Trump has spent his entire career skirting the law. He is very clever in this regard, but anyone who looks at Trump with just a modicum of skepticism can clearly see what he’s doing.
We’re told this is a random group of wingnuts who lost their temper, and I’m sure many were, but still learning facts about the attack and how it was pre-planned. There is a video of the Proud Boys recording their march to the capitol and at least one member who slips and talks about storming the capitol before being admonished by another member not to speak of it. Members of Congress have allegedly provided support. Support may point ultimately back to the President.
Few other thoughts that will either be proven or disproven in the coming months, let’s see how this statement holds up over time…
(1) white house staffers have reported that the sitting President saw the insurrection as a good thing and that he was going to just continue watching it on TV while humans were murdered; that is, until these staffers finally convinced him to speak to the public,
(2) the sitting president never made any calls to aid Congress (i.e. he abdicated his duty) and, instead, the Vice President and Congress-people had to call for support through unofficial channels, AND Giuliani, left a message for Tuberville but dialed the wrong number and left a message at 7pm. Still only concerned about delaying the vote by objecting to every state’s count in order to delay the legitimate and certified votes from each state. No concern about what happened, no asking if everyone was ok.
(3) the insurrectionists were much closer to gaining access to the Vice President and the Speaker of the House (of whom the insurrectionists had called for death during the insurrection),
(4) there were law enforcement officers “inside” aiding the insurrection, and
(5) the insurrection was more organized than at first appeared and that some of the same white nationalist groups in the 1/6/21 insurrection are involved in the planned inauguration day insurrection.
Are these hard facts? No, not yet and I may be wrong, so hang tight. The evidence for what happened is so plentiful it’s going to take months to sift through. But I can already see what’s going to happen. It won’t matter what is found or who steps forward. Trump will call it a witch hunt and his supporters and the press on the right will parrot his lies.
Now, to be honest, will they be able to prove insurrection?
As of today, given what I know, I don’t think so unless there is more that comes about things that took place beforehand, but I think when you take everything into account what happened at the capitol was planned and a relatively small group within the larger group knew exactly what they were doing and Trump reveled in it.
Trumps statements post attack are pre-written statements he’s reading (usually how you can tell he saying things he doesn’t agree with) to try to save his own skin. I mean, he looks like somone is pointing a gun at him forcing him to read them. You know he means what he says when he speaks candidly and off the cuff.
I also think we haven’t seen an end to right-wing terrorism based on the lies Trump has told about what is known about the election. The election wasn’t stolen. Trump lost and people around him know it. That is the opposite of patriotism.
The approval rating for Congress has been below 20%. Since then Congress has sat on the Covet relief package for months before they passed it. Now Congress is impeaching a President who is leaving office in less than a week.
Now the Democrats have their President upon whom they spent hundreds of millions of dollars and countless man hours to get elected. He needs their support to get his cabinet officers approved and begin to work on his legislative program. Instead of devoting their time to the future, they are wasting their time seeking revenge for the past.
How much lower can the public perception of Congress go? Should “totally dysfunctional and useless” be a poll option? If the Congress had acted this way during the early days of the Great Depression, last week’s attack might have looked tame. The country was that close to a revolution at that point.
How moronic a statement to make! Worse yet, you probably BELIEVE that crap! The federal bureaucracy futzed the numbers to make it SEEM like unemployment had been reduced, ignoring the FACT that millions just quit LOOKING for work so weren’t counted as “unemployed” any longer and the jobs that WERE filled were all minimum-wage, burger-flipping jobs, largely with McDonald’s and other fast-food, part-time employment during the Obama years. We saw people with MASTERS degrees operating the deep fryers at Burger King and PhD’s working as “greeters” for Walmart under Obama.
Let’s consider Trump’s approval vs past Presidents
Well, at least he’s been consistent.
You realize that was due to Republicans, right?
Yes, I think with the goal of trying to prevent him from running again.
That said, I hope the impeachment runs out over some time as I think there is a lot of evidence still to be collected. Trying to rush is a bad idea.
And Trump and allies spent…?
Yes, after a person does something unethical, we should all look past it, to the future. I know that’s what Republicans did with respect to Bengazi, right?
It’s ironic that individual congresspeople have much higher ratings individually than Congress has overall.
I think there are numerous reasons this is the case. Some of the problems are with the people we vote for, some are problems within the institution of Congress and lastly some are issues with us, the people that vote them in.
So why don’t you tell us, what you think needs to happen to increase Congress’ approval rating to 50% or better?
I once read that every nation is 9 square meals away from a revolution. However, the problems of the GD were related to economic failures rather than purely partisan political ones.
You realize how often you do this, right? I mean, stupidity loves company, I guess. Right detective?
BS. Pelosi ADMITTED that she’d stalled the vote on it in order to prevent President Trump from getting credit for it before the election! Have you been ASLEEP for the paste 9 months?
Sounds like something you made up.
There is precedent for impeaching someone after they’ve resigned from office.
William Belknap, War Secretary was impeached after he resigned. Trump has been impeached while still in office, it’s his trial that would take place after he leaves, assuming McConnell refuses to bring the Senate back before the 19th (which I’m acctually in favor of), we’ll see his trial take place after he leaves.
No, it was Nancy Pelosi. Even Leslie Stahl posed those question to her, and she dodged it by saying she’s always willing to compromise. Yea, right, like Hitler was ready to compromise with Jewish people.
The attitude has always been, “It’s the other guy’s representative who makes Congress bad. My guy is great.” The trouble is there are too many safe seats, and that is why Congress can get away with whatever they want. At 75% of the districts will vote for the same party election after election. AOC’s district is one of them. If we had term limits, they might be more interested in doing the people’s business. I’d be very generous, Twelve years and you are out.
My district is fairly solid as a Republican seat. That didn’t stop us from turning out a one term congressmen in the primary because he was guilty of playing games with his campaign contributions. We elected his replacement over a Nancy Pelosi puppet who started out by telling everyone she was going to work with both sides. Then she lined up with her far left friends.
Getting rid of Nancy Pelosi would be a great start. She is a hater and a totally partisan politician who can get nothing done that is positive because she hates all Republicans. She is nasty and totally divisive. She is “the Donald Trump of the Republican Party.”
When it comes to working across the aisle, there is no difference between Trump and Pelosi. The difference is she comes from a safe district and never has to worry about re-election. She rules her Democrat Congress minions with an iron hand. If you cross her, you will end up cleaning political toilets.
Term limits would be another. Get some fresh blood at every 12 years. I would agree to something shorter, but I’ve tried to be generous.
There is one thing that AOC and I agree on. The Congressional Democrats need new leadership. All three of them 80 years old or older. They are accountable to no one, and they are not grooming anyone to replace them.
No, what @Pappadave posted is truth, but a partisan like you can never see the truth.
I am very willing to dump on a Republican who goes wrong. You might have noticed that I am not among Trump minions. I probably would not vote for him again if I had the opportunity. His policies were good and effective, but his demeanor stinks and it has poisoned everything he’s done.
You, on the other hand, are a Democrat political slave. None of them can do anything wrong in your eyes.
Oooooooohhhh…Since you said it, now I believe it. /sarcasm off
Sounds like you’re going along with something he made up.
Yes, I call them Trumpublicans and I’ve acknowledged on my own that, while you hover on the fringes, you aren’t, at least in my opinion, a card carrying Trumpublican, even though you’d call me a “progressive” and consistently strawman my arguments.
You really can’t help yourself, can you?
I’ve already said I don’t support the fast track.
How could you ever call yourself anything but a “progressive?” You mouth all of their talking points.
1 Remedy, not weapon. I’m seeing plenty of evidence of the latter and none of the former. And you never did answer my question in (I think) another thread about why Congress needs to make sure Trump can’t run again when he’s at the end of his term. To elaborate on that, if he’s so clearly guilty, an FBI investigation (I laugh at the notion that they’re friendly to Trump) can put the evidence together, present it to Biden’s chosen AG, the AG prosecutes and convicts him, and he’s no longer eligible to run. Convince me this isn’t a nanny-state end run to keep the people from even having the option of choosing Trump.
2 Pretty vague case, so far as I can see. A long way from stating as a fact beyond a reasonable doubt (if that far) that he’s guilty of inciting insurrection.
3 You mean Trump the buffoon who keeps putting his foot in his mouth can speak this coded language without tripping himself up and giving himself away? Sorry, but no, I’m not seeing it.
Okay, the insults are ramping up in this thread, so everyone please cool it.
Why do you find being called a “progressive” and insult? The term dates back to Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson although they didn’t care for each other. I thought that being called a “progressive” was compliment in your end of the political perspective.
An any rate, I view “Progressivism” as an oxymoron. It is based on the concept that a relatively small group of people make and enact public policy leaving those who disagree with them out of the loop. That does not sound “progressive” at all to me. That sounds more like the trappings of royalty and dictatorship. It’s going back to an older, undemocratic system, which why I call them “Regressives.”