192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 06:32 am
@BillW,
Quote:
I'm afraid the free world is headed for a period of extremism.
Thank goodness that religious communities are there to keep civility, reason and respect for human life at the forefront of our affairs.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 06:35 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
Then he added that Judaism was a country.
Ain't that something. A Likud/Kadima/Evangelical and anti-Semitic wet dream.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 08:13 am
Quote:
On impeachment, McConnell vows ‘total coordination’ with Team Trump

In late September, as Donald Trump’s Ukraine scandal started to come into focus, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) demurred in response to reporters’ questions, explaining that she’d likely be “a juror” in the president’s impeachment trial. To draw conclusions about Trump’s guilt or the merits of the allegations, the senator said, might suggest she was “prejudging” the accused.

There are, of course, key qualitative differences between an actual trial in an American courtroom and a presidential impeachment trial in the U.S. Senate, but in a broad sense, senators do serve as jurors. In theory, they have a responsibility to weigh the seriousness of the allegations, consider the evidence, and decide the fate of the accused.

But as Trump’s impeachment process advances, some Republicans are comfortable abandoning the pretense of independence and impartiality. USA Today reported overnight:

Quote:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Thursday that he will be in “total coordination with the White House counsel” as the impeachment into President Donald Trump presses forward.

During an interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News, the Majority Leader said that “everything” he does “during this, I’m coordinating with the White House counsel. There will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this, to the extent that we can.”


Oh. So despite weeks of GOP senators occasionally sidestepping questions about the White House scandal, claiming that they’re jurors who want to maintain the appearance of neutrality, Mitch McConnell – in effect, the jury foreman – is coordinating with the defendant’s lawyers.

Indeed, the Republican leader’s interview followed a Capitol Hill meeting last night with White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and White House Legislative Affairs Director Eric Ueland.

During last night’s marathon session in the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) learned of McConnell’s comments and alerted his colleagues, explaining, “In other words, the jury – Senate Republicans – are going to coordinate with the defendant – Donald Trump – on how exactly the kangaroo court is going to be run.”

On Twitter, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) added that McConnell is “proudly announcing he is planning to rig the impeachment trial for Trump.”

The word “proudly” was of particular interest. The fix is in, and McConnell is in a shameless mood. He’s aware of the seriousness of the scandal; he knows there’s a mountain of uncontested evidence; and he knows his party’s president abused the powers of his office on a historic scale.

And it’s against this backdrop that McConnell isn’t just eager to rig the process to help the accused, he’s bragging about it.

The GOP leader, ignoring reality, added that the case against Trump is “darn weak,” all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. Looking ahead, McConnell went on to say, “My hope is that there won’t be a single Republican who votes for either of these articles of impeachment, and Sean, it wouldn’t surprise me if we got one or two Democrats.”
Benen

It is all about power. Truth? **** that. Democracy? That's for the puny deluded suckers. Power is everything.
McGentrix
 
  2  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 08:25 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

It is all about power. Truth? **** that. Democracy? That's for the puny deluded suckers. Power is everything.


I agree. The House of Representatives have given up on any semblance of searching for truth. Almost 3 years of impeachment investigations and they are going to attempt to impeach the President of the United States of America on "abuse of power" and "contempt of Congress"... Nothing about the Mueller investigation, nothing about emoluments, nothing about Stormy Daniels, Nothing about pussy grabbing, nothing about being a Nazi...

Some much time wasted and money spent to find nothing. Talk about "abuse of power"...
blatham
 
  2  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 08:36 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
Almost 3 years of impeachment investigations
Nothing to do with the House until September following the whistleblower's complaint. The period before that you're referring to involved the special counsel's investigation which resulted in indictments of 34 individuals and three companies with eight convictions or guilty pleas, so far.
blatham
 
  3  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 08:48 am
Quote:
It has often been observed that one of President Trump’s biggest allies in the impeachment battle is Fox News — that if Richard Nixon had enjoyed the benefit of such a powerful purveyor of propaganda, he wouldn’t have been driven from office.

You could not ask for a clearer indication of this than the interview that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell just gave to Sean Hannity about Trump’s coming trial.

The interview showcases how Trump’s propagandists have succeeded in creating a universe that is as hermetically sealed off from this scandal’s widely and firmly established set of facts as one half of a divided cell is from the other.

In this universe, it’s simultaneously the case that everything Trump said on his corrupt call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was absolutely fine and that the key elements of Trump’s pressure on Zelensky simply never happened.

And in this universe, it’s not just fully understood that Trump’s acquittal is assured in advance and that the trial will be gamed to Trump’s maximum benefit. It’s also understood that this is how it should be. Indeed, the interview appears designed to reassure audiences of all this.

That was plainly evident in McConnell’s quotes about how this process will unfold. As McConnell said:
Quote:
Everything I do during this, I’m coordinating with the White House counsel. There will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this.

McConnell also said:
Quote:
We’ll be working through this process ... in total coordination with the White House counsel’s office and the people representing the president in the well of the Senate.

Many have sharply criticized McConnell for telegraphing that the trial will be gamed in advance to assure Trump’s acquittal and to make it as politically painless as possible.

That’s true, but it’s worse than this. Note that Hannity treated this not just as utterly unremarkable, but as how things ought to be.

It’s not. As Laurence Tribe and Joshua Matz write, the framers designated the Senate for impeachment trials to create an “extraordinary court” composed of “the nation’s leading statesmen,” one up to the gravity of weighing “great offenses against the people.” The Senate would not be prone to factional pressure (senators have six-year terms) and would be independent of the president.

But you cannot watch this McConnell interview without coming away convinced that he is trying to reassure the faction known as Trump and GOP voters that the Senate trial will be conducted in full accordance with Trump’s wishes and needs.

“I’m going to take my cues from the president’s lawyers,” McConnell said. “I’m going to coordinate with the president’s lawyers.” And: “There’s no chance the president will be removed from office.”

It has been reported that McConnell wants a quick, un-circus-like trial, whereas Trump wants it to be weaponized against potential 2020 opponent Joe Biden. Here McConnell is plainly trying to put the Fox News audience at ease: The GOP Senate’s interests are 100 percent joined with Trump’s.

Hannity also dramatically misrepresented the evidence against Trump. Hannity said of Ambassador Gordon Sondland:
Quote:
The one fact witness said, ‘The president said he wants nothing, no quid pro quo,’ That was the only fact witness that I saw.

This is a monumental absurdity. Sondland testified that there was a “quid pro quo” in which a White House meeting was conditioned on Ukraine announcing a Biden investigation, as Trump wanted.

What’s more, Sondland also admitted that he actually did directly inform a top aide to Zelensky that the military aid was conditioned on that investigation.

In other words, the extortion demand involving military aid actually was made of Zelensky, by one of Trump’s chief ringleaders, who also explicitly testified that he understood this to be what Trump wanted, as one understands that 2+2=4.

What’s more, this “no quid pro quo” quote from Trump — which came in a call with Sondland — came after the extortion plot was uncovered. And on that same call, Trump reiterated the demand that Zelensky do his corrupt bidding.

But Trump has magically claimed his own quote, delivered even as the corrupt scheme was being executed, as exoneration. In Hannity-land, the power of Trump’s declared self-exoneration, as a reality-defining force, is absolute. It walls out all contrary facts, rendering them nonexistent.

Hannity also said there was zero “evidence of any wrongdoing whatsoever” on Trump’s part:
Quote:
Did you read that transcript? I read it over and over again. I certainly don’t see what we hear Joe Biden bragging about: “You’re not getting the billion taxpayer dollars unless you fire the prosecutor he knew was investigating his son.”

This is utter nonsense. Biden worked to oust the prosecutor, but this was U.S. policy and supported by international institutions, and the prosecutor actually was not “investigating his son.” Meanwhile, on the call, Trump actually did pressure Zelensky to carry out his corrupt bidding, after Zelensky requested military aid.

The disinformation bubble
McConnell also claimed twice that Democrats have wanted to impeach Trump “for three years.”

Not really. A rump of Democrats supported an impeachment inquiry earlier, but Democratic leaders emphatically and concertedly resisted even such an inquiry throughout most of his presidency, only doing so after the Ukraine extortion plot surfaced.

The important point here, however, is that this nonsense is necessary to reverse-justify McConnell’s naked corruption of the process. In the disinformation bubble that is Hannity’s show, millions of Trump and GOP voters are now reassured that McConnell will shape the trial entirely in sync with Trump’s political needs, and that Democrats have rendered it the correct and justified thing to do.

This interview belongs in a time capsule. It will benefit future generations who study the impeachment and all-but-certain acquittal of Trump, and the degree to which Trump’s defenders corrupted our discourse and political system to make that outcome possible.

We don’t yet know what the future consequences of this corruption will be. But future generations will, and interviews such as this one will help demonstrate to them how it happened.
Greg Sargent
McGentrix
 
  1  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 09:01 am
Greg Sargent is obviously full of ****. Go figure you'd quote his fluff piece.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 09:07 am
Kentucky man impersonating cop breaks down door, shoots and kills homeowner in botched robbery. Gets convicted and imprisoned.
His family holds a $21,000 fundraiser for Republican Gov Matt Bevin, personally contribute another $4,000.
Bevin pardons killer.

And that ain't the only despicable pardon from Bevin

How much ya wanna bet the pardoned dude was white? Let's check...

https://media.graytvinc.com/images/810*455/Patrick+Baker.jpg
McGentrix
 
  0  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 09:12 am
@blatham,
Huh. Must be that time where the clock is right as we agree on something. Dude should be in prison.
revelette3
 
  2  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 09:50 am
@blatham,
Well, he won't be there for much longer, the very rare time I was actually proud of my state when we voted him out. He never should have been there to start with and he wouldn't have been had democrats not decided the mid-term election that year wasn't important enough to get out and vote. Maybe Bevin's can get a job with Trump somewhere.
revelette3
 
  3  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 09:53 am
Trump's Christmas cheer just keeps on giving.

Quote:
Trump administration proposes Social Security rule changes that could cut off thousands of disabled recipients

The Trump administration is proposing changes to Social Security that could terminate disability payments to hundreds of thousands of Americans, particularly older people and children.

The new rule would change aspects of disability reviews — the methods by which the Social Security Administration determines whether a person continues to qualify for benefits. Few recipients are aware of the proposal, which is open for public comment through January.

Critics of the plan liken it to the administration’s efforts to cut food stamps, among other entitlement programs, with insufficient information offered to explain curtailing benefits.


source
0 Replies
 
revelette3
 
  4  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 10:03 am
@blatham,
Remarkable in that half the country see nothing at all with McConnell assuring his base that he is working with the President to make sure he is not removed from office. Terrible times we live in.

It is as though we have forgotten already those compelling witnesses who came forward on their own accord to tell the American people just what the President and Giuliani tried to do with evidence to back it up. They keep going on about that stupid transcript, as though it clears the President and as though it is the only evidence of the president abusing his office.

They actually think the president has a absolute right to deny congress it's congressional duty at oversight and refuse to participate. They kept talking about executive privilege in that disgrace they staged yesterday, but as the democrats pointed out, the president didn't assert executive privilege. He just flatly refused to participate and claimed the House had no authority to hold impeachment hearings. As Nadler said, it is not the president's role to decide if the house has grounds for impeachment. The whole day yesterday was a disgrace put on by the republican in the house.

Colins just came off looking a like a shrill weeny, I don't know how he ended up in the minority leadership role of the republicans. Surely they could do better than him.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 11:44 am
@revelette3,
Quote:
Terrible times we live in.

Are you saying it would be better if a president could be removed because one party lost an election? Am I dealing with Americans or fascists? You cannot be both.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 12:13 pm
@McGentrix,
...and the moment quickly passes...
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 12:14 pm
@revelette3,
I know he's gone. But god damn that pardon power can be so easily abused.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 12:55 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
Almost 3 years of impeachment investigations
Nothing to do with the House until September following the whistleblower's complaint. The period before that you're referring to involved the special counsel's investigation which resulted in indictments of 34 individuals and three companies with eight convictions or guilty pleas, so far.


This is how you reveal yourself as a propagandist (or simply a tool).

First of all, you are spectacularly inaccurate when you assert the House didn't get involved until this September. Who the hell did Mueller testify before?

Nadler was appointed Grand High Inquisitor by Pelosi because he needed the exposure to fend off being primaried by AOC and her crowd. When he failed miserably, the sociopath Adam Schiff was given the baton.

Secondly, you are utterly disingenuous with your recounting of the criminal charges resulting from the Mueller investigation. Not one single American, regardless of whether or not they were connected with the Trump Campaign, was charged on the basis of collusion with Russia or any other foreign government. The majority of the individual and corporate indictments involved Russian citizens and companies.

You either know this to be true or are more of Democratic talking-point mouth than I've believed.
blatham
 
  3  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 01:01 pm
@revelette3,
Quote:
Remarkable in that half the country see nothing at all with McConnell assuring his base that he is working with the President to make sure he is not removed from office.
Tribalism on the right is now so thoroughly inculcated and is now being driven to higher pitches of outrage and feelings of victimization by Trump and by right wing media that nothing else ought to be expected.

A fundamental piece of the propaganda story is that Trump has been detested on the left since he announced his candidacy, that such detestation did not waver through his run or the debates and became even more strongly felt since his electoral college win.

Now, all of that is actually true. What makes this presentation of reality propagandist is the big fat memory hole at its core. We despised the man, for sure, but we were not by any means alone.
Quote:
“He’s a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot. He doesn’t represent my party. He doesn’t represent the values that the men and women in uniform are fighting for. I think he’s a kook. I think he’s crazy. I think he’s unfit for office.” Lindsey Graham

Quote:
“This man is a pathological liar, he doesn’t know the difference between truth and lies. The man is utterly immoral” and “a narcissist at a level I don’t think this country’s ever seen.” Ted Cruz

Quote:
“He offers a barking carnival act that can be best described as Trumpism: a toxic mix of demagoguery, mean-spiritedness and nonsense that will lead the Republican Party to perdition if pursued. Trump’s candidacy is a cancer on conservatism, and it must be clearly diagnosed, excised and discarded.” Rick Perry

Quote:
“Trump might be the greatest charlatan of all.” Brent Bozell

Quote:
“Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University.” Mitt Romney

That is just a very few of the many such comments from Republicans about Trump prior to his victory.

To get a much clearer picture of how much Trump was detested by Republicans/conservatives in 2016, wikipedia has a thorough list of senior party and movement figures who opposed Trump at that time. That list is many hundreds of names Do go and look through that list to get any idea of how this part of the past has been so thoroughly erased.

But Trump's victory meant power for the GOP and that immediately changed the public position of most of these characters. Because power is everything to this party. That vulgar and destructive tribalism was already in place even if not at the levels it has now come to.

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 01:21 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
you assert the House didn't get involved until this September. Who the hell did Mueller testify before?
Who else would he testify to? The Teamsters local 22? A high school grad class? The House, a bipartisan body, is who he must report to. That's standard. But the Mueller investigation was NOT initiated by the House nor anyone in it. It followed from an FBI investigation.

Quote:
Not one single American, regardless of whether or not they were connected with the Trump Campaign, was charged on the basis of collusion with Russia or any other foreign government.
So what? Would you rather all the criminality discovered and exposed would be better left unrevealed and the characters involved unconstrained and unpunished? Would it be better if we didn't know that Manafort and Gates were providing polling data to the Russians? Would we be wiser and better citizens if we didn't know that Don Jr arranged a meeting for the express purpose of finding Russian "dirt" on Clinton?

Would you rather that the FBI or any other policing entity never begin any investigation before their finding are magically revealed and understood before any investigation begins?

But more relevantly to your argument, the Mueller report pointed out that "collusion" has no legal definition and is not a federal crime. The report did not establish conspiracy or coordination but made no determination on "collusion" but it suggested attempts to collude were possible to probable.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 01:31 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
Who the hell did Mueller testify before?

That wasn't an impeachment investigation. Mueller and the FBI did the work, not the House committees.
Quote:
the sociopath Adam Schiff

What anti-social behavior did you witness from Schiff?
Quote:
Not one single American, regardless of whether or not they were connected with the Trump Campaign, was charged on the basis of collusion with Russia or any other foreign government.

The charge would have been on the basis of conspiracy, not "collusion". It would have involved both sides agreeing to perform an illegal, subversive, or wrongful act together; it would have been very difficult to prove. The reason "collusion" was suspected is because of all the many contacts between Trump campaign officials and various Russian operatives during 2015 - 2016 — and the fact that these calls and meetings were denied.
blatham
 
  1  
Fri 13 Dec, 2019 02:14 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
and the fact that these calls and meetings were denied.
And covered up or purposefully hidden from citizen view. Good point.

Schiff as sociopath... I figured that would be an entirely fruitless topic for discussion. But if Finn wants to make reference to the DSM or other credible social-science based source material, fine. [Now accepting wagers on the chances of this happening]
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.42 seconds on 04/24/2024 at 10:17:43