Progressives (Liberals)

Oralloy and Branco at their usual racist post spasms, implying none too subtly that black voters are so dumb they'd be taken in by the old carrot on a stick trick. They aren't. They're fully aware the GOP offers them nothing, and Trump is racist thru and thru. Which is why they overwhelmingly keep on rejecting the gop's blandishments and vote Dem. As do women. Hell, Shelby Steele, the black ex-chairman of the RNC, told Repubs that ten years or so ago, and they were too dense to listen. And that was from one of their own. They're still too dense, as is branco.

I've warned that impeachment talk is dangerous, but the time has come: Laurence Tribe

Dave Weigel
‏Verified account
@daveweigel
Dave Weigel Retweeted Nate Silver
In an average of polls, Trump is still running at least 20 points behind where Bill Clinton was when the House impeached him.

By Josh Marshall
April 22, 2019 9:03 am
In the rush of debate and intra-Democratic acrimony about impeachment over the weekend, I wanted to link back to this post from last August. Some of the details are different. But the gist is really the same. Many people who are furious at the President’s crimes and coverups want him impeached right now and think anything short of immediate of articles of impeachment amounts to some kind of civility fetish or refusal to fight his lawlessness. That’s not true. The problem with immediate impeachment is that it takes focus away from investigations which can actually have an effect. I would add that if you want to take the existing and on-going investigations and rebrand the Judiciary committee’s probe as an impeachment inquiry, fine, whatever – as long as it is truly open-ended and can run indefinitely. In any case, I encourage you to Read This Post.

I admit at this point, strategy for me is secondary.

Trump plausibly committed impeachable offenses. A leading expert explains how.

After botching their initial response to the Mueller report, top Democrats are now seriously engaging the debate over whether the shocking scale of corruption, wrongdoing, contempt for our democracy, endless official deception and skirting of criminality that it documented merits — or indeed obligates — an impeachment inquiry.

In multiple TV appearances, the chairmen of three House committees suggested Mueller’s findings are “serious and damning” and normally would fall “within the realm of impeachable offenses," and that doing nothing could leave Trump “emboldened” and signal that “future presidents can engage in this kind of corruption without consequence.”

...Philip Bobbitt, the constitutional scholar at Columbia University, is among those who have wrestled most deeply with the complex questions raised by impeachment. He is the co-author of “Impeachment: A Handbook,” which republishes the famous commentary on impeachment by Yale law scholar Charles L. Black Jr. and concludes with Bobbitt’s own discourse on the topic.

I spoke to Bobbitt at length about the latest revelations. The upshot: Bobbitt now believes it’s “plausible” that Trump committed impeachable offenses and that the House of Representatives is obligated to proceed from this premise.

Democratic debate over Trump’s impeachment reaches a new stage

Before the public was able to read Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report last week, most Democratic leaders were eager to downplay talk of Donald Trump’s impeachment, if they were willing to acknowledge the question at all. But now that the report is out, and we’ve seen the evidence of the president’s alleged crimes, conditions are different.
At least a little...

Everyone knows the scandal's key was the claim that Trump election-conspired with Russia and that he and his key associates were Russian assets.

It shows how sweeping an investigation it was, yet still came up empty on this

I just want there to be some accountability at some point for this administration.

America must, somehow, return to earlier consensus on the rule of law and on fighting corruption at the top.

if such demands from Dems (and from the sane and moral conservatives) look likely to aid Trump's chances of a second term, then it is absolutely certain that much greater damage to democracy will unfold.

I spoke to Bobbitt at length about the latest revelations. The upshot: Bobbitt now believes it's "plausible" that Trump committed impeachable offenses and that the House of Representatives is obligated to proceed from this premise.

the intent of the investigation was to establish what really happened, not to prove any particular conjecture.

I don't see how this leads to Trump's re-election.

Quote:

One of President Donald Trump's picks to serve on the Federal Reserve Board has written that women should be banned from refereeing, announcing or beer vending at men's college basketball games, asking if there was any area in life "where men can take vacation from women."

Stephen Moore, an economic commentator and former Trump campaign adviser, made those and similar comments in several columns reviewed by CNN's KFile that were published on the website of the conservative National Review magazine in 2001, twice in 2002 and 2003.

CNN's report found a missive Moore wrote in March 2002 on the March Madness college-basketball tournament, in which the Republican pundit presented his case for removing "un-American" aspects of it. The first proposed "rule" was banning women.

"Here's the rule change I propose: No more women refs, no women announcers, no women beer venders, no women anything," he wrote at the time. "There is, of course, an exception to this rule. Women are permitted to participate, if and only if, they look like Bonnie Bernstein. The fact that Bonnie knows nothing about basketball is entirely irrelevant." CNN also found a later missive in which Moore wrote that Bernstein, a CBS sports journalist at the time, should wear halter tops.

Just weeks before the 2020 census questionnaire goes to print, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether the Trump administration can ask about citizenship.

Oral arguments in the case Tuesday will center on how the government can get the most accurate headcount -- and whom the census is supposed to be counting.

The stakes are significant because the census determines the apportionment of seats in Congress and how billions in federal tax dollars are distributed over the next decade.