Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 07-13-2018, 09:39 AM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Even though I fear you may be right, I refuse to believe that when confronted with compelling evidence of Donald actively cooperating with if not being directed by Putin, that Republicans would not have the decency and patriotism to do the right thing.
When you believe in the conscience of a republican congressman, a fairy gets its wings.
  #202  
Old 07-13-2018, 09:41 AM
Gyrate Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 21,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Even though I fear you may be right, I refuse to believe that when confronted with compelling evidence of Donald actively cooperating with if not being directed by Putin, that Republicans would not have the decency and patriotism to do the right thing.
You know that thing I said about outrage and shame? That also applies to decency and patriotism. Those few Republicans for whom the current situation becomes too much to bear simply resign (or don't run again) rather than go against the party.
  #203  
Old 07-13-2018, 09:41 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
When you believe in the conscience of a republican congressman, a fairy gets its wings.
I know, I feel like a Jimmy Stewart character when I have hope for Republicans having a conscience.
  #204  
Old 07-13-2018, 10:18 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Even though I fear you may be right, I refuse to believe that when confronted with compelling evidence of Donald actively cooperating with if not being directed by Putin, that Republicans would not have the decency and patriotism to do the right thing.
You need to take the blinders off: an international system of oligarchy, which includes both American and Russian oligarchs, controls the Republican party now. This is not really a new development, really. Over the past decade or two, Republicans have become less and less democratically-minded, relying on voter purges, voter intimidation, and gerrymandering to win elections, despite the fact that a majority of Americans have voted against their agenda. Thus, despite the fact that the Republicans have gained power through legal and constitutional means, their means are not truly democratic. The consequence of this is that they have had to rely increasingly on means that are less and less democratic, because they have become the party of big money, and they have become the party that is willing to do anything -- anything -- to satisfy its super wealthy constituency that funds their campaigns. These are not just American plutocrats who are involved in the system; there are plutocrats with Russian ties. Russia has serious investment in our political system. It's beyond just Donald Trump. And until the average American wakes up and clearly understands this reality, we are going to watch our constitutional democratic republic rot away, bit by bit.

But to too many average ignorant American voters, the president is doing his job as long as they have a job. And too many others trust that truth will prevail and that justice will be carried out, because it always has been. That is a recipe for tyranny.

Last edited by asahi; 07-13-2018 at 10:20 AM.
  #205  
Old 07-13-2018, 10:27 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
You need to take the blinders off: an international system of oligarchy, which includes both American and Russian oligarchs, controls the Republican party now. This is not really a new development, really. Over the past decade or two, Republicans have become less and less democratically-minded, relying on voter purges, voter intimidation, and gerrymandering to win elections, despite the fact that a majority of Americans have voted against their agenda. Thus, despite the fact that the Republicans have gained power through legal and constitutional means, their means are not truly democratic. The consequence of this is that they have had to rely increasingly on means that are less and less democratic, because they have become the party of big money, and they have become the party that is willing to do anything -- anything -- to satisfy its super wealthy constituency that funds their campaigns. These are not just American plutocrats who are involved in the system; there are plutocrats with Russian ties. Russia has serious investment in our political system. It's beyond just Donald Trump. And until the average American wakes up and clearly understands this reality, we are going to watch our constitutional democratic republic rot away, bit by bit.

But to too many average ignorant American voters, the president is doing his job as long as they have a job. And too many others trust that truth will prevail and that justice will be carried out, because it always has been. That is a recipe for tyranny.
I think we need to see IF the system works correctly should the Mueller investigation shows what I think it will. If Republicans keep a corrupt and treasonous government in place following this, then it is time for revolution.
  #206  
Old 07-13-2018, 10:30 AM
The Tooth The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
This of course are what I HOPE will happen. What I think will happen is that late this year, the Mueller investigation will be sent to Congress and it will outrage even Republicans, who will reprise the Goldwater-led visit to Nixon and tell him that the jig is up and he must resign, which he will do early in 2019, 2020 tops.
The results of the investigation will be in the shredder before the ink is dry, upsetting the custodial staff to no end.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell

Last edited by The Tooth; 07-13-2018 at 10:31 AM.
  #207  
Old 07-13-2018, 10:36 AM
DigitalC DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 10,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalC View Post
Being president is the best protection he has, there is zero chance he quits. They will have to drag him kicking and screaming even if he loses in 2020.
I fully stand behind my prediction.
  #208  
Old 07-13-2018, 10:40 AM
XT's Avatar
XT XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
I think we need to see IF the system works correctly should the Mueller investigation shows what I think it will. If Republicans keep a corrupt and treasonous government in place following this, then it is time for revolution.
Out of curiosity and not because I personally think it will be the case, but what will your stance be if they don't find anything actionable? Let's say that in the end, while they have found some leads, they don't actually go anywhere near Trump, who was just a stupid fool and clueless about what was going on around him? While this would be ground for not voting for him (such grounds being larger than Everest at this point, IMHO), let's say that there aren't any for charging him with anything.

Will the system still have worked correctly, IYHO? Will it change your opinion on Republicans that they aren't supporting a corrupt and treasonous government...well, not corrupt and treasonous on this issue anyway? Just curious, as I said.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #209  
Old 07-13-2018, 11:34 AM
Bijou Drains Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,332
Barring a major surprise event, he won't quit since he knows there are not 67 senate votes to remove him via impeachment.
  #210  
Old 07-13-2018, 12:13 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
This of course are what I HOPE will happen. What I think will happen is that late this year, the Mueller investigation will be sent to Congress and it will outrage even Republicans, who will reprise the Goldwater-led visit to Nixon and tell him that the jig is up and he must resign, which he will do early in 2019, 2020 tops.
Thank you.

My own prediction is that Trump will not resign, and that in fact there will be no such visit; to the contrary, I predict Trump will be the GOP 2020 nominee.

I take no particular joy in this outcome, even though I do like being right. I'd rather be wrong here.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #211  
Old 07-13-2018, 12:17 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Dude.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
Is it? Is it really?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
This is GOLD, Jerry, GOLD!

Thanks for the laugh, Bricker. I needed it.
Three responses, none of which staked out a claim to an actual factual position. So in each case, the real answer could have turned out to be (a), (b), c(i), or (c)(ii), and you could have said, "Yeah, that's obviously what I meant."
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #212  
Old 07-13-2018, 12:24 PM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
Out of curiosity and not because I personally think it will be the case, but what will your stance be if they don't find anything actionable? Let's say that in the end, while they have found some leads, they don't actually go anywhere near Trump, who was just a stupid fool and clueless about what was going on around him? While this would be ground for not voting for him (such grounds being larger than Everest at this point, IMHO), let's say that there aren't any for charging him with anything.

Will the system still have worked correctly, IYHO? Will it change your opinion on Republicans that they aren't supporting a corrupt and treasonous government...well, not corrupt and treasonous on this issue anyway? Just curious, as I said.
If Mueller says that Donald had no part in it, then I'll accept his finding just as I hope that Republicans would accept a finding that he is guilty as sin.
  #213  
Old 07-13-2018, 12:34 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 20,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Three responses, none of which staked out a claim to an actual factual position. So in each case, the real answer could have turned out to be (a), (b), c(i), or (c)(ii), and you could have said, "Yeah, that's obviously what I meant."
Didn't stake out a position because it is obvious to any high school equivalent reader that he was joking by sentence 2, and when he concluded by having Nancy Pelosi on Mt Rushmore, even those with but a glancing knowledge of the English tongue could figure this out.

Last edited by JohnT; 07-13-2018 at 12:35 PM.
  #214  
Old 07-13-2018, 12:40 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Three responses, none of which staked out a claim to an actual factual position. So in each case, the real answer could have turned out to be (a), (b), c(i), or (c)(ii), and you could have said, "Yeah, that's obviously what I meant."
This is some prime Bricker. I love you, but it's okay to have a light attitude and take obvious joke posts for the obvious jokes they are.
  #215  
Old 07-13-2018, 12:52 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Is your preferred outcome that predictions that fail to materialize should be ignored?
To ignore something implies an active or intentional refusal to consider or pay attention to something, and that's not what was going on prior to your bumping of this thread for trivial reasons.

Per Google:
Quote:
* refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionally.
* fail to consider (something significant).
For a guy whose profession is all about using words precisely, you sure do fail to manage that more often than one would expect.
  #216  
Old 07-13-2018, 02:55 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
This is some prime Bricker. I love you, but it's okay to have a light attitude and take obvious joke posts for the obvious jokes they are.
Sure. But what was unclear was whether the joke was a framework for the serious date prediction or whether it was all a joke.

In another current thread about the 25th Amendment I posited President Locklear in a coma and Vice-President Sambora as Acting President. The names were jokes; the operation of the 25th Amendment part was serious.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.

Last edited by Bricker; 07-13-2018 at 02:55 PM.
  #217  
Old 07-13-2018, 02:59 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
To ignore something implies an active or intentional refusal to consider or pay attention to something, and that's not what was going on prior to your bumping of this thread for trivial reasons.
Yes, it was being ignored. Your second definition— to fail to consider something significant.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #218  
Old 07-13-2018, 03:01 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Sure. But what was unclear was whether the joke was a framework for the serious date prediction or whether it was all a joke.
It was pretty clear to me, and I think the other posters in the thread.

But no big deal. Just another little Brickerism. It's charming, in fact.
  #219  
Old 07-13-2018, 11:55 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
If Mueller says that Donald had no part in it, then I'll accept his finding just as I hope that Republicans would accept a finding that he is guilty as sin.
Then I expect you will be very disappointed. I highly doubt Donald Trump had knowledge of the actions of the Russians. I expect Mueller's probe will show Trump is and has been corrupt for years - money laundering, tax evasion and a host of financial crimes. Whether he is held accountable for them is debatable.

Manafort, Stone, Don Jr. and the rest of the clowns around Trump? I absolutely expect some, if not all of them were aware of what the Russians were up to, yes. But not DJT. He has never been a man concerned with details. From what I've seen and read he just wants his minions to do what has to be done to keep the cash flowing and don't bother him with the particulars.
  #220  
Old 07-14-2018, 12:05 AM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
Then I expect you will be very disappointed. I highly doubt Donald Trump had knowledge of the actions of the Russians. I expect Mueller's probe will show Trump is and has been corrupt for years - money laundering, tax evasion and a host of financial crimes. Whether he is held accountable for them is debatable.

Manafort, Stone, Don Jr. and the rest of the clowns around Trump? I absolutely expect some, if not all of them were aware of what the Russians were up to, yes. But not DJT. He has never been a man concerned with details. From what I've seen and read he just wants his minions to do what has to be done to keep the cash flowing and don't bother him with the particulars.
Oh, yes. That's why he jumped right in and crafted the "explanation" about the Trump Tower meeting -- of which he claims to have no knowledge and didn't attend -- for Don Jr. on that plane ride back from France.

He acts as his own communications director, his own chief of staff, his own press secretary, doesn't listen to his experts and just does whatever he wants to do.

He's a total micro manager. But you think he was oblivious about what his team was up to on his behalf? Tell me another one.
  #221  
Old 07-14-2018, 02:01 AM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Oh, yes. That's why he jumped right in and crafted the "explanation" about the Trump Tower meeting -- of which he claims to have no knowledge and didn't attend -- for Don Jr. on that plane ride back from France.

He acts as his own communications director, his own chief of staff, his own press secretary, doesn't listen to his experts and just does whatever he wants to do.

He's a total micro manager. But you think he was oblivious about what his team was up to on his behalf? Tell me another one.
You seem to be operating under the assumption I'm a fan of our current President. You could not be more wrong. There is little in this world that would delight me more than seeing DJT caught red-handed, up to his neck in this shit show and removed from office. But I doubt anything like this will happen.

If you would like to direct me to an article or something that demonstrates he is a detail oriented person who is deeply involved in the specific tasks needed to accomplish what he wants I would gladly read it. DJT, like any successful mafioso, knows to keep himself insulated from any criminal act that can be directly traced back to him.

Impeachment won't happen, nor will resignation. The best I/we can hope for is that once he is out of office he will be convicted for a variety of financial crimes at the state level and die penniless. Hopefully in state prison.
  #222  
Old 07-14-2018, 10:54 AM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post

Impeachment won't happen, nor will resignation. The best I/we can hope for is that once he is out of office he will be convicted for a variety of financial crimes at the state level and die penniless. Hopefully in state prison.
Even if, himself is untouchable due to the office he holds, those around him, and his businesses are not.

He doesn't have to resign or be impeached to have everything in the world taken away from him. His businesses dissolved, his friends and most of his family (I think Baron is mostly innocent at this point) in jail, and the US Marshals camping out on the white house lawn with a pair of handcuffs on January 20th 2020.
  #223  
Old 07-14-2018, 12:33 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
You seem to be operating under the assumption I'm a fan of our current President. You could not be more wrong. There is little in this world that would delight me more than seeing DJT caught red-handed, up to his neck in this shit show and removed from office. But I doubt anything like this will happen.

If you would like to direct me to an article or something that demonstrates he is a detail oriented person who is deeply involved in the specific tasks needed to accomplish what he wants I would gladly read it. DJT, like any successful mafioso, knows to keep himself insulated from any criminal act that can be directly traced back to him.

Impeachment won't happen, nor will resignation. The best I/we can hope for is that once he is out of office he will be convicted for a variety of financial crimes at the state level and die penniless. Hopefully in state prison.
Kolak, I'm familiar with your posts and am aware you're not a Trump supporter. I have an immense amount of anger about our current state of affairs, and sometimes (often?) it bleeds through in my posts. I am frustrated that people seem unable to recognize the true sociopath who occupies the Oval. You said you highly doubt Trump had knowledge of what the Russians were/are doing, when so many of his observable actions demonstrate the exact opposite:
  • "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails...";
  • Refusing to sit for an interview with Mueller;
  • Disparaging the Mueller investigation at every opportunity;
  • Refusing to criticize Putin, ever;
  • As I pointed out before, taking matters into his own hands to craft the explanation for the Trump Tower meeting;
  • The selection of the only Supreme Court nominee who has publicly declared the president is above the law, cannot be investigated, can fire a special counsel and cannot be prosecuted;
  • Constantly trying to find ways to fire anyone in law enforcement who may bring charges against him;
  • Not-so-surreptitiously offering pardons to those who can tie him to knowledge of the Russian attack in exchange for their silence;
  • Ignores the overwhelming evidence of (successful) Russian subversion of an American election and refuses to take any steps to prevent such subversion in the future.

I could go on and on.

Let's take the last point for a moment. If Trump was an unwitting co-conspirator as you believe, do you think his behavior is consistent with someone who only just learned he was badly used by the Russians in the 2016 election? Wouldn't such a man be eager to make it clear that he had no idea this was happening, cooperate fully with the investigation into Russian interference? Meet with the special counsel, clear his name? Work arduously to support individual states to prevent such election interference in the future? Has Trump done any of these things?

There is a well-known concept in the legal world called 'consciousness of guilt.' If someone engages in a course of conduct that shows they are aware they did something wrong, like lying about obvious things and/or consistently trying to cover their tracks, it demonstrates they are more likely to be guilty. Sure, there can be other reasons why they act that way, but this is a concept permitted to be considered in making a determination of someone's guilt or innocence. I'm sure you've heard this term referenced in describing some of Trump's behaviors.

But wait, you say. It's because he is afraid of getting caught for other illegal activity! That's no doubt true. But I think his awareness goes deeper than that, and I think he has shown his consciousness of guilt about specific Russia involvement over and over again. I'm aware he runs his organizations like a Mafia don, never putting anything in writing, having conversations on the back stairs of Trump Tower with Manafort instead of emails, phone calls or texts, etc. (Reminds me of Paulie in Good Fellas.) But as careful as he thinks he is, he knows that Mueller has the goods.

Here is another morsel for thought: Mueller is not a guy to waste time. If he had determined to his satisfaction that Trump was merely an unwitting co-conspirator, he would come right out and say that. I recently heard it said by someone who worked with Mueller for years and knows him well that if you're innocent, you could not have a better defender in your corner that Mueller. I believe that to be true. Likewise, if you are guilty, he will not stop until he has his man. Given Trump's behaviors toward Mueller and his investigation, which thing do you think more likely to be true?

You asked for a cite to something written that asserts Trump is a details guy, and of course that would be a fiction. Trump's brand is chaos, as is well known. What I'm asking you to consider is that there is a method to his madness. His chaos is extremely well targeted.

A good example is his ostensibly erratic behavior at the NATO summit and visit to the UK. Sure, it looks like he's all over the map -- but if you look a little deeper, it becomes frighteningly obvious that all his behaviors are intended to disrupt the NATO alliance, do everything that Putin would want him to do and throw red meat to his base.

Your opinions are based on what you've "seen and read," and mine are, too. We're not in Great Debates here.

If you felt I attacked you personally, I am sorry. I'm just so frustrated over all this. I'm watching my country being taken apart by a traitor while the Congress tasked with preventing such abominations stands by and looks at its collective watch. As I recently told a friend on this forum who knows me outside of it, I think I come off here as a humorless bitch most of the time. It's not personal. Put it this way: If this turd isn't the one for which the emoluments, impeachment, removal and conviction clauses were written, then we may as well just take them right the fuck out of the Constitution.
  #224  
Old 07-14-2018, 06:32 PM
FavreCo FavreCo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 46
It's possible he quits with 2-3 months left in his term and proclaims that he is the greatest president ever, having accomplished all his goals in under 4 years. He only needs to convince himself, which I would guess he already ahs. he then turns it over to Pence and heads outta town.
  #225  
Old 07-14-2018, 06:39 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
Yes, it was being ignored. Your second definition— to fail to consider something significant.
Can't argue with that. What could be more significant than a year-old prediction on a nth-tier website?
  #226  
Old 07-14-2018, 06:58 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Can't argue with that. What could be more significant than a year-old prediction on a nth-tier website?
Context is all. Your failure to castle may have been significant in that it led to your checkmate seven moves later, but insignificant because who cares what happened in a casual game of chess that was played twelve years ago?

So the prediction is certainly not significant when placed in the context of the entire Internet, where this is merely a single message board.

But within the context of accurate predictions made on this board, the failure is significant.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #227  
Old 07-14-2018, 07:10 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
But within the context of accurate predictions made on this board, the failure is significant.
That context only existed once you bumped the thread.

Nice try, counselor.

In general, the significance of these year-old predictions is only in your head. It's not even the significance of last year's newspapers.
  #228  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:19 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 30,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Doing the lord's work there, Bricker.
This is America, and we don't have lords. I think Bricker can get behind that, seeing as it's in the Constitution.
  #229  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:47 PM
kaylasdad99 kaylasdad99 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 30,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Even though I fear you may be right, I refuse to believe that when confronted with compelling evidence of Donald actively cooperating with if not being directed by Putin, that Republicans would not have the decency and patriotism to do the right thing.
Yeah, I remember having the same belief about the electorate, prior to November of 2016.
  #230  
Old 07-14-2018, 10:39 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
...If you felt I attacked you personally, I am sorry. I'm just so frustrated over all this. I'm watching my country being taken apart by a traitor while the Congress tasked with preventing such abominations stands by and looks at its collective watch. As I recently told a friend on this forum who knows me outside of it, I think I come off here as a humorless bitch most of the time. It's not personal. Put it this way: If this turd isn't the one for which the emoluments, impeachment, removal and conviction clauses were written, then we may as well just take them right the fuck out of the Constitution.
No apology necessary Aspenglow, I share much or your frustration with the current situation. I appreciate all of the points in your post and actually agree with most of your conclusions. I realize Mueller is a hard ass when it comes to investigating crimes. I guess I've just lost hope in the system because it looks as if the most corrupt person to ever be elected POTUS is likely to get away with what he has done, whether Mueller comes up with rock solid evidence or not.

The GOP leadership has shown they value party over country very clearly. From what many who say they are GOP voters have said here and elsewhere it is clear they are of the same mindset so I don't see any way Trump could ever be impeached and he certainly won't resign. I also am pretty much without any hope that the Democrats can get their shit together and do anything about the current situation or are competent enough to successfully mount a serious challenge to the GOP in the midterms or 2020.
  #231  
Old 07-15-2018, 12:05 AM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
No apology necessary Aspenglow, I share much or your frustration with the current situation. I appreciate all of the points in your post and actually agree with most of your conclusions. I realize Mueller is a hard ass when it comes to investigating crimes. I guess I've just lost hope in the system because it looks as if the most corrupt person to ever be elected POTUS is likely to get away with what he has done, whether Mueller comes up with rock solid evidence or not.

The GOP leadership has shown they value party over country very clearly. From what many who say they are GOP voters have said here and elsewhere it is clear they are of the same mindset so I don't see any way Trump could ever be impeached and he certainly won't resign. I also am pretty much without any hope that the Democrats can get their shit together and do anything about the current situation or are competent enough to successfully mount a serious challenge to the GOP in the midterms or 2020.
Thank you for being kind. Bit of a rarity around here.

I don't think impeachment/removal from office is as remote as you do. I think Republicans are holding fast through the mid-terms because court appointments/Supreme Court/tear down as much of the government infrastructure as they possibly can. But... I see some signs that they may not stand with Trump after the mid-terms, especially if Dems take the House -- and I believe they will.

First, note the (R) stampede for the doors.

Second, recent votes in the Senate and the House show Republicans are nervous about Trump's reckless trade shenanigans and screwing around with NATO. They are also concerned about his relationship with Putin. Remember that hasty Senate vote last year to prevent Trump from removing Russian sanctions on his own.

Third, Pence is staying far away from Trump. He pretty much acts as President-Behind-the-Scenes, needed now by Trump only for the occasional Adoring Gaze. But he is quietly consolidating his power.

Behind Trump's back, there is a lot of Republican grumbling and discontent. They know that if Dems take back the House, any Republican that ever put a foot wrong will be investigated within an inch of his/her life. (As he/she should be. My cynical take is that if you are a member of the Freedumb Carcass, you're probably also in it up to your neck with the Russians.)

McConnell knows the jig is nearly up. If Dems take the House in November, I expect a sudden change of heart by Republicans: "My goodness, we had no idea!! Thank you, Director Mueller, for bringing this abhorrent corruption in the Oval Office to our attention!! Let us have a removal trial!!" Even John Roberts isn't that much of a tool.

This is my two-bit prediction for after the mid-terms, but only if Dems prevail. Start practicing your "President Pence."
  #232  
Old 07-15-2018, 08:17 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
McConnell knows the jig is nearly up. If Dems take the House in November, I expect a sudden change of heart by Republicans: "My goodness, we had no idea!! Thank you, Director Mueller, for bringing this abhorrent corruption in the Oval Office to our attention!! Let us have a removal trial!!" Even John Roberts isn't that much of a tool.
Here's my prediction:

IF the Dems take the House, and IF the GOP holds onto the Senate, and IF the House Dems vote to impeach Trump:

There will be no impeachment trial in the Senate.

The Constitution, Article I, Section 3, sixth paragraph, says, "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments." I don't see where it says they have to use that power, even after the House has voted to impeach. Just like two years ago when Mitch decided 'advice and consent' could consist of acting as if Merrick Garland didn't exist (I guess 'fuck off' constitutes 'advice,' so there is that), in the absence of an absolute, ironclad Constitutional requirement that the Senate must have a trial once the House votes to impeach, there will be no impeachment trial in the Senate as long as Mitch is still Senate Majority Leader.
  #233  
Old 07-15-2018, 08:34 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Just started a GQ thread on the question of whether the Senate has to try someone that the House impeaches, for anyone who's interested.
  #234  
Old 07-15-2018, 09:18 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,445
I think it would be a bad idea for democrats to vote for impeachment without strong national sentiment for it. And by 'strong national sentiment' I mean approval ratings dipping down of < 20%. The only way Trump would be successfully impeached is some national disaster or crisis were attributed to his presidency, like a massive economic recession or a costly war, or if Putin goes wild and takes over much of Europe. Anything short of that, he goes nowhere, and he might actually feed off of the fight against him.

I think we've seen enough of Trump to know that he actually relishes the moment when people take the attack to him. He's weaker when his opponents needle him and provoke him into an overreaction. I think an impeachment would annoy Trump, but it would potentially play into his hands, especially since he knows the Senate wouldn't convict him.
  #235  
Old 07-15-2018, 10:05 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 31,587
If the Democrats get the House, they should dig and dig and investigate every whiff of wrongdoing, from cabinet and campaign officials to Trump himself, and if/when they find something that is egregious enough that it resonates with the public at large (and/or if Mueller's findings are egregious and resonate with the public), then consider impeachment.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 07-15-2018 at 10:05 AM.
  #236  
Old 07-15-2018, 11:20 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 7,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
If the Democrats get the House, they should dig and dig and investigate every whiff of wrongdoing, from cabinet and campaign officials to Trump himself, and if/when they find something that is egregious enough that it resonates with the public at large (and/or if Mueller's findings are egregious and resonate with the public), then consider impeachment.
They should restart their own investigation from the beginning, since there has never been a valid congressional investigation.
  #237  
Old 07-15-2018, 12:38 PM
sfriver sfriver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: The IL Corn Desert
Posts: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
If the Democrats get the House, they should dig and dig and investigate every whiff of wrongdoing, from cabinet and campaign officials to Trump himself, and if/when they find something that is egregious enough that it resonates with the public at large (and/or if Mueller's findings are egregious and resonate with the public), then consider impeachment.
In America it is unconstitutional to investigate without evidence first.

My prediction is Trump for two terms. I take home an extra roughly $75 per paycheck, plus I save $700 per year from the Obamacare mandate being eliminated. MAGA.

His ace in the hole is the marijuana card. If he rightly makes it a state's decision like he is leaning to do it will be all over for the liberals. MAGA.
  #238  
Old 07-15-2018, 12:50 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
In America it is unconstitutional to investigate without evidence first.
Citation needed! Where does the Constitution say anything about investigating?
  #239  
Old 07-15-2018, 12:53 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
They should restart their own investigation from the beginning, since there has never been a valid congressional investigation.
As was the case with Nixon's impeachment, the appropriate House committee is likely to receive relevant information from the Special Counsel. They won't have a need to start from zero.
  #240  
Old 07-15-2018, 01:02 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
That context only existed once you bumped the thread.

Nice try, counselor.

In general, the significance of these year-old predictions is only in your head. It's not even the significance of last year's newspapers.
That's . . . um . . .

If we adopt this view, then no future prediction can be called out for being wrong. The prediction is, perforce, a forecast that some future event will occur. If the prediction fails to materialize, it seems obvious to me that pointing out the failure of accuracy is significant. Am I to believe that your position truly is that all of these predictions about how Trump will resign, Dems will take the House, are valid in the moment but "insignificant," when considered after the actual event has happened??

No, no - that can't be true. Surely one value of confidently asserting a prediction is a willingness to revisit the prediction after it has either dissipated or materialized. Otherwise we accept a world of John Edwards, Sylvia Browne, and James van Praagh: they get the benefit of perceived acumen by making confident predictions, and dodge any accountability for their failures.

Even worse: accepting this idea of yours would mean that these types of phony, cheating, despicable psychics could trumpet their successes and dismiss any discussion of failures as "in the past," and "insignificant," and excoriate the person who brings them up.

No! Bullshit on that idea! A person who offers a prediction, whether a despicable "psychic" preying on desperate families or a good-faith debater on a message board, is accountable for that prediction. I absolutely reject your attempt to sweep such accountability away.
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.

Last edited by Bricker; 07-15-2018 at 01:03 PM.
  #241  
Old 07-15-2018, 02:27 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
That's . . . um . . .

If we adopt this view, then no future prediction can be called out for being wrong.
Or you might just wait to have a natural hook to hang it on in some other conversation.

How weird. I know.

But you know, that's how conversations tend to work. When talking with other people, you don't tend to just bring up long-forgotten (by most) conversations out of nowhere, apropos of nothing.

I mean, you can, nothing's stopping you. But everybody's gonna go, "hunh? WTF??"

Which is pretty much what you're experiencing here.

Anyhow, that wasn't my point, which was you can't ignore stuff that isn't there in any meaningful sense. Nobody was ignoring anything when you bumped this thread.

Now I'm ignoring the rest of what you said. It's present. The word applies.
  #242  
Old 07-15-2018, 05:09 PM
Evil Economist Evil Economist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
If we adopt this view, then no future prediction can be called out for being wrong. The prediction is, perforce, a forecast that some future event will occur. If the prediction fails to materialize, it seems obvious to me that pointing out the failure of accuracy is significant.
Since noting ever happens with 100% certainty, predictions are simply expressions of likelihoods, expressed in informal language. Which means a prediction could be correct even if the forecasted event didn't happen.

You seem to be claiming that all predictions are statements of 100% certainty, which is wrong.

I bet you understand this in different contexts, so it's weird that you don't understand it in this one.
__________________
"...the social ills of the nonwhite inner-city poor had their origin not in some mysterious flaws of African-American culture but in economic factors—specifically, the disappearance of good blue-collar jobs. Sure enough, when rural whites faced a similar loss of economic opportunity, they experienced a similar social unraveling." - Krugman
  #243  
Old 07-15-2018, 05:32 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 20,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post

...But you know, that's how conversations tend to work. When talking with other people, you don't tend to just bring up long-forgotten (by most) conversations out of nowhere, apropos of nothing.

...
I see you never got into an argument with my wife, then. Good for you!

Last edited by JohnT; 07-15-2018 at 05:33 PM.
  #244  
Old 07-15-2018, 07:50 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
I see you never got into an argument with my wife, then. Good for you!
Yeah, my mom was like that too. Made sure to marry someone who wasn't anything like her.
  #245  
Old 07-15-2018, 09:52 PM
HMS Irruncible HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
One thing I could not have predicted: the depravity of the entire Republican party, which is now becoming more and more apparent.
Yes, I had low expectations for Republicans, but I am truly shocked seeing the depths of hypocrisy and dereliction displayed by Ryan, McConnell, Nunes & the House Intel committee. Hell, even Jeff Flake with all his public hand-wringing, followed by a total failure to do anything of substance.

Another thing I failed to see was to see the economy chugging along, though we'll note the DJIA is down on the year. It seems the economy has enough steam to continue the Obama expansion, but Trump keeps kneecapping it with his tariff nonsense. Watching for oil and soybean prices as a wildcard here.

Another thing I failed to predict was the utter depravity of the Republican base in cheerfully swallowing the bait while Trump fawned over Kim Jong Un, gave away major concessions, and got zilch in return. His frauds become more evident by the day, and his base more credulous.

Other wildcards are the 2018 election... whether it's a Blue Wave, or not, or some chaotic nightmare scenario of hacking and uncertainty.

With Manafort in jail and Cohen feeling the pinch, and Mueller into the 14th month of the investigation, I can't see how this thing can struggle on for yet another year. So if my original prediction doesn't pan out in the next 6 weeks, auto-renew my subscription for August 2019.
  #246  
Old 07-15-2018, 11:43 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
In America it is unconstitutional to investigate without evidence first.
Which section of the Constitution says that?
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #247  
Old 07-15-2018, 11:48 PM
Bricker Bricker is offline
And Full Contact Origami
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 56,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post

But you know, that's how conversations tend to work. When talking with other people, you don't tend to just bring up long-forgotten (by most) conversations out of nowhere, apropos of nothing.
On the contrary, I remembered it, and refuse to be bound by your inability to remember it. Start a diary. “Dear Diary, Today I predicted Trump would resign in a week and everybody on the SDMB cheered. It was the bestest day ever.”
__________________
It was always the Doctor and Sarah.
  #248  
Old 07-16-2018, 05:41 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 20,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
In America it is unconstitutional to investigate without evidence first.

My prediction is Trump for two terms. I take home an extra roughly $75 per paycheck, plus I save $700 per year from the Obamacare mandate being eliminated. MAGA.

His ace in the hole is the marijuana card. If he rightly makes it a state's decision like he is leaning to do it will be all over for the liberals. MAGA.
Woooo, $75 per paycheck. Guess it makes the alienation of allies and adoration of dictators all worthwhile. Who cares about dismantling of environmental laws and attacks on civil rights when you've got that massive reduction in taxes? Now you're free to skip out on health insurance and head for bankruptcy when you (heaven forbid) get into an accident or develop cancer. And OMG the marijuana issue! Certainly everybody will abandon liberalism once the Mighty Donald takes his jackboot off the necks of the states! We're doomed, doomed I tell ya.

Regarding predictions, some take it more seriously than others. I find it fun to project my hopes and dreams into my predictions, then if I'm right I'm the second coming of Jeanne Dixon. I predict good outcomes so that I'm pleased if I'm right, sort of like how I predict Michigan State to win the Big Ten every year.
  #249  
Old 07-16-2018, 11:03 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricker View Post
On the contrary, I remembered it, and refuse to be bound by your inability to remember it.
Bricker unbound!!

Funny, I don't recall suggesting I could bind you. Trust me, nothing would interest me less.

Seriously, goody goody for you. Congratulations on your excellent memory. And by all means, keep on ignoring things that are not there.

Last edited by RTFirefly; 07-16-2018 at 11:03 AM.
  #250  
Old 07-16-2018, 11:09 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 37,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfriver View Post
I take home an extra roughly $75 per paycheck, plus I save $700 per year from the Obamacare mandate being eliminated.
A $2/hour increase in the minimum wage would increase lower-paid workers' paychecks by $4160/year. I don't know how often you get paid (weekly? monthly? in between?) but among Dems, the only question is whether the minimum wage should be increased from its current $7.25/hour to $12 or $15 or somewhere in between.

That beats Trump's tax cut every which way, unless you're already pretty affluent.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017