Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 04-22-2019, 05:55 PM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,778
Start the process, the destination is not the journey, grasshopper. Calmly accumulate the evidence and the documents, pile them up, reach for the next bunch. There is a value in educating the people regardless of ultimate outcome.
  #102  
Old 04-22-2019, 06:09 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMurdock View Post
What is this, False Dichotomy Day? I can't keep up with all these wacky holidays they come up with: Presidents' Day, Cesar Chavez Day, False Dichotomy Day...

How does Senate Republican intransigence and partisanship translate into less participation by Democrats in November 2020?? Yes, yes, Clinton, but he was impeached -- when you get right down to where the cheese holds together -- for a blow job. By a bunch of guys with extramarital affairs and illegitimate children on their records. So, no, I really don't think the comparison is valid.

Doing the right thing -- playing out the constitutional process of impeaching a sitting president for malfeasance - is "posturing about Virtue and Duty"??
I think there IS a way to "impeach" with minimal posturing about We Must Do Our Duty, and I think that's the smart way to go, assuming the activists get their way.

As for 'less participation by Democrats in November 2020': yes, on the day the Senate votes to acquit Trump, and for many days and weeks thereafter, Trump and all the Congressional Republicans will be doing victory laps with plenty of media coverage from all the major outlets (not just FoxNews). All day and night. Every day and night, for days and days. And the great victory of Trump will dominate coverage in a way that Trump could never have hoped to do, if not for the impeachment/acquittal.

And that will be a big giant humongous gift to Trump and to the Republicans.

And a lot of people who would otherwise have been inclined to vote for the Democrat, will feel sickened and disgusted with the Democrats for giving Trump and the Republicans that particular gift.


All the claims that 'Trump and the GOP will declare victory no matter what's going on, even if there's no impeachment' ignore the fact that massive media coverage, by ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS/NPR, and the major newspapers, will be very different in the case of "Senate Acquits Trump" as opposed to the case of "nothing happened in the Senate but Republicans are saying Trump is awesome anyway."

It's not smart to ignore this difference in the degree and intensity of coverage.
  #103  
Old 04-22-2019, 06:50 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,408
A consideration that I haven't seen here - is it worth it to Democrats to potentially lose the House majority in order to impeach but not convict? The current majority is based on winning purple and slightly red districts. The reps in those districts are the ones most vulnerable and they can't reliably win just by appealing to the party faithful.

Vulnerable House Democrats tread carefully in wake of Mueller report - Reuters

Quote:
More than 30 Democratic representatives, many of whom are in their first term, represent districts that supported Trump in 2016.
Quotes from two of those potentially threatened Reps:
Quote:
“Regardless of what actions the president did or didn’t take ... understanding in far greater detail the aggression of a foreign adversary nation against our election’s infrastructure should ideally help us avoid such circumstances in the future,” she [ Abby Spanberger, D - VA] said.
Quote:
“If the conclusion remains that there is no further criminal wrongdoing, I think we should, as a country, move on and ensure that Russia cannot interfere again,” said Ben McAdams, a freshman Utah Democrat in a Republican-leaning district.
A senior strategist involved in crafting the 2020 campaign messaging but wanted to remain anonymous
Quote:
said the party’s own research showed the Russia probe was not particularly resonant for voters.

Still, he said Mueller’s findings would create the background “mood music” when Democrats talk in broad terms about corruption and government accountability.
The Democratic leadership is going to have to make a hard decision about how much risk they are willing to accept for impeaching, but likely not convicting, Trump. It's a real risk. It's especially risky for those 30 first term reps from districts Trump won in 2016. It ceases being background music the moment they are forced onto the record by an impeachment vote.

Last edited by DinoR; 04-22-2019 at 06:51 PM.
  #104  
Old 04-22-2019, 07:08 PM
CaptMurdock's Avatar
CaptMurdock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Evildrome Boozerama
Posts: 1,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
I think there IS a way to "impeach" with minimal posturing about We Must Do Our Duty, and I think that's the smart way to go, assuming the activists get their way.
Fine. I'm listening.

Quote:
As for 'less participation by Democrats in November 2020': yes, on the day the Senate votes to acquit Trump, and for many days and weeks thereafter, Trump and all the Congressional Republicans will be doing victory laps with plenty of media coverage from all the major outlets (not just FoxNews). All day and night. Every day and night, for days and days. And the great victory of Trump will dominate coverage in a way that Trump could never have hoped to do, if not for the impeachment/acquittal.

And that will be a big giant humongous gift to Trump and to the Republicans.

And a lot of people who would otherwise have been inclined to vote for the Democrat, will feel sickened and disgusted with the Democrats for giving Trump and the Republicans that particular gift.
Mmmm. No. Not buying it. Any victory laps that the Republicans take will lead to that much more outrage, and Democratic voter turn-out. Especially as the major outlets sans Fox News are going to style this as Republican Partisanship Trumps Patriotism, which it is.

Besides, I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that the Senate is going to acquit Trump. McConnell is only one man. And if there's as much dirt to be uncovered by a House investigation and impeachment proceedings, some of the Repubs might not be as stalwart as Orange Julius Caesar wants to be believe.
__________________
____________________________
Coin-operated self-destruct...not one of my better ideas.
-- Planckton (Spongebob Squarepants)
  #105  
Old 04-22-2019, 07:10 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Hey LHOD, who are you quoting in that second box? Good stuff, that.
And that's just off the top of my head!

I'm available for consultations by Democratic candidate, good rates.
  #106  
Old 04-22-2019, 07:15 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,803
[sarcasm] I think Democrats govern best when they allow fear to guide them. [end bullshit]
  #107  
Old 04-22-2019, 07:17 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
I think there IS a way to "impeach" with minimal posturing about We Must Do Our Duty, and I think that's the smart way to go, assuming the activists get their way.
No 'posturing' as you call it, would be necessary if the House Dems would just pass a resolution authorizing the House Judiciary Committee to initiate an investigation to determine whether impeachment was warranted.

If nobody 'postures,' then people like Steny Hoyer will assume it's OK with the caucus to not do jack shit.

Seriously: in the face of leadership's apparent willingness to sit on their hands, what's the Sherrerd-approved way for Dems in and out of Congress, but in public life, to pressure the leadership on this matter?
  #108  
Old 04-22-2019, 08:49 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoR View Post
A senior strategist involved in crafting the 2020 campaign messaging but wanted to remain anonymous
Russia is only important to the left wing intellectuals who assume that since President Trump violated the constitution, it necessarily follows that he must be removed from office. In reality, most voters are just not that educated and to them, this entire investigation is nothing more than political payback. That's obviously not how we here at SDMB see it, but that's how this is perceived by many voters, including a fair sum who don't really like or support Trump.

This isn't Watergate, and this isn't the year 1974. Sorry.
  #109  
Old 04-22-2019, 09:04 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Russia is only important to the left wing intellectuals who assume that since President Trump violated the constitution, it necessarily follows that he must be removed from office. In reality, most voters are just not that educated and to them, this entire investigation is nothing more than political payback. That's obviously not how we here at SDMB see it, but that's how this is perceived by many voters, including a fair sum who don't really like or support Trump.

This isn't Watergate, and this isn't the year 1974. Sorry.
Really? So you're saying the bullshit Benghazi hearings had no effect on Clinton's popularity?

And you don't think some Americans can discern between proceedings of real significance and manufactured garbage meant only to dirty up a candidate?

Don't tell me open hearings don't have an impact. Few people will have time to read a 448 page report. They'll watch televised hearings, though.

I think you and Sherrerd are reading this all wrong. Trump's approval rating remains at the mid-30s to mid-40s despite a decent economy. He horrifies people. Even if every single person who voted for Trump votes for him again in 2020 (and they won't), what turned the trick in the mid-terms are the new voters who turned out. There is not one single thing that changes this strategy for the presidential election in 2020.

We're not after Trump voters. We're after the ones who came out to ask Dems to provide a check on Trump. What message does it send if Dems aren't willing to do what the people came out to ask them to do?

As for Republicans crowing about a failed vote in the Senate... if Dems back off of impeachment, do you think they'll do anything different? They're going to do everything possible to de-legitimize the process of either Democrats' choice of oversight or impeachment. It will make no difference which avenue Dems pick. If Dems back away, Republicans will simply adjust their narrative: "We told you there was nothing there!"

I say, do what's right and you can't go far wrong. Impeach. If Senate Republicans fail to remove after all the testimony, I should think it only strengthens the resolve of voters to get rid of the Republicans who feel they are all above the law.
  #110  
Old 04-22-2019, 09:50 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
And you don't think some Americans can discern between proceedings of real significance and manufactured garbage meant only to dirty up a candidate?
Not really, no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Don't tell me open hearings don't have an impact. Few people will have time to read a 448 page report. They'll watch televised hearings, though.
They'll watch what their filters tell them to watch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
I think you and Sherrerd are reading this all wrong. Trump's approval rating remains at the mid-30s to mid-40s despite a decent economy. He horrifies people. Even if every single person who voted for Trump votes for him again in 2020 (and they won't), what turned the trick in the mid-terms are the new voters who turned out. There is not one single thing that changes this strategy for the presidential election in 2020.
He horrifies people, but not his base of supporters, and he doesn't seem to be horrifying independents a lot more now than he was when many of them decided to vote for him despite their horror. That's what people are missing: he won an election with nearly 50% of the vote, which noticeably outperformed his miserable favorability ratings. Trump has always horrified and disgusted people - and many of them voted for him anyway.

I don't disagree that Trump is vulnerable, but he's always been so. He's always had to scrape and claw for votes. I guess I'm not really opposed to investigations, provided that they don't assume that the congressional investigative process is going to fundamentally change the dynamics by itself. They need to win on issues.

As for providing a check on Trump, I think that's what happened in 2018. In 2020, the way I see it, it's a referendum on his presidency. Incumbents generally don't lose when the economy is doing this well. I can't remember anytime in recent memory when a president lost under those circumstances.
  #111  
Old 04-22-2019, 11:53 PM
CaptMurdock's Avatar
CaptMurdock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Evildrome Boozerama
Posts: 1,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Not really, no.







They'll watch what their filters tell them to watch.



How wonderfully facile and empty. Saves actually having to think,doesn't it?

Quote:
He horrifies people, but not his base of supporters, and he doesn't seem to be horrifying independents a lot more now than he was when many of them decided to vote for him despite their horror. That's what people are missing: he won an election with nearly 50% of the vote, which noticeably outperformed his miserable favorability ratings. Trump has always horrified and disgusted people - and many of them voted for him anyway.



I don't disagree that Trump is vulnerable, but he's always been so. He's always had to scrape and claw for votes. I guess I'm not really opposed to investigations, provided that they don't assume that the congressional investigative process is going to fundamentally change the dynamics by itself. They need to win on issues.



As for providing a check on Trump, I think that's what happened in 2018. In 2020, the way I see it, it's a referendum on his presidency. Incumbents generally don't lose when the economy is doing this well. I can't remember anytime in recent memory when a president lost under those circumstances.

I can't remember a time in recent memory that a president has gone on Twitter To snipe at his political adversaries, either. Maybe historical precedent is not the see-all tell-all you think it is.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
____________________________
Coin-operated self-destruct...not one of my better ideas.
-- Planckton (Spongebob Squarepants)
  #112  
Old 04-23-2019, 12:46 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMurdock View Post
How wonderfully facile and empty. Saves actually having to think,doesn't it?




I can't remember a time in recent memory that a president has gone on Twitter To snipe at his political adversaries, either. Maybe historical precedent is not the see-all tell-all you think it is.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Reported for personal insults.
  #113  
Old 04-23-2019, 01:01 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,239
The Democratic leadership's message should be "Although Trump is clearly unfit for office and should be removed, we're not going to waste the people's time by going through the motions of an impeachment process which is doomed to fail because the GOP leadership will always put party over country. Once a few Republican Senators indicate that they are open to impeachment, we'll put that on the fast track. In the meantime, we will spend our time and energy putting forth serious policy proposals. (And investigating the fuck out of Trump, following up on every loose end in the Mueller report with public hearings, and passing motions of censure which Republicans will have to cast votes on.)"

Let the Democratic leadership be wise elder statespeople, putting the public interest ahead of partisan spectacle. Meanwhile, the likes of AOC and Tlaib can be the bad cops, keeping the principled case for impeachment in the public eye and pressing their Republican colleagues hard on why they continue to defend this scumbag.
  #114  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:04 AM
galen ubal is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,555
Nope.
The Democratic leadership's message should be " Since Trump is clearly unfit for office and should be removed, we're initiating the impeachment process, to highlight the fact that GOP leadership will always put party over country. We'll be investigating the fuck out of Trump and his administration as part of this, and we will contine to put forth serious policy proposals, because we actually can do more than one thing at a time*. This is not a matter of partisan spectacle, but a matter of the public interest."


*I mean, seriously, is there some reason that the impeachment process puts a halt to all other things in your minds?
__________________
Salvator apiae.
  #115  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:06 AM
galen ubal is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,555
Puts me in mind of this:

Quote:
conservatives: circles are squares now
old liberals: ok, let me spend three weeks explaining how a circle is not a square
cons: good. good.

conservatives: circles are squares now
current liberals: fuck you theyre circles
cons: THIS IS SO UNFAIR YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO LOSE
From here.
__________________
Salvator apiae.
  #116  
Old 04-23-2019, 02:28 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
Nope.
The Democratic leadership's message should be " Since Trump is clearly unfit for office and should be removed, we're initiating the impeachment process, to highlight the fact that GOP leadership will always put party over country. We'll be investigating the fuck out of Trump and his administration as part of this, and we will contine to put forth serious policy proposals, because we actually can do more than one thing at a time*. This is not a matter of partisan spectacle, but a matter of the public interest."


*I mean, seriously, is there some reason that the impeachment process puts a halt to all other things in your minds?
Well, it SHOULD. Impeachment means that a serious Constitutional crisis is in progress, a once-every-few-generations event. From the moment that the House Judiciary Committee seriously takes up impeachment articiles, nobody will be thinking or talking about anything else political, nor should they, really.

Somebody upthread snarked about "walking and chewing gum at the same time". Those are both routine activities. A better analogy to the notion of carrying on with politics as usual on the one hand, and an impeachment process on the other, would be something like "participating in a conference call while eating lunch at the same time, and also fending off a knife-wielding assailant". One is simply not going to divide one's attention equally between those activities.

By seriously pursuing impeachment, we guarantee that the 2020 election will be nothing other than a referendum on said impeachment. The polls right now are telling us very clearly that we have better issues to fight that election on. Of course that might change, and we should do everything in our power to expose all of Trump's dirty laundry. But there's no reason to start actually voting on it unless and until there's some hope of winning.

Last edited by Thing Fish; 04-23-2019 at 02:29 AM.
  #117  
Old 04-23-2019, 05:29 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,175
I never said the House can't investigate and subpoena the hell out of him -- they should do that. I just don't think we want to do something as dramatic as impeachment unless we're reasonably certain that he could be removed from office. If the economy tumbles, then impeachment is a lot more likely. I say investigate him and subpoena him and give the American public more information. But I wouldn't start impeachment until his approval ratings go deep into the tank. If the democrats start impeachment before the public is ready, it could actually backfire.
  #118  
Old 04-23-2019, 05:43 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
By seriously pursuing impeachment, we guarantee that the 2020 election will be nothing other than a referendum on said impeachment.The polls right now are telling us very clearly that we have better issues to fight that election on. Of course that might change, and we should do everything in our power to expose all of Trump's dirty laundry. But there's no reason to start actually voting on it unless and until there's some hope of winning.
I think this is exactly right. If House Democrats impeach, it becomes the lead story as long as the effort is still ongoing. Moreover, the Democrats are a broad coalition, with many members of their majority coming from districts that didn't elect their representatives to be partisans but rather, because they were viewed as more moderate alternatives to the GOP. A democratic-led impeachment would be viewed as partisan by voters in these more moderate districts, which is okay if his support among independents and his base craters, but not before then.

I'm not saying that Trump can't be impeached ever. I fully support investigating the administration, particularly now that we have Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy out of the way. The House absolutely should document this presidency and get the facts in plain view. Over time, this could make a case for impeachment. But a partisan-led impeachment before the public is ready to send Trump packing could easily backfire against the Democrats.
  #119  
Old 04-23-2019, 06:23 AM
UnwittingAmericans is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 267
They need to get the "Trump should be impeached" number much closer to the Trump disapproval number than it appears to be right now.
  #120  
Old 04-23-2019, 06:50 AM
galen ubal is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,555
Investigations?
White House tells official not to comply with Democratic subpoena over security clearances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CNN
The White House has instructed a former official who was in charge of the security clearance process to not comply with a House subpoena demanding his appearance for an interview, the latest move by the Trump administration to thwart Democratic-led investigations into all aspects of the presidency.

After a day of tense negotiations, the White House late Monday told the former official, Carl Kline, who now works at the Defense Department, to not appear at Tuesday's deposition, contending that Democrats were seeking access to confidential information that should be off limits.
The move raises the prospect that the House Oversight Committee could seek to hold Kline in contempt, a step that Chairman Elijah Cummings warned Monday he would take. And it's the latest White House effort to stonewall Democratic investigations, coming the same day the Trump Organization filed a lawsuit to prevent an accounting firm from complying with Cummings' subpoena for President Donald Trump's past financial records.
Emphasis mine.

Trump will continue to obstruct justice until he's stopped. He will continue to attack, set the narrative, while the Democrats (and America) remain on the defensive. And those on the defensive never win, and cannot win, until they turn to offense.

Those who are saying that the Senate won't vote to convict are almost certainly correct*.
I remain unconvinced, however, that the failure to convict will certainly dishearten the Democrats - if anything, it will strengthen the message that the Senate must change hands, that Trump must be voted out, that there is now no alternative.
I remain unconvinced that it will strengthen Trump's position, if impeachment succeeds, but the trial doesn't. Just as the truth of the Clinton impeachment is well known, that it was a political hack job with no basis in justice, so too will the acquittal in the Senate is no less political, with no basis in justice. True, his base will remain loyal - but his base is perhaps 40%, at most, and probably less. The rank and file conservatives would be made more likely to remain home in such circumstances. After all, wasn't that the point of all the "controversy" surrounding Ms. Clinton in 2016?
I remain unconvinced that it will move the undecided voters toward Trump. They move whichever way the wind blows, to be honest, following the flavor of the moment. I doubt that it's Trump, anymore; his novelty is gone.


*I'll note that I am not inclined to absolutes when predicting future events - including whether the sun will rise in the East.
__________________
Salvator apiae.
  #121  
Old 04-23-2019, 07:28 AM
Haldurson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 214
A failed impeachment attempt could energize Trump's base, so I don't think that we ought to impeach until we have a smoking gun. Not enough Republicans are going to turn on him without that happening. The good news is that there are still certain ongoing investigations of him. But I do think that it will be unlikely that anything substantive will be done before he leaves office (via, I hope, him losing the upcoming election). I have no doubt that he's committed crimes. But if nothing else, he's probably earned the guinness book of world records entry for most corrupt staff ever hired by a president. And he's certainly INTENDED to obstruct justice. Fortunately for him, brighter minds prevailed.
  #122  
Old 04-23-2019, 07:49 AM
UnwittingAmericans is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 267
I mean, what are the motivational scenarios people really seem to be expecting?

Assume a lot of the Mueller report gets recited in hearings, either pre-Judiciary or during Judiciary and floor debate.

Is this what the anti-impeachment people are expecting v.v. impeachment effect on 2020:

impeach:
Rs - energized
Ds - placated, not energized?

don't impeach:
Rs - go into hibernation?
Ds - what exactly? Better able to keep their spreadsheets of the differences in postions between 20 candidates up to date/ Motivated to turn out because the House did nothing?

What is your motivational matrix?
  #123  
Old 04-23-2019, 07:59 AM
Oly is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
By seriously pursuing impeachment, we guarantee that the 2020 election will be nothing other than a referendum on said impeachment. The polls right now are telling us very clearly that we have better issues to fight that election on. Of course that might change, and we should do everything in our power to expose all of Trump's dirty laundry. But there's no reason to start actually voting on it unless and until there's some hope of winning.
This says it all. Unless there’s some bloody daggers yet to be brought out of the MR (highly doubt) or that come out of those other spinoff investigations (possible), there is not enough there that hasn’t already been and would continue to be partisianized by partisans or ignored by ignorers.

The best thing for the Ds to do is get it all out, say “This is clearly impeachment-worthy but the Republicans have shown absolutely no willingness to be a check on Trump, and since there’s no reason to think that’ll change we’re not going to drag us all through a formal impeachment and instead we’re going to let the nation decide at the next election.”

Ultimately that is the best way to exorcise this demon anyway. Impeachment, even if successful, would just be another nail in the coffin of ever trying to reset our politics to some kind cooperative mode. Voters rejection of Trump is the only legitimate rebuke.

Of course they/we may not reject. Then, so be it.
  #124  
Old 04-23-2019, 08:02 AM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,093
Will it happen? Who the hell knows. I do think its a good path for Trump to win in 2020 and for the Democrats to lose congressional seats.

That's unfalsifiable though. If the democrats lose in 2020, they'll blame it on either impeaching or not impeaching him.
  #125  
Old 04-23-2019, 08:07 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
Trump will continue to obstruct justice until he's stopped. He will continue to attack, set the narrative, while the Democrats (and America) remain on the defensive. And those on the defensive never win, and cannot win, until they turn to offense.
...yep. They've just launched a lawsuit to stop the Dems getting his financial records. Jim Jordan wants to investigate Clinton. While the Dems dither over impeachment Trump and his regime are going on the rampage. And nobody is doing fuck-all to stop them.

You guys think you are playing "3 dimensional chess" but in reality you are playing snooker and these guys are snookering you. You are getting out-flanked. They are laughing their fucking heads off.

You've managed to convince yourselves that impeachment is a "partisan process" and that invoking it will cause Dems to get angry and not vote in 2020. That it will "energise the base" and that "energising the base" will do something: but you guys aren't exactly clear exactly what that is. You claim that impeaching will "hurt the Dems chances" but you can't quantify exactly how it will hurt their chances

But choosing not to impeach because it "will hurt the Dems chances" is about as partisan as you can get. It makes you guilty of exactly what you are afraid of getting accused of.
  #126  
Old 04-23-2019, 09:21 AM
nate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 877
I'll feel like Democrats are putting party over country if they don't impeach. It's their duty. It's not always easy to do the right thing, but it has to be done in order avoid setting precedent that a sitting president can clearly and repeatedly obstruct justice without any consequence. Really, do we really want to allow future presidents to do that?

It's been frustrating to watch talking heads and Democrat politicians talk about how voters are not interested in oversight of Trump. Bullshit. You know what will turn off a lot of voters? You sitting on your ass doing nothing because you fear backlash from a group that treats you as Satan-incarnate regardless of your actions. You want people to think "both parties are the same"? Then don't impeach because of "political reasons". You fucking cowards.
  #127  
Old 04-23-2019, 09:33 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,234
The country doesn't seem to want impeachment. The last Politico/Morning Consult poll has it at 34% for/48% against. This despite Trump being at his lowest approval ratings ever. I can see people objecting to that with "who cares? This is too important!" but I can't see defending impeachment as an election winner.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...report-1286386
  #128  
Old 04-23-2019, 09:42 AM
scr4 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,594
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
The country doesn't seem to want impeachment. The last Politico/Morning Consult poll has it at 34% for/48% against.
Probably because Democrats in Congress are telling their supporters it's a bad idea.
  #129  
Old 04-23-2019, 09:49 AM
elucidator is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 59,778
Don't really have to. Squabbling among the Dems is common, if not actually traditional. Some Dems can argue forcefully for impeachment, others may quibble and waver, so what? They can all say the same thing, investigate, see what's there. The Dems from purplish regions can say that they oppose impeachment as the situation stands now, a solid and valid position. Others in more leftish regions can argue the opposite, but support further investigation to support their position. What's the problem? Investigate as a preliminary to impeachment, investigate simply to expose the truth.

Republicans have surrendered to Trump, nothing further can be expected from them, they are unified in treasonous cowardice. The Dems huge split is simply about which flag to sail under, impeachment or oversight. Big hairy ass deal.

The Republicans have unity, they already did. When it comes to political suicide pacts, lockstep is not an improvement over lockjaw.
  #130  
Old 04-23-2019, 09:50 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by nate View Post
it has to be done in order avoid setting precedent that a sitting president can clearly and repeatedly obstruct justice without any consequence.
But if Democrats impeach Trump, and the Senate votes against conviction (which it most likely would), then it would quite possibly send a message that, yes, a sitting president can clearly and repeatedly obstruct justice without any consequence.
  #131  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:05 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
But if Democrats impeach Trump, and the Senate votes against conviction (which it most likely would), then it would quite possibly send a message that, yes, a sitting president can clearly and repeatedly obstruct justice without any consequence.
...Nate wasn't talking about "the message": but about precedent. If the "messaging" is "a sitting president can clearly and repeatedly obstruct justice without any consequence" if they do impeach, then the "messaging" will be identical if they don't impeach. So why use "the messaging" as part of the calculus of whether or not to impeach?
  #132  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:09 AM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by nate View Post
I'll feel like Democrats are putting party over country if they don't impeach. It's their duty. It's not always easy to do the right thing, but it has to be done in order avoid setting precedent that a sitting president can clearly and repeatedly obstruct justice without any consequence. Really, do we really want to allow future presidents to do that?

It's been frustrating to watch talking heads and Democrat politicians talk about how voters are not interested in oversight of Trump. Bullshit. You know what will turn off a lot of voters? You sitting on your ass doing nothing because you fear backlash from a group that treats you as Satan-incarnate regardless of your actions. You want people to think "both parties are the same"? Then don't impeach because of "political reasons". You fucking cowards.
I think you should prepare yourself for a real bitter taste in your mouth. Your party is preparing to thoroughly disappoint you. If you equate "not impeaching Trump" with putting "party before country", then the Democratics are about to put "party before country". Nancy knows on which side her speakership bread is buttered, and it's not in the beating heart of liberaldom. It's in moderate Republican-leaning districts where voting for impeachment will go over like a lead balloon. It appears that she learned something from 2010 after all. Quote of the week:

That's her putting party (and her speakership) before country, but like a girlfriend that found a cuter boyfriend, she's trying to let you down gently. I suggest you look for other fish in the sea besides the one labeled 'impeachment'.
  #133  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:10 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,180
The more I think about it, the more I think it needs to happen. If Democrats fail to impeach, then they are not fulfilling their constitutional duties. The Mueller report clearly lays out the case for multiple obstruction of justice charges. The only thing that stopped Mueller from indicting Donald was the Justice Department policy that disallowed it. He even pointed out that the ban on indicting him only lasts as long as his time in office. Clearly, Mueller thought DJT was a felon. If Democrats say "he's a crook, but we won't impeach because we know we'll lose" that's a copout. I now say have the hearings, get McGahn to testify in exhaustive detail how he was told to get rid of Mueller and see what kind of inane questions the Republicans might ask of him. Show them to be the sniveling cowards that they are. Then when it gets to the Senate, use their time to hammer these charges over and over again as long as the Chief Justice will allow it. Yes, Republicans will vote (except maybe Romney) to acquit. We know Susan Collins will express grave concerns before toeing the party line. Make them all go on record as aiding and abetting the criminal enterprise in the White House.

When all is said and done, we will see that a Republican president is above the law as long as there are say 35 Republicans in the Senate.
  #134  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:13 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by scr4 View Post
Probably because Democrats in Congress are telling their supporters it's a bad idea.
You probably have it backwards. Pelosi is an astute politician and her position is no doubt informed by her read of the electorate.
  #135  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:24 AM
CaptMurdock's Avatar
CaptMurdock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Evildrome Boozerama
Posts: 1,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
The country doesn't seem to want impeachment. The last Politico/Morning Consult poll has it at 34% for/48% against. This despite Trump being at his lowest approval ratings ever. I can see people objecting to that with "who cares? This is too important!" but I can't see defending impeachment as an election winner.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...report-1286386
Yeah, Og Forbid they defend the idea as The Right Thing to Do as opposed to winning another election where they sit and basically strategize how to win elections.
__________________
____________________________
Coin-operated self-destruct...not one of my better ideas.
-- Planckton (Spongebob Squarepants)
  #136  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:26 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMurdock View Post
Yeah, Og Forbid they defend the idea as The Right Thing to Do as opposed to winning another election where they sit and basically strategize how to win elections.
So you don't care who wins the next election?
  #137  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:49 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
So you don't care who wins the next election?
I care very much who wins the next election. But if the debate is between one side says impeachment will hurt the Dem's chances in 2020, and the other side that says it'll help them, but neither of them really knows jack shit: then fuck it, let's do the right thing.
  #138  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:51 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
But if Democrats impeach Trump, and the Senate votes against conviction (which it most likely would), then it would quite possibly send a message that, yes, a sitting president can clearly and repeatedly obstruct justice without any consequence.
So the Dems have a choice between two courses - avoiding impeachment, or proceeding with it, both of which "would quite possibly send a message that, yes, a sitting president can clearly and repeatedly obstruct justice without any consequence," again, I say: fuck it, let's do the right thing.
  #139  
Old 04-23-2019, 11:28 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
I care very much who wins the next election. But if the debate is between one side says impeachment will hurt the Dem's chances in 2020, and the other side that says it'll help them, but neither of them really knows jack shit: then fuck it, let's do the right thing.
Does a poll showing only 34% of people support impeachment proceedings and 48% oppose qualify as "jack shit"?
  #140  
Old 04-23-2019, 11:34 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Does a poll showing only 34% of people support impeachment proceedings and 48% oppose qualify as "jack shit"?
Depends when it was taken, and how the question was worded.
  #141  
Old 04-23-2019, 11:40 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
Depends when it was taken, and how the question was worded.
I linked the politico article above. The poll was taken this past weekend. I don't see a link there to the poll questions but Morning Consult might have it somewhere.
  #142  
Old 04-23-2019, 11:54 AM
nate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 877
The democrats can choose to be unsuccessfully brave or unsuccessful cowards during this time. Which one will they choose? I love my country and do NOT want blatant corruption to become to norm. Again, anything short of impeachment is giving the green light to this sort of behavior in the future... that is until a Democratic president is elected. The Republicans would have impeachment hearings as soon as the president made eye contact with the AG.
  #143  
Old 04-23-2019, 12:28 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Does a poll showing only 34% of people support impeachment proceedings and 48% oppose qualify as "jack shit"?
Depends.

Are those 48% dead set against impeachment proceedings, or is it just how they feel right now, when they probably still don't have any idea of what's in the Mueller Report? Does this poll ask that question?
  #144  
Old 04-23-2019, 12:40 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,234
Well, what if we just assume for a second that Morning Consult did an honest poll and fairly assume the vast majority of Americans already know as much as they ever are about the Mueller report.
  #145  
Old 04-23-2019, 12:47 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,234
The aricle I linked lists a whole bunch of questions asked and yes, how much they've read the Mueller report was one of them. You should probably take a look and save some of your needless rhetorical questions.
  #146  
Old 04-23-2019, 12:50 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
Investigations?
White House tells official not to comply with Democratic subpoena over security clearances.

Emphasis mine.

Trump will continue to obstruct justice until he's stopped. He will continue to attack, set the narrative, while the Democrats (and America) remain on the defensive. And those on the defensive never win, and cannot win, until they turn to offense.

Those who are saying that the Senate won't vote to convict are almost certainly correct*.
I remain unconvinced, however, that the failure to convict will certainly dishearten the Democrats - if anything, it will strengthen the message that the Senate must change hands, that Trump must be voted out, that there is now no alternative.
I remain unconvinced that it will strengthen Trump's position, if impeachment succeeds, but the trial doesn't. Just as the truth of the Clinton impeachment is well known, that it was a political hack job with no basis in justice, so too will the acquittal in the Senate is no less political, with no basis in justice. True, his base will remain loyal - but his base is perhaps 40%, at most, and probably less. The rank and file conservatives would be made more likely to remain home in such circumstances. After all, wasn't that the point of all the "controversy" surrounding Ms. Clinton in 2016?
I remain unconvinced that it will move the undecided voters toward Trump. They move whichever way the wind blows, to be honest, following the flavor of the moment. I doubt that it's Trump, anymore; his novelty is gone.


*I'll note that I am not inclined to absolutes when predicting future events - including whether the sun will rise in the East.
Dude. Your own cite says that, if he keeps this up, the official ignoring the subpoena will likely be charged with contempt of Congress, meaning he could conceivably be jailed for up to a year. How is this the Democrats being "on the defensive"? Do you think that once articles of impeachment are passed, Trump will stop trying to obstruct the investigation?

It's ridiculous to draw a false dichotomy, as several in this thread have done, between calling for a vote on impeachment next Tuesday and "doing nothing". If the House formed a committee to determine whether trump should be impeached, what would that committee's first tasks be? To see the unretracted Mueller report and to have Mueller testify and answer questions about said report...IOW, exactly what they are currently doing.
  #147  
Old 04-23-2019, 12:54 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Depends.

Are those 48% dead set against impeachment proceedings, or is it just how they feel right now, when they probably still don't have any idea of what's in the Mueller Report? Does this poll ask that question?
Here's the poll.
Quote:
How important of a priority should each of the following be for Congress? Beginning
impeachment proceedings to remove President Trump from office
A top priority 29%
An important, but lower priority 12%
Not too important a priority 9%
Should not be done 38%
Don’t know / No opinion 11%
So, there's 38% that say it should not be done. That corresponds almost exactly to the number that support Trump. Except, bizarrely, it's 1% lower than his support. That means that there is 1% of the public that support Trump but answered something other than "should not be done" to the question of impeachment.

41% say it's an important or top priority.

The question is what to do with the 9% who said "not too important a priority". I'm not sure they belong in the "against" category, since they declined to say it shouldn't be done. Someone who thinks that impeachment is bound to fail, so they don't think it's a priority, but it should probably happen anyway, would be in that category.

If you assume that everyone opposed to impeachment said it shouldn't be done--which seems like a very reasonable assumption to me, almost a restatement of the option--that means that less than half the public oppose impeachment, and that about half the public are lukewarm to excited about the idea.

That said, I think this poll doesn't provide an excellent answer to the question of whether folks support impeachment. A question that would more accurately guide action would be, "Do you support Congress beginning impeachment proceedings to investigate whether Trump should be removed from office?" and allow "strong support," "somewhat support," etc.

Last edited by Left Hand of Dorkness; 04-23-2019 at 12:57 PM.
  #148  
Old 04-23-2019, 01:00 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,234
Here's the actual question the article is relating:

As you may know, the first step toward removing a president from office is
impeachment. Do you believe Congress should or should not begin impeachment
proceedings to remove President Trump from office?

Yes, Congress should begin impeachment proceedings 34%
No, Congress should not begin impeachment proceedings 48%
Don’t know / No opinion 18%
  #149  
Old 04-23-2019, 01:00 PM
HurricaneDitka is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
... the official ignoring the subpoena will likely be charged with contempt of Congress, meaning he could conceivably be jailed for up to a year. ...
We could ask Eric Holder about how much jailtime "conceivably" amounted to. Or just read the words of Jay Carney:

Quote:
“It is an established principle, dating back to the administration of President Ronald Reagan, that the Justice Department does not pursue prosecution in a contempt case when the President has asserted executive privilege,” Carney told reporters in a gaggle aboard Air Force One.

“The assertion of executive privilege makes the contempt matter moot, if you will. I mean, I’m not a lawyer, so I’m probably not using quite the precise language. But it is my understanding, and I would refer you to the Justice Department, that dating back to the administration of President Reagan that prosecutions will not take place under this, in this circumstance.”

A Justice Department spokeswoman echoed Carney’s comments and pointed to a letter that was delivered Thursday to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) outlining the same argument.

“Across administrations of both political parties, the longstanding position of the Justice Department has been and remains that we will not prosecute an Executive Branch official under the contempt of Congress statute for withholding subpoenaed documents pursuant to a presidential assertion of executive privilege,” reads the letter, signed by Deputy Attorney General James Cole.
source
  #150  
Old 04-23-2019, 01:12 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 40,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Here's the actual question the article is relating:

As you may know, the first step toward removing a president from office is
impeachment. Do you believe Congress should or should not begin impeachment
proceedings to remove President Trump from office?

Yes, Congress should begin impeachment proceedings 34%
No, Congress should not begin impeachment proceedings 48%
Don’t know / No opinion 18%
Ah. Fair, I stopped looking over the results when I saw one that looked like the right one. My apologies.

In any case, when less than half the public oppose impeachment, and when 18% have no opinion, that's hardly a slam dunk. If folks learn that beginning impeachment proceedings trigger certain investigative powers, that might change opinions.

But even if it doesn't, I figure Congress needs to do its damn job.
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 08:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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