I didn’t know there were any left that weren’t 90% trolls, Kinda like the aristocrats joke, performance art to see who can come up with the most ridiculous crap.
LOL, oh, yes, I remember the last time these guys decided to get together to overthrow the guv’mint. 10-Million Man March Recruits Several Hundred
It rained a bit and that appeared to daunt attendance.
I think their motto ended up being, “Live Free or Dry.”
I think more like 40% Trolls, 30% paid Russian shills trying to incite things and 30% racist white supremacist true believers. Unfortunately I do think there will be some violence from lone nut true believers if impeachment proceedings do actually start.
I love it!
Based on what I’ve read in this thread and others, I’m worried that the congressional Republicans might realize their best course of action WOULD be to initiate impeachment proceeding soon, knowing there isn’t quite enough there (yet) for a Senate conviction. By ending up with the same result as Bill Clinton, the wind will be knocked out of the sails among anti-Trumpists – no one would want to go through such a “national trauma” twice – AND some Republican lawmakers (in purplish districts) would benefit by distancing themselves from Trump, AND others (in deep red districts) would benefit among die-hard Trumpists by having helped prevent conviction…AND Trump would be in power for the next almost-four years.
Is this something to worry about (among anti-Trumpists like me)?
According to The Google, apparently not actually original to me. (Although I might have independently re-invented the phrase; I dunno.)
But God damn does it seem apt.
They were openly advocating fascism and violence if he lost the election, which is why I think removing him via impeachment or the 25th amendment is not going to be a walk in the park for either democrats or republicans. Trump’s core constituency is still very significant to most members of the GOP House, who are already running for re-election next year.
Interestingly enough, I saw an article yesterday that kinda grabbed my attention and put Trump’s election into more perspective. In it, the article states that, over the past 2 years, males – conservative males in particular – have become more optimistic about the future of the country. Conservative women have also become more optimistic but to a lesser degree. The trend started in 2015 and rose significantly over the past year.
The article’s link is here:
Behind the numbers, I suspect what this really and truly means is that white males and to a lesser degree white females are feeling more optimistic about their country’s future. They see a restoration of their ‘proper place in society’ and feel good about it. If people think that white christian nationalists are just going to allow someone to remove their figurehead from office, they’d best think again. It would get very, very ugly. And I think that Republicans going back to their home districts, where probably no less than 45% (and in many cases a much greater percentage than that) of the voters there would support Trump come hell or high water, are very much aware of that reality.
What has to happen, I think, is that Trump has to be exposed visually in some sort of unflattering manner – something that seems highly unlikely – or he has to be held to account, over time, for his inability to govern and pass legislation that matters to republicans, which seems more likely. House republicans promised a big agenda to their voters and that just hasn’t happened, and it doesn’t seem likely to without the support of senators, who typically have more diverse voting populations and more challenging elections to win. If House GOP members start hearing exasperation from their voters, then it’s entirely possible that they look for a fall guy. House GOP members know that they would have gotten major legislation passed already if they were working with President Pence rather than President Trump, and maybe this is what they start telling their voters.
The Democrats have helpfully handed Trump and his crew a can’t miss line.
Sure, there’s a majority in the House and in the Senate, but look at the unrelenting assault by the Democrats in collusion with the mainstream media, calling for impeachment over anything and everything.
Emoluments! Impeachment!
Hiring relatives! Impeachment!
Lease on government property! Impeachment!
Ties to Russia! Impeachment!
Revealing classified information! Impeachment!
Firing Comey! Impeachment!
It’s the perfect cover for his failure to legislate. It’s not his inability to grasp the dictates of a complex job and work successfully with Congress. It’s not his utter misunderstanding of the complications surrounding health care policy. It’s not his simplistic view of the world.
No, no. It’s the Democrats, and the media. Which are the same thing, really.
You claim that you oppose Trump, so tell us how to Dump the Trump, instead of shooting down all the efforts others bring to the table.
Borrowing a line from one of my favorite tough guy conservatives:
Bring it on.
Vote him out in the next election. Don’t like that answer? Sometimes it sucks to live in a democracy, because your guy (or gal) doesn’t always win.
If the Democrats can’t nominate someone who can beat Trump, then maybe they are the ones who have the bigger problem.
I don’t claim to favor impeaching Trump.
I opposed Obama in 2012. But I didn’t favor impeaching him after he won.
Do you see why?
I opposed Trump as a candidate, and (with a couple of notable exceptions) I have been unimpressed with Trump as a President. But I don’t agree that my reaction justifies impeachment.
How to dump Trump? Plan for 2020.
Which sort of implies that you don’t have a problem with what is going on, either because you approve of what he is doing, or because the price of gaining political control is worth the damage being done by this malevolent Forrest Gump. I do not oppose Trump because of his tenuous party affiliation-I oppose him for the damage he has done, is currently doing and is threatening to do in the future, and I would oppose the person I voted for if he or she acted this same way.
Yes, at this point it’s well known that:
A) The right-wing news media is essentially a propaganda arm of the worst aspects of the party
B) As such they will reach to any excuse they can find
and C) The right-wing electorate is so fucking stupid that they’ll fall for it hook line and sinker again and again and again
These are all quite clearly true. Not even sure why a “line” is needed, to be honest. Regardless of this, various right-wing sources have attacked the democrats for obstructing Trump on the AHCA, on Gorusch, on the Wall, and on numerous other things. They don’t need this line, they’ll find some excuse.
So here’s a question. Maybe you can provide some insight. What the fuck do we do about that?
“I don’t claim to favor shooting Hitler in the face. I opposed Kurt von Schleicher in 1932. But I didn’t favor shooting him in the face after he won. Do you see why?”
Hmm, maybe because it’s two totally different things that are fundamentally unrelated? Maybe it’s because the more immediate comparison to Trump is not Obama, but Nixon?
Ghod knows I have asked this question in the past enough times without receive a straight answer but lets give it another shot: What specifically would Trump have to do for you to get on board with impeaching him?
That’s assuming there’s still a government to run *for *in 2020.
Reuters reporting that Putin is offering a transcript of the Oval Office meeting. A transcript that came off a recording. A recording that was unknown to the Administration. Made by the TASS agent Trump allowed in the Oval Office at Putin’s request.
But! Her! Emails!
That’s also assuming that all the damage done to people, the environment ahd our international relations in those four years magically fixes itself once he is out of office
This is Bricker - you’ll never get a straight answer. He takes his posting style directly from the Governor in this following video on youtube:
Personally, I think Donald Trump is a danger to the country and needs to be removed from office either by impeachment or a Constitutional coup under the 25th Amendment. However, I’ll come to the defense of those who are sitting on the fence. Impeachment is an extraordinary step and should always be considered very carefully – one of the reasons why I was opposed to the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton despite voting against him in 1998 and basically agreeing that there was evidence of perjury. In my view, the offense has to be more than something that is technically illegal and it really ought to pertain to the president’s conduct while in that office, rather than what he’s alleged to have done before taking the Oath. It should represent a serious breach of public trust and should call into question the integrity of the office. Impeachment ought to be reserved for clear and present dangers to the Constitution and the Republic. And moreover, there has to be clear and convincing evidence that such acts have been committed. The allegations made against Trump are substantial – no doubt about that. And there is some evidence to support the claims against him, but I can understand those who want to wait for more evidence to corroborate the various accounts. It’s an extreme step to remove a sitting president, and it requires more than just outrage over alleged wrongdoing to justify going through with it.