No, but even if he were it wouldn’t protect him.
I was never sure of that.
[QUOTE=Okrahoma]
He didn’t say anything about odds, you did. And you picked 50:50. Thats not a lot of confidence in your man.
[/QUOTE]
So sorry, but I won’t be making a bet with you; I don’t trust you.
I would like a straight answer to the question of whether you will support Trump in doing essentially what I have described.
The second one is very germane. Just because he exercises a right of the president doesn’t mean it’s legal or that it’s not obstruction. Quite clearly he is all obstruction all the time. There is a reasonable cause to investigate him til doomsday from what he’s already said in public.
This doesn’t mean anything? Really?
He could be even prosecuted by another administration after his is over. If these factors are relevant to donalds decision making then why are they not being considered here? He’s not Loki.
You are simply saying that you can’t foresee the rebupkis impeaching donald, from what you know now, and your perspective watching the goldfish for the last year. I’d be more convinced if you had foresight into what the country might look like at that juncture. It’s not enough just to say “they got the votes, done deal.” Life often intrudes on this kind of certainty. But I just think that means you are not thinking that far ahead or about the nuances of the various pressures everyone will be under. And we have to come up with real intelligent analysis to be able to get through this.
I’m thinking it’s better that he not be impeached anyway. The best case is he is so wrapped up in this that he is unable to do much harm and we manage to dump trump and pence both, never seeing pres pence.
I think there are some political realities that people here are missing. He’s at a 36% approval rating now; where do you think that’ll be if he proactively pardons everyone, and especially if he’s stupid enough to even try to pardon himself? Legally, anyone accepting it would be admitting guilt, but more importantly, it’d be an admission of guilt in the court of public opinion. Forget the 25%; they are and always have been a lost cause. They’re a given, but it’s not they who are really important; it’s the swing voters that things will devolve upon if Congress sits on its hands.
You think you saw protests at town halls over health care? Just wait for the uproar that comes if pardons happen, and those Republican Representatives do nothing. They’ll never want to do a town hall again, no matter what happy horseshit Numbnuts tweets. Yes, those from the reddest districts will be able to ignore it with impunity, the ones steeped in the 25%. But the rest are going to get quite vocal.
I’d also argue that some of that small minority of moral Republicans, some of those hardcore conservatives who vote and realize the threat to democracy, will exert the same kind of pressure. That will shake some Pub Reps to their core (again excepting the immune ones who live in a delusional district), because that’s getting into their funding. And here’s the thing: the threat doesn’t have to be that they’ll vote for Democrats, which is unforgivable for many if not most Republicans; it will be that they’ll primary current Reps, like the Tea Party did.
But back to the swing voters…they’ll have to live under a rock or watch only conservative networks not to hear about it. Democrats will eat out on it for years to come, and the MSM will dun it into their brains. They’re the ones who have the power to give Democrats the House back, with the right messaging. The Senate is probably a lost cause based on the numbers no matter what. Worst case, though, I don’t see Trumpy having the slightest chance at re-election if he pulls this. He might manage to pull off the primaries, but forget about the general.
Speaking of catchy nicknames, how about ‘Dictator Donald?’ There’s some nice messaging for you.
So be of good cheer, and do your utmost to fuck him over at every turn. All the hand-wavy ‘nothing to see here’ goes out the window if he pardons people (as usual, excepting the 25%).
I’m curious to know why you believe the emphasized portion to be true. If the America-hating fuckstick befouling the Oval Office fires Mueller and any AG (or Deputy AG) who tries to appoint a replacement, the Russia investigation is done.
I wish I could be as confident and optimistic, but where was the uproar when James Comey got fired? Where were the protests? It should have happened then. The fact that nothing changed after Comey’s dismissal is pretty ominous. The fact that Donald Trump dismissed Comey for trying to investigate him and all but admitted as much to a global audience is pretty telling, I think. There is a difference between someone terrified that they might lose the ability to pay for their child’s cancer treatments and political mischief. The former is much more likely to motivate people to protest at town halls, but things like ‘collusion’ are somewhat nebulous in the eyes of voters. History has shown this time and time again: ordinary citizens in a democracy quite often fail to act when a tyrant is threatening to take away their democracy, because they are usually not aware that it’s happening in the first place.
I’m not saying that Trump is absolutely going to get away with it - people might realize the gravity of the situation and finally say ‘enough is enough’. I hope you’re right. But the truth is, there is nothing that has happened up to this point that shows me that he can’t get away with firing Mueller and that he can’t get away with firing people, one right after another, who continue to challenge him. The firing of Comey should have been the moment when the Republican party stood up to him - it wasn’t. And there are probably many things that should have been the moment at which people rejected Donald Trump, but he’s still here and while not popular, still has a strong following. The rule of law is under attack, and with it, all of our democratic norms are as well. And unfortunately, I’m not as convinced as you are that we’re really aware of it.
Firing Comey isn’t even in the same league as blanket pardons. That’s AA minors compared to the Big Show. As for the lack of awareness, you advertise it…push it into people’s faces, and tell them to protest to their Republican Congressmen.
You’re missing the point, which is to end-around the Congressmen AND the Republicans. Grass roots pressure in swing districts. Make those Congressmen fear for their fat kickbacks.
The 25% is the strong following you’re thinking of. As I said, they’re a lost cause, but ultimately they’re unimportant. How many others will be left after pardons?
I agree that they’re different, and that there would be political consequences. But I suspect whatever those consequences may be have more to do with Trump’s incompetence in building legislative coalitions than anything else. It would just feed the perception that he’s a desperate political nincompoop, which is bad in and of itself. But having said that, I unfortunately doubt that the public would really get that passionate about yet more political mischief from an administration that seems to function on non-stop drama. People have gotten used to Trump’s moral outrages. As long as the economy is fine and healthcare isn’t touched, we will be surprised at how much he can get away with.
I wasn’t just referring to the firing of Comey. What I was saying is that his dismissal, which was so obviously the move of a Banana Republic dictator, should have been the moment at which the country erupted. It should have been the last straw. And yet, it wasn’t. And I doubt the outrages that are sure to come will be either.
Look at the things that voters have actually gotten passionate about and protested over: the travel ban, the perceived loss of women’s rights, and the threat of losing healthcare. Those are all personal issues that voters can identify with. People believed that our basic human rights were under attack, so they protested.
But what happens when the machinery that maintains democracy comes under attack? Has anyone protested voter suppression? Has anyone protested Gerrymandering? Has anyone protested the now obvious fact that a foreign power quite possibly changed the outcome of a presidential election? Has anybody protested the firing of officials, from Yates to Bharara, to Comey? No, they haven’t, and they haven’t because they’re not considered personal enough. They’re political. And people are disassociating themselves from political issues unless they are perceived to have a direct personal, human impact. That’s how American democracy works in 2017.
I know that’s what you want to happen, but I’m not sure it’s going to. You may be right – I hope you are. But I’m seeing a lot of warning signs that indicate there’s a a burglar in our house and he’s taking it all while we’re sleeping.
People protest when they feel like they’ve lost something or they’re about to lose something. They protest when they feel like they’ve got something to gain from it and not as much to lose. Right now, the economy’s at near full employment, the stock market’s high, there’s relative peace and prosperity at home. They’ve protested when it looked like Trump and Republicans might take some of that away, but they haven’t. In the meantime, there has never been a government in my lifetime that has so little trust in democratic institutions and worked so actively to dismantle them. It’s quite possible that by the time people actually want to protest, doing so might actually require some bravery.
I think too many Republicans and Trump supporters feel the collusion was an act of patriotism that kept American from being destroyed by Hillary - who they think is way worse than Putin. It isn’t that they don’t believe it happened, it’s that they felt it was a good thing. But they can’t say that out loud. But they certainly aren’t going to punish anyone over it.
2018 DNC campaign ad, targeted at strategic districts:
(montage of everyone pardoned, with His Lordship last if he somehow tries and gets away with it)
“Last year, Donald Trump pardoned all of these people for any possible crime connected with Russian collusion.”
(Shots of Comey, then Mueller)
“He then fired the FBI Director and Special Counsel in charge of investigating the collusion.”
(Sound bite of the Donald denying collusion)
(Shot of Trump looking unhappy)
“If what he says is true, why was he so afraid of an investigation that wouldn’t find any wrongdoing? Why did he pardon all of those people if they didn’t commit any crimes? What is he hiding? He’s not worried about it interfering with governing. He’s afraid we’ll find out the truth. And thanks to Donald Trump, we’ll never know.”
“He’s obstructed justice many times over. He’s done everything possible to keep the truth from coming out.”
(shot of Pubbie Rep)
“And Congressman (insert Pubbie Rep here) did nothing about it.”
“He sits silent…”
<or>
(sound bite of Pubbie Rep frowning on pardons) “He talks a good game, but sits on his hands…”
(shot of Trump shaking hands with Putin)
“…while Donald Trump systematically destroys our democracy and hands our secrets to the Russians.”
(shot of American flag waving in the wind)
“It’s time to hold them both accountable. It’s time to return to a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, not of Donald Trump, for Donald Trump, and by Donald Trump, aided by (insert Pubbie Rep here).”
(shot of Dem candidate)
“Take your democracy back. Vote (insert Dem candidate here) for Congress.”
None of that holds a candle to pardons. Many of us remember Watergate, and this blows that out of the water. We’re not talking about an amateurish robbery followed by a blundering cover-up. This is colluding with an enemy power followed by a blundering cover-up.
Gerrymandering and voter ID are both state issues, and a little too complex for people to latch onto, anyway. Presidential pardons are a helluva lot more visceral.
So don’t try to wake anybody up or anything.
Then it’s time to nut up or shut up, to quote Woody Harrelson. What are you willing to do about it? This is already a war for the soul of America. Are you going to fight or go on sleeping?
Different times, different people.
They might be, or they might not be.
I’ve been active so I’m not one to slumber, but I’m also realistic.
Trumpist: “Fake news!”
You are not going to get past that, sorry. We’re in a post-truth world. 1974 was a different time.
Remember, **half of all Republicans don’t think, or are at least doubtful, that Donald Trump Jr. met with Russians at all. ** I don’t mean they are doubtful of the contents of the details of the meeting, or its purpose; they literally doubt it happened. A third of Republican voters flatly say it never occurred. A meeting Trump Jr. and everyone involved, including the President, openly admit happened. The Trumpists disbelieve it all the same. The level of doublethink you’re working against is unprecedented in recent American history.
In my bet with FiveYearLurker, **Bricker **is acting as escrow. Do you trust Bricker? We both deposit the $ with him, and he disburses it at the date specified.
If someone offers a bet, etc. we have typically only moderated offers or challenges of betting for hijacks or harassment. If someone declines a bet, that should be enough to put a stop to further requests. RickJay has declined.
This isn’t an invitation to asking every other poster if they’d like to bet either - the general idea is out there and if there are takers there will be, no need to raise the subject for each additional poster.
[/moderating]
How many times do I have to say it? The Trumpists are a lost cause. THEY ARE THE 25%. Any energy wasted on them is just that, wasted.
Where the hell did I say any of this doesn’t matter? I would appreciate if you don’t put words in my mouth.
There is nothing to support the idea Republican voters will demand their reps take action about any of this. In fact, polling shows a substantial majority of GOP voters find nothing of concern in this matter. As long as they have control of both houses of Congress I see no reason to think there will be repercussions for Trump regarding any of his actions. Your second link actually says exactly that:
Obviously, if control of Congress changes then that could change. I have yet to see anything to make me think that is likely in 2018.
As for the pardons - can you give an example of someone who has been prosecuted for obstruction based on pardons they have granted? Clinton was investigated because of the Mark Rich pardon and nothing came of it. Sure, if Trump started handing out pardons like candy on Halloween it is possible a future administration could prosecute, but that is completely uncharted territory and would likely end up in front of the Supreme Court years in the future. No guarantee how that would turn out.
Good for you. What are you going to do now?
I’ve heard an awful lot of handwringing and futility from a lot of people here and not a lot of actual constructive thinking, let alone anyone calling for action but me.
Define the problem, formulate and test solutions, and put them into effect. Evaluate, revise and reapply as necessary. “Oh, woe is me” does worse than nothing. It actually encourages inaction. “Well, there’s nothing I can do, so why try?”
I’m not Pollyanna. But by the same token, I’d rather be the Man of La Mancha than sit idle and watch the place turn into Ingsocland. That’s exactly what you’re encouraging. Frankly, most of what I’ve seen is excuses for letting the asshole get away with it.
i dunno, saying Trump is on a path to impeachment and likely to try various avoidance strategies isn’t quite “The sky is falling!”
More like “The sky is blue.”
This bill is very promising. It indicates that maybe Congress is seeing through Trump’s obvious intentions to enrich himself with deals in Russia. Assuming it passes, I wonder if Trump will veto the bill as a piece of political theatre, which seems likely?