He's right on, fuck these assholes trying to make America 'great' again.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
US PoliEra 2019 |OT7| It's happening
- Thread starter Ogodei
- Start date
- Status
He's right on, fuck these assholes trying to make America 'great' again.
we are waiting for saudi arabia to tell us who to bomb for them? nothing concerning about that... nope, nothing at all
Some of the skepticism has been about the name of the gang or crew Biden said CornPop ran with, the Romans. Here's an article from Delaware's News Journal in which a local historian says there was a Wilmington gang called the Romans in the 1960s.
CornPopgate.
I feel like answering "What era was America great during" with some bullshit about slavery implies that your preferred era to return to was when we had slavery.
You know, the same time we were massacring Native Americans for their land, women couldn't vote or hold jobs, there were no child labor laws, and oh yeah, we had fucking slavery.
I wonder if he'd give a public rant if he got impeached by the house.
---
I've got to give Biden credit, he fucks up so many details but somehow he got Cornpop's nick name right from decades ago.
"But black people were in their place!" -Racists
Same shit happens even today. If something helps black people as well as white people, racists are against it.
"Great post!" Thanks! But seriously I'm not sure what you're hoping to accomplish when people can just read my post and see how you've tried to make it seem like I'm saying something I'm not.
Ah yes says the 214 post member who doesn't allow people to views their posts. Nah, your post was clear, it was just terrible.
Perhaps this was posted before, but the Kav investigation is being withheld from FOIA under 'executive privilege' which hilariously illogical.
You can view my posts.
Impeach everyone!
And see all the impeachments go nowhere.
And then what? Lol.
I think people are living in a Twitter bubble.
Kavanaugh is gross and should not have been confirmed. He probably should be removed. There are not enough votes to remove him.
Impeach everyone!
And see all the impeachments go nowhere.
And then what? Lol.
I think people are living in a Twitter bubble.
Kavanaugh is gross and should not have been confirmed. He probably should be removed. There are not enough votes to remove him.
To be honest, complaining and saying "get it together" is still better than firing all of them
In the Trump Era, but not actually due to Trump, we will be adding "Corn Pop" to the National Register of Historic figures.
Well, if you don't want Trump in office I suppose the monkey paw is he launches a strike against Iran because of a proxy war Saudi Arabia started which sends crude to records highs and causes a global recession that tanks his economic approval rating and starts making him poll in the low 30's
It's not impeach everyone. It's 3 people who deserve it, clearly. And those proceedings do have a high percentage of uncovering new information. And again the house is an independent entity from the Senate. Nothing happens if you don't even try. The but the Senate argument is so tired and useless.
Like if I hear it again I'm just gonna start hitting the ignore. If you dont understand the utility of actually using a house majority I don't need to see your posts any longer on the subject.
You won't even get the votes in the House lol.
There's a plausible case to impeach far more than 3 people.
There's a plausible case to impeach far more than 3 people.
It's just completely disgusting and baffling that Candace Owens seems to want to go back to the pre-Lincoln America. What does she think she'd be, the master's favorite slave? The highest second-class citizen is still a second-class citizen.
If he could actually fire them I'm sure he would, and then brag about shrinking the government and getting rid of lazy, entitled government employees.
She has none of her own convictions. She can't even grift well, and would have long been exposed if she wasn't so "useful" as every Republicans favorite black friend.
Not being able to remove in the Senate is irrelevant. Impeachment inquiries are the only way to drag crime and corruption by the Executive into the light and take away their plausible deniability. Not impeaching literally encourages future corruption. Oversight is in the job description.
It's also good for elections, every damned time. Don't impeach Clinton and then Gore's margins would have been too great to steal.
It's also good for elections, every damned time. Don't impeach Clinton and then Gore's margins would have been too great to steal.
I understand these precautions, but I don't view any of this as significantly risky.
1) Democrats are already being portrayed by Republicans and the mainstream media as "going after everyone in the administration" because...they are. And I think there's more to gain by being loud and clear-eyed about that. We're dealing with the most openly corrupt administration in American history. Seriously, we don't know what the extent is, the level of corruption that has taken place in the WH in the past behind the scenes. But on the basis of what we know is happening today? There has not been a more corrupt administration in the history of our country. No administration more deserving of extensive investigation and impeachment. I've been pretty hard on Congressional Democrats, but the one olive branch I toss them is acknowledging we are truly in uncharted waters. But, as far as "going after everybody," the circumstances dictate that they have to. They are morally and ethically charged with this responsibility. It will absolutely be a failure if they don't, regardless of the political calculus. But that almost doesn't matter because what the Democrats actually do will have no bearing on what everyone else will say they're doing. So own it.
2) Most people aren't under any pretense that Democrats can get "good policy stuff" done now. The general perception right now is that Congress isn't doing anything. Which, yeah, not true. But those messaging bills Democrats are focusing on aren't really getting a message through. Hence why Pelosi is walking around the Hill ready to pop off on journalists.
3)There are Democrats in conservative districts openly pushing for impeachment at this point. There comes a point where it starts to feel like we're just for covering for the political cowardice of the moderates, and not considering the potential cost of not holding the Trump Administration accountable. We've fallen into this pit again where we're counting on Trump to drive our base's enthusiasm. Mush-mouthed moderates are threatening to go against the party on this? Hold loud hearings. Put all the evidence out there. Hold a vote and then dare their asses to vote against impeachment.
He doesn't deserve any credit, he'd fire them if he had the power. He just can't.To be honest, complaining and saying "get it together" is still better than firing all of them
The blatant lies are sometimes staggering. Media, talk about the Dems in disarray please.
Impeachment inquiries during the election process also greatly distracts the Trump campaign and his sycophants. This isn't something they would be able to play offense on and that's their entire playbook. They would have to be attacking the House or the impeachment proceedings... and not be as focused on the actual election. It would be flooding the news media and no matter how you dice it... impeachment is a dirty word to associate a presidency to. It's why the media and public are so on the edge of the seat waiting for the Democrats to just SAY it. The messaging matters and right now the Democratic messaging is mixed at best.
And setting aside the political calculus on this... it's not the public's job to deliberate on the political calculus of it. We as the people should demand on what is right and fair. And what is right is beginning impeachment inquiry/investigation whatever. It's up to the House on how they want to play it. So all this talk about "bbbut the Senate" or "political strategy" doesn't really get us, the American public, anywhere.
You aren't going to take on the most corrupt administration playing it safe or by being quiet/docile about it. If the House Democrats are so worried about staying in power and political blowback then they aren't really doing their job. And they deserve what they get if they are going to be spineless about unfettered greed and corruption.
And setting aside the political calculus on this... it's not the public's job to deliberate on the political calculus of it. We as the people should demand on what is right and fair. And what is right is beginning impeachment inquiry/investigation whatever. It's up to the House on how they want to play it. So all this talk about "bbbut the Senate" or "political strategy" doesn't really get us, the American public, anywhere.
You aren't going to take on the most corrupt administration playing it safe or by being quiet/docile about it. If the House Democrats are so worried about staying in power and political blowback then they aren't really doing their job. And they deserve what they get if they are going to be spineless about unfettered greed and corruption.
I'm always a bit confused by what people mean when they say they want the House to begin impeachment of X.
Nadler can open an inquiry into Kavanaugh. He can depose people. He can issue subpoenas.
And can recommend articles of impeachment to the full House.
The modern Judiciary Committee has authorities and powers that basically match those granted by House votes to launch an inquiry in the past.
I haven't seen any indication this would pass a floor vote. I haven't seen any indication a symbolic vote to authorise an impeachment inquiry would pass a floor vote.
There is currently an inquiry that can lead to articles of impeachment, without ever needing a floor vote to launch it.
Nadler can open an inquiry into Kavanaugh. He can depose people. He can issue subpoenas.
And can recommend articles of impeachment to the full House.
The modern Judiciary Committee has authorities and powers that basically match those granted by House votes to launch an inquiry in the past.
I haven't seen any indication this would pass a floor vote. I haven't seen any indication a symbolic vote to authorise an impeachment inquiry would pass a floor vote.
There is currently an inquiry that can lead to articles of impeachment, without ever needing a floor vote to launch it.
I'm beyond tired of the impeachment arguments, especially considering we're already in one, and a deep one at that. Seriously, I've been beaming since 7/26 - not even Pelosi or Neal and especially not ya'll are going to kill this high.
That said, if Pelosi is the whip of our generation and has to whip some conservative mofos to vote 'Yes' on impeaching the most corrupt and traitorous administration this country has ever seen and hopefully ever will see, then I have faith that she can whip those "Yes"s after ALL of the information is publicly disseminated, digested, and absorbed - over many many months of daily hearings and sessions.
That's a power of impeachment, especially with these dudes. Nixon's crimes barely amount to what we suspect Trump of doing before and during 2016, to even speak of when he became president is just statistics at that point. And with his ass comes a RICO on steroids case (if acted on) involving most of his GOP pals, benefators, and an infiltrated NRA,
Furthermore, The public doesn't know a goddamn thing about a damn thing where it comes to Trump, other than vague clouds shat out from whatever bubbles of information they've secluded themselves to. ANd then of course it's out of a news cycle in no time flat; but stuff has been happening in the weeds still, and impeachment is a forceful agitator towards making them sprout and slam you in the head.
Impeachment, despite the tired debate, changes that. It's an X-factor, and one we should be using to our advantage a lot more and a lot sooner. The bigger this inquiry can grow and force the courts, then the more monumental the case gets. Make the GOP own it, not continue hiding from it thanks to some 12D 20th century thinking chess.
That said, if Pelosi is the whip of our generation and has to whip some conservative mofos to vote 'Yes' on impeaching the most corrupt and traitorous administration this country has ever seen and hopefully ever will see, then I have faith that she can whip those "Yes"s after ALL of the information is publicly disseminated, digested, and absorbed - over many many months of daily hearings and sessions.
That's a power of impeachment, especially with these dudes. Nixon's crimes barely amount to what we suspect Trump of doing before and during 2016, to even speak of when he became president is just statistics at that point. And with his ass comes a RICO on steroids case (if acted on) involving most of his GOP pals, benefators, and an infiltrated NRA,
Furthermore, The public doesn't know a goddamn thing about a damn thing where it comes to Trump, other than vague clouds shat out from whatever bubbles of information they've secluded themselves to. ANd then of course it's out of a news cycle in no time flat; but stuff has been happening in the weeds still, and impeachment is a forceful agitator towards making them sprout and slam you in the head.
Impeachment, despite the tired debate, changes that. It's an X-factor, and one we should be using to our advantage a lot more and a lot sooner. The bigger this inquiry can grow and force the courts, then the more monumental the case gets. Make the GOP own it, not continue hiding from it thanks to some 12D 20th century thinking chess.
Concern trolls are run amok to be honest. There are people who care more about trying to provoke others than truth and integrity, and they do it under the guise of smart politics. Way too much bad faith shit going around and the instigators are a big problem, and pathetic.
And what we do now sets precedent for the future. At least Trump is a bonafide moron who is too obsessed with his public appearance... imagine a Mitch McConnell type person as the President. A person who is both corrupt and dangerously effective at getting things done. Not stopping a stooge like Trump now means you open up worse cases in the future.
I'd agree that the risks don't seem that large as far as big political things go. You could certainly come up with ideas that are much more dangerous to the party, and a bad outcome here is probably something like 1% country-wide, not total disaster (although obviously if that's the 1% that puts Trump over the top, etc.). At the same time it's not very clear what the possible benefits are that would justify these (not huge) risks. I laid out three in my earlier post, and like I said I think two of them are basically nothing. By far the strongest argument for impeachment that I'm aware of is the third one, that the pomp and circumstance of a bona fide impeachment might actually get the public (well, swing voters) to realize that these are bad dudes. Like, what is "the potential cost of not holding the Trump Administration accountable", where of course by "holding the Trump Administration accountable" we mean the House voting to say that Trump should be removed from office and then nothing happening?
Ultimately I just don't think impeachment is likely to matter very much, whether it happens or not. The disagreement about impeachment in the party is fundamentally a tactical disagreement about what plays best in 2020 (we can talk about the argument that actually it is the House's Constitutional duty to impeach if you like, but I think this is nonsense and a transparent example of motivated reasoning), and no one seems to have great reasons to think it'll have a huge impact one way or the other, or even to think that it will definitely go in a particular direction. The expected value of impeachment has to be nearly 0. I lean towards not impeaching since I think it makes sense to be risk-averse given that the Democrats already seem well-positioned for 2020, and I would prefer a better chance of beating Trump to a worse chance of beating Trump but a better chance for a total moonshot where we take the Senate too. But I'm not going to call my congresswoman to tell her not to impeach, and if he does get impeached I will laugh at him but also I will worry a bit more about 2020.
As for whether impeachment is even possible, I don't really know how much arm-twisting you can get away with. I mean that -- I don't feel like I have a good understanding at all of how Congressional backroom dealing works, and only an okay one of congresspeople's willingness to buck leadership on high profile votes when they think the votes are bad for them. Certainly I am not willing to take what seems to me to be a massive risk of putting impeachment up for a vote and then having it actually fail, but I assume that if Pelosi ever does bring it up it will be in part because she's very confident it won't fail.
Last edited:
Fair enough.
Why cant he though? Would it just be too much of a mess? I think ive seen his administration do worse things so it wouldnt be that surprising I think.
I mean, personally, I'm not currently arguing that the Senate would acquit Trump, Barr or Kavanaugh. (They would, even with a Democrat majority, because it requires a super majority.)
Nor am I currently arguing that articles of impeachment would fail a floor vote. (They would.)
I'm way back at the, a floor vote to "launch an impeachment inquiry" would fail, which it would since there are currently only about half of the Democratic caucus who would support this, and basically zero GOP.
And this is ultimately mostly redundant, since the House Judiciary Committee has subpoena and deposition power.
Nor am I currently arguing that articles of impeachment would fail a floor vote. (They would.)
I'm way back at the, a floor vote to "launch an impeachment inquiry" would fail, which it would since there are currently only about half of the Democratic caucus who would support this, and basically zero GOP.
And this is ultimately mostly redundant, since the House Judiciary Committee has subpoena and deposition power.
Hard disagree on it would fail the floor vote. They have 135+ Dems in support already and they will keep gaining votes as this thing builds momentum towards the end of the year (less than a month ago we had only 90 Dems in favor). And it's going to look pretty bad on the Dems voting against this so they are going to hold their nose and vote for it anyway.
In any case they are doing something in the meantime so probably best to see where the inquiry leads first.
In any case they are doing something in the meantime so probably best to see where the inquiry leads first.
I'm guessing that's the main disconnect here because my immediate thoughts, and I assume others with my alignment, is "Who gives a flying fuck".
The impeachment process is just that - a process. All these terms of inquiry and investigation are meaningless. The House chooses how the process will proceed and that's that. The courts only care about the briefs, not the twitters and NYT editorials. This train is already rolling.
But again, it's all just a process. There was great scare that Pelosi was blocking even the judiciary from launching an inquiry, but that's been proven false since they've been in one for months. That was the monumental most important step of the process taken.
Floor votes, in the house and senate, can be worried about next summer. There's a lot of oversight shit that needs to get done in the interim. It ain't finishing in 2019.
Keep in mind that the judiciary committee's use of House counsel for its activities is at the discretion and permission of the Speaker of the House.
As for the auto labor deal, Trump probably wants to make sure that whatever the agreement is, both sides give up something to him.
As for the auto labor deal, Trump probably wants to make sure that whatever the agreement is, both sides give up something to him.
What does "look pretty bad" mean here, though? If you're a Democrat from a conservative district you're probably not planning on being nationally popular anytime soon anyway. There are definitely some Democratic House members who would benefit from being seen to buck their party on something like this. Off the top of my head I couldn't tell you how many we've got from districts Trump is still fairly popular in and where impeachment is deeply unpopular. Certainly you can tell a story where they won't dare embarrass the party like that, but I can imagine that going the other way. From their perspective it's the party trying to force a terrible vote on them for no reason.
I don't really know, but I suspect that unless there are primary challengers lined up there's just not much leverage here.
- Status