Cold War II: The United States vs Trump and Co. A Russian Affair

[AZBeauty]

Maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention. Is there a contingent of people here who are actively supporting not impeaching (now/asap)? I posted a pro-wait comment because I believe it provided some valid discussion points. But I'm still team GTTFOH2020.......

I get this as well. Since they know the Senate won't remove him, which is what most non-politically educated people think impeachment means, they don't want to do it. They think it will be his rally cry about how he was proven innocent of charges because look the Senate didnt impeach me. There are several problems with this, in my opinion. It should not even be about politics, its about accountability. Sets a bad precedent and I honestly dont think it with swing people one way or another. People who are supporting Trump will still support him no matter what. He's their white savior. I dont think there are many middle of the road people out there and if there are, they would be pushed left (or support Weld) if they paid attention to at 20% of the impeachment hearings if they are held.

Accountability is impeachment. Accountability is making the Senate Republicans who voted to not remove him defend it in the face of the all the evidence that would be revealed in those hearings, WHILE THEY RUN FOR REELECTION. GOP voters are pretty consistent, they will vote the R so this isnt for them anyway. Make them campaign on being the candidate who turned the blind eye to crimes of the president. Use their colleague Amash words against them in campaign ads if you want.

 

[CSquare43]

I get this as well. Since they know the Senate won't remove him, which is what most non-politically educated people think impeachment means, they don't want to do it. They think it will be his rally cry about how he was proven innocent of charges because look the Senate didnt impeach me. There are several problems with this, in my opinion. It should not even be about politics, its about accountability. Sets a bad precedent and I honestly dont think it with swing people one way or another. People who are supporting Trump will still support him no matter what. He's their white savior. I dont think there are many middle of the road people out there and if there are, they would be pushed left (or support Weld) if they paid attention to at 20% of the impeachment hearings if they are held.

#100

 

[Blackfyre]

@renato_mariotti
Trump lies about Mueller, claiming that Mueller sent a “letter” to correct his “testimony.”

Mueller never testified or sent a letter “correcting” anything.
11:36 - 6 Jun 2019

 

[jj23]

While gives a fukk? This is what happens when you move like a coward, you end up getting shytted on.

 

[PoorAndDangerous]

While gives a fukk? This is what happens when you move like a coward, you end up getting shytted on.

Mueller won't speak which allows Trump and company to make shyt up and put words in his mouth because he won't say shyt. Mueller needs to testify.

 

[Poetical Poltergeist]

While gives a fukk? This is what happens when you move like a coward, you end up getting shytted on.

And Trump can say whatever he wants because no one gives a fukk.

Can't believe many of us thought Mueller was gonna come through on some real shyt.

 

[CSquare43]

Yo low key...it kinda upsets me that this is the President that is there for those 75th Anniversary events...

WW2 is my "favorite" war. The events surrounding it and the war itself always fascinated me.

Trump calls Pelosi 'Nervous Nancy' before a somber D-Day commemoration in Normandy where 20,000 troops died 75 years ago

President Donald Trump took a shot at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi during a Fox News interview in Normandy, France on Thursday shortly before he attended a commemoration of the 75th anniversary of D-Day.

Sitting in front of a cemetery of American war dead, Trump argued that Pelosi's leadership and the Democratic party's investigations into him are a "disaster." And he took the opportunity to debut a nickname for Pelosi.

"Nancy Pelosi, I call her Nervous Nancy, Nancy Pelosi doesn't talk about it. Nancy Pelosi is a disaster, okay?" Trump said during an interview with Fox host Laura Ingraham. "She's a disaster. Let her do what she wants, you know what? I think they're in big trouble."

When asked about the comment, Pelosi, who is also in Normandy, told reporters that she has a policy of not criticizing the president while she's on foreign soil.

"I don't talk about the president while I'm out of the country. That's my principle."

I don't use the word frequently, but I really hate this piece of sh*t.....

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Interesting take on the 'now is not the right time to impeach' crowd....

Spoiler: SIAP: Re: Impeachment

For those of you who don't understand the game, here it is:

Pelosi has the numbers to pass articles of impeachment. McConnell has the numbers to ensure Trump is not convicted in that impeachment trial.

It would take the defection of 20 Republican Senators to convict Trump in an impeachment trial. Trump currently has a 90% approval rating among Republican voters. Voting to impeach would piss off those voters and ensure that Senator loses re-election. Nixon did not resign until his approval rating among Republican voters was around 60%. That won't happen to Trump during the Fox News era.

So, if Nancy impeaches, Mitch the bytch will "exonerate" Trump, and from that day until Election Day, all you're going to hear from the GOP, Republican pundits, Republican Voters, and trolls is "Trump was cleared of all charges/innocent/Russia Hoax."

We are 17 months out from Election Day.

That means we are in the middle of the large Democratic field, as the party's platform is built from an amalgamation of the best ideas of our 20-odd candidates. Right now we need primetime debates, and the primetime media coverage is being fought over fiercely by each of the candidates. Dems need every second of good press they can get.

Trump, on the other hand, is doing barely any campaigning. It's still more campaigning than any other President would be doing, but he's still out there very little in comparison. He's fundraising for the real election season next year, mostly. And planning.

Politically, there are four benefits to an impeachment trial with a guaranteed failure. First, it motivates the base to see their opponent on trial. Second, all of that overwhelming evidence demotivates the centrists aligned with the party on trial. They won't necessarily switch parties, but they're more likely to not vote. Third, it absolutely drowns out all other news coverage. Nobody else will be able to breathe in that media ecosystem without addressing it. And fourth, whoever is on trial in the Senate is nearly-grounded to DC. They won't be out heavily campaigning, they'll be reliant on surrogates for grip-and-grins.

Now, effects 1 and 2 only remain active so long as the trial continues. Once it's over and the trolls get to chant "Russia Hoax" the spell is broken and the motivation leaves an exasperated base and rejuvenated opposition.

Effect 3 is the exact opposite of what the Dems need right now. That kind of media blackout will drown campaigns who can't get their message out, and so can't get funding. You'll see a boost in the Senator-candidates campaigning like Harris, but campaigns like Buttigieg will die a lonely death out in the cold. The simplest solution to this is have the media circus after we have chosen a candidate and pushed our message out to the people. If the people know what we stand for, we'll survive the storm more intact.

The fourth effect would be useless right now when Trump is barely campaigning. But it would be incredibly next August-September-October. Imagine a candidate who could barely leave DC, who couldn't go out to see their supporters. It'd be doubly effective on Trump, who thrives off his cult-like rallies.

Lastly, House Democrats get to decide how long the impeachment trial lasts.

So if Pelosi times this right by holding off on impeachment for one year, we could ground and destabilize Trump's 2020 campaign, while mobilizing our own voters, and pushing the Senate vote back until after the election, so that the decision on whether Trump stays President or not is made in the ballot box instead, and we never have to hear "but he was found innocent" once this cycle.

OR

She could impeach right now and we get "bUt HE waS eXoNeRaTeD" for a year straight.

I respectfully disagree. It's not a trial. It's an impeachment proceeding. Nixon's took 17 months. Clinton's took 2 months and republicans had much much less to hit him with. A proceeding against Trump will probably take 2 years.

Also Trump has never stopped campaigning. He's been raising funds and holding rallies since he entered office. He was just in PA holding a rally for a House race.

 

[Blackfyre]

@axios
NEW: House Democrats have formally introduced a resolution to hold AG Bill Barr and former White House counsel Don McGahn in contempt of Congresshttps://www.axios.com/contempt-resolution-bill-barr-don-mcgahn-1cc15e79-d2c6-4757-9190-738b810dcc4e.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100 …
14:26 - 6 Jun 2019

 

[ExodusNirvana]

The man just insulted a decorated War vet (Mueller) on D Day in front of the cemetery in Normandy

WTF is wrong with ya'll that support this cat

 

[ORDER_66]

So they gonna drag this fat cac barr out in handcuffs or what!!? I didn't know you could break the law and get away with it, what happened to no one's above the law???

 

[fact]

So, now I have to ask, if the impeachment inquiry fails, which it will in the Senate, does that mean he is untouchable after his term(s)? If this isn't the truth, Pelosi is gaslighting us. If that is the truth, then I get it. I am however hard pressed at the thought that anyone in govt is going to make a real play at trying to put Trump in jail after his time is up. I am all for it, but it's something that I don't ever recall seeing in my lifetime, so I have no reference point.

 

[fact]

Agreed. My Father (who I didn't know growing up beyond @ 5 years old) lied about his age so he could go fight in WW2 and came home a very different person (that ultimately affected/destroyed his relationships with all his children) so this as*hole could play Private Bonespurs games and claim that "going to military school was basically like being in the military".....and then this f*ck gets to parade around during this timeframe and relish in it like he was in some way part of the process.....

SMMFH...

Both of my grandfathers were in WW2, dads father was in the battle of the bulge, and moms dad was a pilot/pow. How old was he when you were born, if you don't mind me asking?

 

[Sohh_lifted]

 

[Hood Critic]

So, now I have to ask, if the impeachment inquiry fails, which it will in the Senate, does that mean he is untouchable after his term(s)? If this isn't the truth, Pelosi is gaslighting us. If that is the truth, then I get it. I am however hard pressed at the thought that anyone in govt is going to make a real play at trying to put Trump in jail after his time is up. I am all for it, but it's something that I don't ever recall seeing in my lifetime, so I have no reference point.

That is yet another aspect of how this is being handled that is driving me insane. The Mueller report was only scoped to Russian interference and obstruction of justice. The whatever comes out of the counterintelligence investigation, the multitude of financial crimes, campaign fraud and violations, emoluments and hatch act violations, etc. all fall out of the scope but are fair game for post-office indictment.

If Pelosi is truly running with this line of thinking, that would mean the House would be trying to impeach Trump on both in and out of scope crimes or strictly out of scope crimes. Which would be foolish because one, there is plenty in the Mueller report that lawfully justifies multiple articles of impeachment. Secondly, the House neither has the investigative capacity nor the cooperation to fully investigate the out of scope crimes, so how the hell would they investigate and lay out an impeachment inquiry in a meaningful way if their philosophy is to wait?

Not to mention, NY where Trump will likely be indicted after office, has already amended some of its laws to get around double jeopardy and pardons. And, I was under the impression that impeachment proceedings in congress fall outside of the DOJ guidelines, so what justification or precedent could his legal team use to shake prosecution in court when he no longer holds office?

A lot of her justifications are not making logical sense, I know she has this reputation of being a strategist but I just don't see it.