Politics Generations

[smjjames]

6 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

the chief justice acts as the presiding officer during the senate trial. is not SCOTUS involvement. just the chief justice. furthermore, the presiding officer role is largely ministerial, which is one reason why the trial o' andrew johnson were such a complete and utter charlie fox. 

I was responding to the 'SCOTUS plays role of Pontius Pilate' part, since Pontius Pilate is the one who sentenced Jesus (or at least ordered the cruxification anyway), I was like 'I don't think SCOTUS actually has quite that much involvement.

8 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

but perhaps change is needed. the 2019 presidency is so different than what were envisioned by the founders in 1787. separation o' powers and checks and balances current only works if you got a person in the oval office who believes in the Constitution or who is concerned 'bout legacy and has at least some notion o' a greater good.  maybe we needed trump to show us all just how broken the executive can be?

am just not seeing an alternative to impeach. if trump is once again allowed to violate Constitutional limits, then what precedent is set? 

Not to mention how broken Congress is when one party blindly* (or more accurately, fearfully) accepts the adminstrations excesses. *Yes, I know both parties tend to do that when a President of their party is in power, but the Republicans behavior here is particularly egregious.

Also, as far as looking to history, there's an argument against looking to history as a guide since each one is unique to their time and there is just no precedent for the level that Trump goes to.

[Gromnir]

we were using pontius pilate in sense that he washed his hands, literal and figurative... is reason we have idiom o' washing hands as a way o' identifying one who has absolved self o' responsibility in a matter o' some import.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Agiel]

56 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

 

from larry tribe's book 'bout impeachment:

"Many Americans who voted for Trump view themselves as belonging to a victimized, disenfranchised class that has finally discovered its champion. For some of them, Trump’s appeal is less what he will accomplish programmatically than whom he will attack personally. Were Trump removed from office by political elites in Washington, DC—even based on clear evidence that he had grossly abused power—some of his supporters would surely view the decision as an illegitimate coup. Indeed, some right-wing leaders have already denounced the campaign to remove Trump as a prelude to civil war. This rhetoric, too, escapes reality and indulges pernicious tendencies toward apocalyptic thinking about the impeachment power."

 

This quote brings to mind the song <<The Fires of Frustration>> by Deathspell Omega, a critique of those whom Nietzsche referred to as "Men of Resentment":

 

Quote

Hear our voices, all of you, Men of resentment; whose stomachs and souls are aflame with the poisonous hatred of impotence; you whom have been wronged again and again; wiping your face clean, day after day, from the spit of those sitting unjustifiably above you.

We will grant you freedom from freedom.

As thou cometh unto us, we shall ease your sense of frustration and isolation: from your mouths will flow endless rivers of black bile, you will regurgitate the quintessence of failure and, in the depths of the night, feel the warmth of equality recovering your shivering body.

We will feed the illusion that, by merely mastering some of your base impulses, you can aim for the world - that your failure with common affairs all but guarantees your success with the unattainable and the splendid. Your indisputable competency to direct the fortunes of the many is herewith consecrated.

We shall reassure you of our warm paternal love, tell you with gentle yet virile words that a place exists that was yours of all eternity, that you won’t have to conquer it nor to redeem you worth with strenuous effort. Eventually, we are to arm and turn all of you into the expendable hounds of our Order.

We shall base our ladder of dignity on things that are innate, things that require no skill nor exceptional aptitudes, so as to rally the masses of the inept and the interchangeables.

Edited September 29, 2019 by Agiel

[ManifestedISO]

3 hours ago, Gromnir said:

for those who is advocating impeachment and removal, is worth reading 'bout the andrew johnson trial as a cautionary tale.  

HA! Good Fun!

this from Yoni Appelbaum in March is long but riveting and rife with history

The case before the United States in 1868 bears striking similarities to the case before the country now—and no president in history more resembles the 45th than the 17th. “The president of the United States,” E. P. Whipple wrote in this magazine in 1866, “has so singular a combination of defects for the office of a constitutional magistrate, that he could have obtained the opportunity to misrule the nation only by a visitation of Providence. Insincere as well as stubborn, cunning as well as unreasonable, vain as well as ill-tempered, greedy of popularity as well as arbitrary in disposition, veering in his mind as well as fixed in his will, he unites in his character the seemingly opposite qualities of demagogue and autocrat.” Johnson, he continued, was “egotistic to the point of mental disease” and had become “the prey of intriguers and sycophants.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/impeachment-trump/580468/

 

[Guard Dog]

Johnson never wanted to be President. Had it not been for Lincoln being assassinated he never would have been. Trump wanted this for reason only he can know.

[smjjames]

15 hours ago, ManifestedISO said:

this from Yoni Appelbaum in March is long but riveting and rife with history

The case before the United States in 1868 bears striking similarities to the case before the country now—and no president in history more resembles the 45th than the 17th. “The president of the United States,” E. P. Whipple wrote in this magazine in 1866, “has so singular a combination of defects for the office of a constitutional magistrate, that he could have obtained the opportunity to misrule the nation only by a visitation of Providence. Insincere as well as stubborn, cunning as well as unreasonable, vain as well as ill-tempered, greedy of popularity as well as arbitrary in disposition, veering in his mind as well as fixed in his will, he unites in his character the seemingly opposite qualities of demagogue and autocrat.” Johnson, he continued, was “egotistic to the point of mental disease” and had become “the prey of intriguers and sycophants.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/impeachment-trump/580468/

 

Not sure how demagoguery and autocrat are 'seemingly opposite qualities', one doesn't exclude the other. Sure, there may be some demagogues who aren't autocrats and vice versa, but they're traits that are commonly found together.

In addition to what GD said, Johnson wasn't charged with the same kind of things that Trump is being accused of. Sure, they may have striking similarities in personality, but the similarity stops there. See my earlier point about the argument against looking to history as a guide for impeachment because it only works up to a point.

Edited September 29, 2019 by smjjames

[Gromnir]

we brought up johnson 'cause o' the trial.  what happens when a deeply divided senate attempts to hold a trial? you are gonna have dozens o' judges who is simultaneous jurors voting on what evidence and testimony is admissible. gosh, with a partisan senate, how could that turn out bad, eh? am thinking most o' us would agree that jury and witness tampering is something one would wanna avoid if you hope for fair trial, but such were commonplace with the senate trial o' johnson. deals were struck and money changed hands and the line 'tween the good guys and bad guys were blurred beyond recognition. it were all very democratic and ugly... am suspecting we got a glimpse o' what trials looked like in athens when democracy were young. disquieting to say the least. is good reasons why the American experiment attempted to insulate the Courts from the other branches o' government, and the trial o' johnson were a morbid effective case study in what happens when there is no distinction 'tween political and judicial. 

oh, and let's not ignore how trump is gonna be tried by social media and 24 news as much as senate. how do you think that plays out?

mueller attempted, with little luck, to explain the gravity o' a legal decision not to pursue criminalization o' trump's election interaction with russia. mueller tried to warn Congress and the public 'bout the extent o' russian attempts to interfere with elections.  russian efforts were always less 'bout getting a particular candidate elected and more 'bout creating distrust and amplifying discord. you think the russia and and china and others is gonna sit meek and quiet outta respect for our American institutions and let the senate trial play out w/o any foreign interference? precedent is now set that politicians may knowing accept dirt from foreign powers as long as coordination and planning with such powers is limited. can't imagine how such could possible turn out bad.

a senate trial o' trump has much potential for calamity. still in favor o' impeachment and trial knowing the likelihood o' nightmares inherent in pursuing justice? fine. as we say, am personal in favor o' impeachment 'cause am seeing no alternative-- there needs be a response to executive excess other than inherent limits o' a 4-year term. 

read history o' johnson trial and consider in context o' 2019 political and media realities. 

HA! Good Fun!

[smjjames]

26 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

American experiment attempted to insulate the Courts from the other branches o' government, and the trial o' johnson were a morbid effective case study in what happens when there is no distinction 'tween political and judicial. 

And yet they have the Chief Justice preside. Though someone has to preside and having the VP (who would normally preside for important votes and all that) preside would likely be an even worse idea. Not sure whether you meant that the Chief Justice at the time was being political, but from what I've read of Roberts, he's been trying to avoid the appearance of politicizing SCOTUS, so, he'd likely try his best to stay neutral.

As for a response to executive excess, most of that would involve Congress taking back it's powers and it's hard to see what sort of constitutional amendment remedy would help, or rather, I'm not sure what it would be.

[Gromnir]

preside is not same as judge. am not sure what you think chief justice presiding means.  again, is worth your time to read history o' the johnson trial. the senate, all o' the senators, is gonna judge the trial.  the SCOTUS and the judicial branch has no say on what happens at a senate trial resulting from impeachment and chief justice is limited to largely ministerial functions. 

kinda repeating self.

oh, and is much Congress can do to reign in power o' the President, but not with divided Congress. emergency power, for example, were given to the executive by Congress. the expansion o' bureaucracy were accomplished by Legislation and not by some kinda executive branch mitosis. etc. whatever powers Congress has ceded to the executive may be quashed.  however, is not gonna happen. an amendment isn't necessary, but traditional methods is ineffectual as Congress is divided. 

four years ago, describe an imaginary future President who colludes with russians to get elected, but collusion is found just shy o' necessary coordination for a criminal conspiracy charge. tell us the imagined President, on multiple occasions, obstructed efforts by special counsel and fbi to investigate the russian collusion, but doj cannot pursue a criminal indictment 'gainst a sitting president, so evidence o' obstruction is simply memorialized. explain to us how the imagined President took money for military construction projects and disaster relief in an effort to circumvent Congressional explicit refusal to provide money for a unnamed task.  tell us the President then attempted to bury ig findings regarding an urgent and credible whistleblower report which claims the President attempted to leverage a foreign power to investigate a political rival. etc.

extend imagined Presidential nightmare scenario and tell us a divided Congress is incapable o' responding to Presidential excesses and only two viable options for responding to repeated executive excess: wait for the next election or initiate impeachment.  

welcome to september 2019.

HA! Good Fun!

ps if you wanna show how founders desire to insulate justice from political is not real, chief justice presiding at Presidential impeachment is a terrible rebuttal. however, the past couple hundred years o' Congressional legislation and executive branch rulemaking which both implicit and explicit relies 'pon judicial decisions to fill in gaps in laws and rules does make a mockery o' founder's goals. 

[ShadySands]

Supposedly Biden's campaign has put out a request for news networks to stop booking Giuliani. This seems like a dumb ask to me and not just because of the obvious reasons but because I haven't seen him make anything better or even provide any defense but rather he often seems to make things worse for himself and his client.

 

Is anyone following the Amber Guyger murder trial at all? If so can you please explain to me what the issue is? She admitted to going into the wrong apartment and killing the occupant. We've got a Texas Ranger saying he doesn't believe she committed a crime (though I read he was not allowed to say that in front of the jury). Is it because she was a cop? Is she just trying to get a lesser charge or is she really trying to get away with it? My primitive brain doesn't understand.

 

Edited September 30, 2019 by ShadySands
My phone isn't being the grammar tiki torch enthusiast that it's supposed to be

[smjjames]

2 hours ago, ShadySands said:

Supposedly Biden's campaign has put out a request for news networks to stop booking Giuliani. This seems like a dumb ask to me and not just because of the obvious reasons but because I haven't seen him make anything better or even provide any defense but rather he often seems to make things worse for himself and his client.

Mostly they just want the lies to stop getting aired. The guy makes a fool of himself almost every time he goes on TV though, despite Trump and co. thinking that the strategy is working.

[ShadySands]

The lies and conspiracy theories are going to continue no matter what but Giuliani keeps digging a deeper hole so if it were me I'd want him to continue running his mouth. But maybe that's just me.

[Malcador]

4 hours ago, ShadySands said:

Is it because she was a cop

I'm going to be fairly surprised if she is actually convicted.  DA already conveniently broke the gag order, heh.

[Gromnir]

4 hours ago, ShadySands said:

 

Is anyone following the Amber Guyger murder trial at all? If so can you please explain to me what the issue is? She admitted to going into the wrong apartment and killing the occupant. We've got a Texas Ranger saying he doesn't believe she committed a crime (though I read he was not allowed to say that in front of the jury). Is it because she was a cop? Is she just trying to get a lesser charge or is she really trying to get away with it? My primative brain doesn't understand.

 

am hesitant to answer.

even when it is possible to criminalize a person for murder/manslaughter/negligent homicide, we rare see a da do so if is the result o' accident.

a doctor, 'cause o' a bonehead mistake, screws up a prescription and shady dies. perhaps a construction worker messes up construction o' scaffolding and not only does coworker die in fall, but shady dies. etc. 

the doctor and construction worker don't get away with anything, and chances are the doctor loses everything even if she does have malpractice insurance. will be wrongful death civil case to make folks pay. even so, if is mistake, we typical don't see da going for prosecution, in part 'cause juries won't convict for mistake even if unlawful killing of another with malice aforethought could be applied... even if manslaughter or negligent homicide could be applied, da rare does so.

if the doctor or construction worker were on drugs when they made their mistake? then yeah, da goes after such stuff rabid and juries is willing to convict such folks. but mistake?

am suspecting "because she is a cop" is why da isn't going for, at most, negligent homicide.

malcador kinda gets backwards. da is obviously pushing this hard and is willing to risk censure to show the public how the prosecution is doing everything possible to punish this cop. is unlikely the judge would throw out the conviction, but the da could face some kinda punishment. why is da risking? needs to reassure constituents that justice is being pursued.

am knowing this feels gut-level wrong. an innocent person, sitting on a couch in their own home when a stranger busts in, gets shot and dies and nobody goes to prison? how could that be justice? the thing is, the cop being on trial for murder is actual what is odd in these circumstances. 

so it goes.

[Gromnir]

Trump wants to meet whistleblower, says Schiff may have committed ‘fraud and treason’

reading fox stuff is... weird. this is relative tame as an example

"But Schiff opened Thursday’s hearing on Capitol Hill with Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire with an exaggerated reading of the phone call, which he later walked back as a “parody.”"

walked back? were obvious parody from start. schiff starts off by explaining how, "this is the essence of what the president communicates."  so, y'know, is clear he ain't direct quoting.

"We’ve been very good to your country, very good, no other country has done as much as we have, but you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand, lots of it, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I’m going to put you in touch with the Attorney General of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy — you’re going to love him, trust me. You know what I’m asking, and so I’m only going to say this a few more times in a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again, I’ll call you when you’ve done what I’ve asked.’

“This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of office.”

now maybe you think parody is inherent inappropriate or perhaps is some cases which cross a line

regardless, were nothing to walk back and accusations o' fraud is so complete out o' touch with reality they could only come from alt-right sources... and gop Congressmen in 2019.

and again, although am technical libertarian, we traditional vote republican, so this is double disturbing for us... those o' you who has had to shake your head in dismay over the past few years as we mocked obama foreign policy and democrat Congress bumbling can all get a well deserved chuckle at our expense.

regardless, the notion o' trump making threats regarding anonymity o' the whistleblower is... disturbing. is even more disturbing 'cause the threats appear calculated to create support 'mongst his base, which should be utter insane.

HA! Good Fun!

[ManifestedISO]

The predictable and co-occurring idealization and devaluation are two emotional states that generally define a narcissist’s attitude toward himself (idealization) and others (devaluation; see the insults discussed above). He projects them, primitively — i.e., without any self-reflection or inhibitions, as there is no functioning conscience to impose such “obstacles” on his mental processes and behavior — onto the world and constructs an entire ideology from them.

 

horrifying, explicit description of the president's pathology, from three years ago ... also includes explanation for what may have happened to today's Congressional GOP: narcissistic collusion; again, June of 2016 this was published, by Elizabeth Mika

 

https://medium.com/@Elamika/hell-hath-no-fury-like-a-narcissist-scorned-d0e0186ea332

[Gromnir]

the weird thing 'bout trump bringing up treason all the time is that it is literal the only crime which is detailed in the Constitution. accusations o' treason by tyrant or tyrannical government is what concerned the founders enough to make singular definition. no implied treason in the US. 

at times it looks as if the founders wrote the Constitution with trump in mind. 

HA! Good Fun! 

Edited September 30, 2019 by Gromnir

[Guard Dog]

2 hours ago, Gromnir said:

the weird thing 'bout trump bringing up treason all the time is that it is literal the only crime which is detailed in the Constitution. accusations o' treason by tyrant or tyrannical government is what concerned the founders enough to make singular definition. no implied treason in the US. 

at times it looks as if the founders wrote the Constitution with trump in mind. 

HA! Good Fun! 

Didn't he also tweet his removal would trigger a civil war yesterday? This gets better by the minute. There are things for which I would feel justified in bearing arms against my country. The removal of a politician, even an honest one and he is far from that, is not one of those things. It's also hard not to interpret his comment about what we used to do to spies as a threat to the WB. 

In other news I'm seeing Hillary Clinton's name come up a lot of late. Along with speculation she may enter the race. Especially since Biden might well be compromised in Trump's self immolation. He was fading in the polls anyway and Warren is damaged goods. Oh please, please, please let that happen. Once you realize to outcomes of elections are utterly irrelevant (a contest of villainous fools and foolish villains) politics becomes much more entertaining. Clinton would diving in would bring an amusing level of chaos. 

Amber Guyer. Incompetent cop murders someone. Nothing to see here. I'm actually surprised they didn't drop an untraceable pistol on the guy's body, forge a backdated warrant for his arrest and give her a medal. If I were king for a day I'd give the police a choice. Either you give up your firearms while on duty or you give up your qualified immunity. You cannot have both. 

[213374U]

6 hours ago, Malcador said:

I'm going to be fairly surprised if she is actually convicted.

Well, she "feared for her life".

[Volourn]

That cop is guilty of murder. She didn't make a mistake she made a choice. She chose to enter  someone else's apartment, shoot them for giggles, and now claiming 'mistake'. She is a piece of arbage. Plain and simple.

[Hurlshort]

29 minutes ago, Volourn said:

That cop is guilty of murder. She didn't make a mistake she made a choice. She chose to enter  someone else's apartment, shoot them for giggles, and now claiming 'mistake'. She is a piece of arbage. Plain and simple.

Why would she make that choice?

[213374U]

3 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Why would she make that choice?

She can't seem to answer that.

 

[smjjames]

8 hours ago, ManifestedISO said:

The predictable and co-occurring idealization and devaluation are two emotional states that generally define a narcissist’s attitude toward himself (idealization) and others (devaluation; see the insults discussed above). He projects them, primitively — i.e., without any self-reflection or inhibitions, as there is no functioning conscience to impose such “obstacles” on his mental processes and behavior — onto the world and constructs an entire ideology from them.

 

horrifying, explicit description of the president's pathology, from three years ago ... also includes explanation for what may have happened to today's Congressional GOP: narcissistic collusion; again, June of 2016 this was published, by Elizabeth Mika

 

https://medium.com/@Elamika/hell-hath-no-fury-like-a-narcissist-scorned-d0e0186ea332

Seems more like a combination of the need to win, making a deal with the devil, and fear (lots of fear), than narcissistic collusion on the part of the GOP

[Gfted1]

Another nothingburger like "Russian voting influence" and "paying to get your kid into university"?

[smjjames]

If you want to be like the GOP and ignore the evidence, yes.