Politics US Edition (2021!)

[rjshae]

Trump. Impeached. Again. So much losing. At least this time it was over quickly.

[Gorth]

I'm still keeping something Gromnir mentioned in the back of my head. The goal may not be to get him kicked out 12 hours early (no matter how much instant gratification it would give some, like Pelosi), but to prevent him running again in 2024?

(or run for local governor, house, senate, whatever)

 

[melkathi]

Yeah, his term is over anyway. It's for later. But I doubt they'll get enough republican senators to go for it.

[Gorth]

3 minutes ago, melkathi said:

Yeah, his term is over anyway. It's for later. But I doubt they'll get enough republican senators to go for it.

If they delay it a bit, the Democrats will also have a senate majority at some point. Iirc, a simple majority would be sufficient for the purpose (edit: not for removing him, but for blocking his re-runs).

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

13 minutes ago, Gorth said:

I'm still keeping something Gromnir mentioned in the back of my head. The goal may not be to get him kicked out 12 hours early (no matter how much instant gratification it would give some, like Pelosi), but to prevent him running again in 2024?

(or run for local governor, house, senate, whatever)

It's split between that and posturing. It's probably not going to amount to anything though.

Honestly I doubt Donald Trump is going to run for anything besides president due to ego. Assuming Donald doesn't or can't run in 2024 the likelihood of the primary winner is the one closest to Trump is pretty good. Right now I'd say it's most likely to be that dip**** from Missouri or Ivanka, but if there's one thing the US has a lot of it's really dumb rich people with horrible beliefs so we could see another one come out of the woodwork promising stuff that gets the ****wits fired up.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

I'm still keeping something Gromnir mentioned in the back of my head. The goal may not be to get him kicked out 12 hours early (no matter how much instant gratification it would give some, like Pelosi), but to prevent him running again in 2024?

(or run for local governor, house, senate, whatever)

 

I think it also disqualifies him from some of the post-presidential perks that come with the office.

[Gromnir]

the next years is gonna result in a whole lotta trump lawsuits and criminal cases which trump will no longer have Presidential privelage to avoid. as bad as trump appears today, there is a good possibility he will be viewed far more critical in two or three years. many in the trump base will never believe anything bad 'bout trump, but november and the georgia runoffs made clear that the suburban republicans were already moving away from trump. trump's imminent and vulgar legal theatre will not polish his image with suburban housewives. today, many republicans is being forced to go on record with their support for trump, and such support will be used mercilessly by democrats and fellow republicans in the not so distant future.

numerous senators, 'cause o' their lengthy terms, are able to take a more expansive view o' what trump support means for the party and for themselves personal. keep in mind, individuals such as mcconnell and graham just won reelection. they are safe from being primaried for a long time.  however, anybody up for reelection in 2022 already started their reelection campaign efforts in earnest, and at the moment, trump is popular with his base. devil and the deep blue sea.

oh, and trump is ignorant, erratic and narcissistic. he is still dangerous for the next week and beyond. am not certain why people refuse to accept that reality. potential for trump harm remains now and in the future. the current efforts by democrats puts pressure on republicans to take efforts to reign in the mistake they collective made possible through four years o' embarrassing enabling. 

the push for impeachment didn't have much downside for democrats. impeachment with possible senate trial looming prevents the republican party from being able to pretend as if the last four years o' complicit behaviour were just a fleeting aberration which many in the gop will in the future attempt to marginalize as you saw 'em marginalizing the relevance o' january six during the debates earlier today on the floor o' the house. recorded vigorous defense 'o trump and the events o' january 6 is gonna be replayed over and over again and for a long time to come.

successful prevent trump from running ever again? nix his security detail and travel allowance? bonuses. 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Edited January 14, 2021 by Gromnir

[rjshae]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

I'm still keeping something Gromnir mentioned in the back of my head. The goal may not be to get him kicked out 12 hours early (no matter how much instant gratification it would give some, like Pelosi), but to prevent him running again in 2024?

(or run for local governor, house, senate, whatever)

Yes, it's not automatic but the senate can include a ban. Plus he'd lose the bene's from the 1958 Former Presidents Act, which includes a handsome pension. He still gets Secret Service protection though, cause you never know if somebody might want to execute general order 666. 

[rjshae]

1 hour ago, melkathi said:

Yeah, his term is over anyway. It's for later. But I doubt they'll get enough republican senators to go for it.

Actually, if Mitch goes for it they just might. The reasoning is that with Trump gone, the party can reboot itself. Without that, he's a permanent boat anchor that could cost them more elections.

[BruceVC]

6 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

For me, got the number from BBC specifically, prior to the vote. House Majority Leader Steny (?) also said up to 20 expected to cross the floor. Not sure where Bruce got it from but he mentioned the same number too, last page.

 

I got the number from CNN political insiders who have sources in Congress, that they dont specifically mention, who often share information that is correct..not all the time but often their "information" is accurate as the predictions do come true

 

[BruceVC]

6 hours ago, Gorth said:

I'm still keeping something Gromnir mentioned in the back of my head. The goal may not be to get him kicked out 12 hours early (no matter how much instant gratification it would give some, like Pelosi), but to prevent him running again in 2024?

(or run for local governor, house, senate, whatever)

 

I think its more symbolic, I dont believe in the next   6 days Trump is actually still a threat to the stability of the USA but his appalling behavior starting with him rejecting the election outcome and culminating in him supporting both directly and indirectly the insurrection around the Capitol attacks has left many US congressman tired of the constant irrational and impulsive behavior from Trump 

So this is their response to Trump, its more symbolic than truly punitive because in less than 7 days Trump is finally gone 

Edited January 14, 2021 by BruceVC

[Raithe]

[Gromnir]

5 hours ago, BruceVC said:

I think its more symbolic, I dont believe in the next   6 days Trump is actually still a threat to the stability of the USA but his appalling behavior starting with him rejecting the election outcome and culminating in him supporting both directly and indirectly the insurrection around the Capitol attacks has left many US congressman tired of the constant irrational and impulsive behavior from Trump 

So this is their response to Trump, its more symbolic than truly punitive because in less than 7 days Trump is finally gone 

curious. do you believe trump is not a threat because he lacks capacity to do harm or 'cause he will choose to do no harm?

trump has the capacity to break much in a week. do you depend on the better angles of his nature to conclude he is no threat? do you believe he fears practical consequences 'cause breaking more would be unreasonable and lead to a less beneficial outcome for the President?

trump is a potential threat now and in the future. particular with all the unity theory o' executive power adherents trump and barr ensconced in the executive, is worth noting that all authority in the entirety o' the executive branch is vested in one office: POTUS. am thinking you do not comprehend what he could break in a week. as for the future, his head is full of secrets and do you genuine believe trump will maintain those confidences for love of country if a foreign power or domestic actor with ill intent offers him a deal which is to trump's benefit?

GOP Sen. Roy Blunt Says He Thinks Trump ‘Is Unlikely’ to ‘Touch the Hot Stove’ Again After Capitol Mob Riots

...

is only a week remaining in the current President's term in office and those in trump's inner circle appear to be trying to restrain the President, which is good news. nevertheless, am curious at to why anybody would be willing to gamble on trump being reasonable, rational and reserved for the next twenty-four hours much less until the 20th. assume he will do something stoopid is a safe bet. assume trump will do something dangerous is the prudent course o' action. 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

38 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

curious. do you believe trump is not a threat because he lacks capacity to do harm or 'cause he will choose to do no harm?

trump has the capacity to break much in a week. do you depend on the better angles of his nature to conclude he is no threat? do you believe he fears practical consequences 'cause breaking more would be unreasonable and lead to a less beneficial outcome for the President?

trump is a potential threat now and in the future. particular with all the unity theory o' executive power adherents trump and barr ensconced in the executive, is worth noting that all authority in the entirety o' the executive branch is vested in one office: POTUS. am thinking you do not comprehend what he could break in a week. as for the future, his head is full of secrets and do you genuine believe trump will maintain those confidences for love of country if a foreign power or domestic actor with ill intent offers him a deal which is to trump's benefit?

GOP Sen. Roy Blunt Says He Thinks Trump ‘Is Unlikely’ to ‘Touch the Hot Stove’ Again After Capitol Mob Riots

...

is only a week remaining in the current President's term in office and those in trump's inner circle appear to be trying to restrain the President, which is good news. nevertheless, am curious at to why anybody would be willing to gamble on trump being reasonable, rational and reserved for the next twenty-four hours much less until the 20th. assume he will do something stoopid is a safe bet. assume trump will do something dangerous is the prudent course o' action. 

HA! Good Fun!

Trump still has the capacity and irrational, capricious personality to do harm if he wants but I cannot see him doing this after the disastrous events of last week that has been linked to his comments

The Republican hardliners have accepted Biden will be president so that is progress and even Trump has acknowledged " there will be a new president " 

So I am not too concerned that Trump will cause any more problems with his comments or try  any " legal " attempts to prevent Biden becoming the rightful president of the USA 

Nothing that should be seen as a " threat to the nation  therefore impeachment is critical "  

So the impeachment objective is not  necessary to ensure  a political transition 

 

 

[ComradeYellow]

8 hours ago, rjshae said:

The reasoning is that with Trump gone, the party can reboot itself.

Doubtful that the Republicans will ever "Reboot" to some abstract notion of how the Dems formerly perceived them.

The party is ****, always has been ****, and always will be ****.

[Gromnir]

51 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Trump still has the capacity and irrational, capricious personality to do harm if he wants but I cannot see him doing this after the disastrous events of last week that has been linked to his comments.

 

and every time trump does something unforgivable and is afterwards chastised by republicans and media, folks like collins and blunt says they cannot imagine the President doing something irrational and capricious... again. how many times does trump need do again before is too much?

if you concede trump is irrational and capricious, and you acknowledge trump has the capacity to do great harm, then what is the basis for  hope that this time trump won't do the unthinkable, improbable or impossible?

am not picking on bruce, but having seen the same curious optimism voiced by numerous individuals here and at various news sites, am baffled by the confidence that this time is different. how many times do you need to see the scorpion sting the frog before it sets in that the scorpion cannot be trusted? 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

[BruceVC]

9 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

and every time trump does something unforgivable and is afterwards chastised by republicans and media, folks like collins and blunt says they cannot imagine the President doing something irrational and capricious... again. how many times does trump need do again before is too much?

if you concede trump is irrational and capricious, and you acknowledge trump has the capacity to do great harm, then what is the basis for  hope that this time trump won't do the unthinkable, improbable or impossible?

am not picking on bruce, but having seen the same curious optimism voiced by numerous individuals here and at various news sites, am baffled by the confidence that this time is different. how many times do you need to see the scorpion sting the frog before it sets in that the scorpion cannot be trusted? 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

I dont disagree with the potential harm Trump could cause but after the attack on the Capitol what all Republicans are now acknowledging is that " Biden will be president " 

This wasnt what some of the Trump loyalists were saying until that event. So that is what is different ever since that event, the acceptance that Biden won the election and that narrows  and inhibits Trumps ability to do harm 

[Gromnir]

1 minute ago, BruceVC said:

So that is what is different ever since that event, the acceptance that Biden won the election and that narrows  and inhibits Trumps ability to do harm 

this is hardly universal, which is why the fbi has warned of potential attacks in all 50 states contemporaneous with the inauguration. a considerable % o' the US population still believes the election were stolen from trump even if they have no meaningful proof to support such a belief and regardless o' their awareness joe biden, and the existential threat he represents, is inevitable after january 20. many o' these people are more angry 'cause the last legal obstacles to a biden Presidency is gone. what choice but force o' arms remains, eh? is madness, but tell us it ain't real. dare you. 

so what if trump loyalists now believe the biden transition is inevitable. the vast majority of trump loyalists in Congress and the wh knew biden were gonna be President before january 6. many such loyalists were placating the President. we were told, "what harm could come from letting the President exhaust his arguments in court?" and how many republican Congressmen nevertheless voted to object to the electoral vote count after the riot?

trump is no less dangerous because is clear he won't be the President for another four years. arguable more dangerous. 

trump loyalists cannot stop the President from writing executive orders, making announcements and proclamations or giving direct instructions to any number o' persons in the executive branch or military. the joint chiefs o' staff released a warning 'cause they is clear concerned that at least a few in the military place loyalty to trump before their oath to the Constitution. house minority leader mccarthy and vice president pence couldn't even get trump to help them as they were under siege in the Capitol and you nevertheless believe they can stop the President from self or national immolation if he commits himself to some destructive course of action? 

am utter baffled by the belief that the danger trump poses has passed. even if trump doesn't manage to burn down dc before the 20th (am not personal believing such will happen,) am unable to see confidence that the executive occupant o' the oval office is mollified or harmless can be attributed to any argument save for faith. who hasn't been watching the past four years o' the trump Presidency?

HA! Good Fun!

 

[rjshae]

2 hours ago, ComradeMaster said:

Doubtful that the Republicans will ever "Reboot" to some abstract notion of how the Dems formerly perceived them.

The party is ****, always has been ****, and always will be ****.

Mmm, so what? A two-party system is still preferable to a one-party system. The Republicans will need to flush the taint of this jerk from their system in order to move forward.

[Raithe]

Okay, this one made me lightly chuckle and sigh..

 

[ComradeYellow]

Just now, rjshae said:

Mmm, so what? A two-party system is still preferable to a one-party system. The Republicans will need to flush the taint of this jerk from their system in order to move forward.

Well when both parties agree on the same things that I despise (protect Israel, imperialism, foreign intervention, ect.) yet Republicans are extremely ass backwards on social and economic issues, I'd prefer Dems as a 1 party state over a worse 2 party state IF a 3rd party is impossible.

[rjshae]

20 minutes ago, ComradeMaster said:

Well when both parties agree on the same things that I despise (protect Israel, imperialism, foreign intervention, ect.) yet Republicans are extremely ass backwards on social and economic issues, I'd prefer Dems as a 1 party state over a worse 2 party state IF a 3rd party is impossible.

With a two-party state the two parties can police each other, which lowers net corruption. A one-party state will stop listening to the voters.

[BruceVC]

53 minutes ago, ComradeMaster said:

Well when both parties agree on the same things that I despise (protect Israel, imperialism, foreign intervention, ect.) yet Republicans are extremely ass backwards on social and economic issues, I'd prefer Dems as a 1 party state over a worse 2 party state IF a 3rd party is impossible.

You actually think you can have such a thing as  a " 1 party state " in a Democracy, you make me laugh with your strange definitions of what Democracy is and how to make our institutions stronger  

I have a good idea, its unusual but you may agree. Why dont we all become like China....they are a " 1 party state " , that will definitely solve all the issues you are raising that exist in our various Democratic systems ?

 

Edited January 14, 2021 by BruceVC

[Gromnir]

y'know, if trump were a habitual drunk driver, with a long record o' alcohol related moving violations, and he went ahead contributed to an accident in which a police officer died, how long do you think it would take to suspend his driver's license?

perhaps drunk driving trump's supporters point out that donald's family is watching him closely and a week from now he is going to have a limo service and wouldn't be driving anymore. would anybody argue it were a good idea to let hypothetical drunk trump behind the wheel during the intervening week... or ever?

it's only one week remaining?

is so weird the support for trump and the excuses for allowing him to continue being President particular after january 6.

HA! Good Fun!

[Raithe]

For the snarky comment of the day:   "Trump sure brought the troops home. On inauguration day there will be more American troops in Washington DC than in Afghanistan and Iraq combined!"