Options

The [Impeachment] of the 45th President of the United States

1727375777898

Posts

  • Options
    Descendant XDescendant X Skyrim is my god now. Outpost 31Registered User regular
    Just so I’m all caught up with the lingo, Deep State basically equals Illuminati in its vagueness and complete lack of actual, real-world meaning, correct?

    Garry: I know you gentlemen have been through a lot, but when you find the time I'd rather not spend the rest of the winter TIED TO THIS FUCKING COUCH!
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Apparently the deep state were the people working at the state department. I hope something comes from this stuff, but I'm Eomer on so many things with this admin.

    Do you mean Eeyore, or the Captain of the Rohirrim?

  • Options
    SiliconStewSiliconStew Registered User regular
    jmcdonald wrote: »
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    However, most of those in Trump's administration seem willing to go as far along the way down the path of "make me" as they can until real consequences actually happen. That's not a scenario the law and justice encounter very often, and things happen slowly when you have to do it that way.

    Things happening slowly would be like, court challenges and lawsuits. Nothings fucking happening AT ALL because the dems have been too chicken shit to start literally anything.

    Sure start with fines but we can't even get that going apparently.

    It’s been five days

    Slow your chicken little roll

    Due process is a real thing, even for this

    I agree with your point, but this admin has been refusing to comply with a multitude of evidentiary requests from congress for a lot longer than 5 days.

    Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
  • Options
    AbsalonAbsalon Lands of Always WinterRegistered User regular
    The State Dept IG's emergency meeting is likely about Pompeo threatening people.

  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Atomika wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Apparently the deep state were the people working at the state department. I hope something comes from this stuff, but I'm Eomer on so many things with this admin.

    Do you mean Eeyore, or the Captain of the Rohirrim?

    Captain of the Rohirrim, for the line "Do not give yourself to hope it has forsaken these lands." Ever since 2016 it feels like hope is a fools errand.

    Not to be overly cynical obviously, but I always temper my hope with that.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Here is how any attempt to force this administration to comply with subpoenas is going to go:

    We tell them to comply. They refuse. We implement punishment X. They challenge that in court. It spends the next year winding through appeals. Eventually a decision comes down. By now it is probably after the election.

    So the question is what kind of action do we want them to ignore? If it's a financial action, like fines, we have our battle and whatever happens happens and if the fines don't get collected for two years, okay, it still ends up being a consequence.

    If the action is throwing them in jail, we need to figure what to do when they refuse, because it's now a matter of trying to physically drag someone to a jail cell, and while I think we would all enjoy that in the event that it actually works that way, we need to prepare for the idea that a policeman is ordering Barr to get in the car and Barr is telling him to fuck off and that's fucking scary.

    I would rather have the option that doesn't involve firearms. Because multiple Trump administration officials refusing to comply at all costs is a thing that's absolutely going to happen.

    I'm not hoping to see any shooting, but "they will fight back hard" is no reason not to enforce the law. If they can be made to comply through any other means besides arrest, let's do that. If not, then we have to do things the hard way.

  • Options
    WACriminalWACriminal Dying Is Easy, Young Man Living Is HarderRegistered User regular
    edited October 2019
    Nobeard wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Here is how any attempt to force this administration to comply with subpoenas is going to go:

    We tell them to comply. They refuse. We implement punishment X. They challenge that in court. It spends the next year winding through appeals. Eventually a decision comes down. By now it is probably after the election.

    So the question is what kind of action do we want them to ignore? If it's a financial action, like fines, we have our battle and whatever happens happens and if the fines don't get collected for two years, okay, it still ends up being a consequence.

    If the action is throwing them in jail, we need to figure what to do when they refuse, because it's now a matter of trying to physically drag someone to a jail cell, and while I think we would all enjoy that in the event that it actually works that way, we need to prepare for the idea that a policeman is ordering Barr to get in the car and Barr is telling him to fuck off and that's fucking scary.

    I would rather have the option that doesn't involve firearms. Because multiple Trump administration officials refusing to comply at all costs is a thing that's absolutely going to happen.

    I'm not hoping to see any shooting, but "they will fight back hard" is no reason not to enforce the law. If they can be made to comply through any other means besides arrest, let's do that. If not, then we have to do things the hard way.

    Ultimately, the only thing that can stop fascists is force. We're still at the stage where "force" could potentially mean "a duly appointed officer of the law bearing proper authorization and a willingness to act upon it". We should take that opportunity while it lasts.

    WACriminal on
  • Options
    NeveronNeveron HellValleySkyTree SwedenRegistered User regular
    edited October 2019
    Preacher wrote: »
    Apparently the deep state were the people working at the state department. I hope something comes from this stuff, but I'm Eomer on so many things with this admin.

    The "deep state" was always just a scary term for "long-term government worker", the part of the state that stays the same between elections. The scare-mongering is just about how these unelected and unaligned-to-the-ruling-party bits of the state might maybe sabotage governments that they disagree with.

    It's been broadened a bit since to basically just mean any scary G-Boogeyman that Republicans dislike, but that's at least what it used to mean. As a term it's been thoroughly poisoned and has lost any use it may once have had.

    EDIT: And yes, it's definitely taken on some Illuminati "this is the secret government" elements amongst some of the right.

    Neveron on
  • Options
    Twenty SidedTwenty Sided Registered User regular
    Neveron wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Apparently the deep state were the people working at the state department. I hope something comes from this stuff, but I'm Eomer on so many things with this admin.

    The "deep state" was always just a scary term for "long-term government worker", the part of the state that stays the same between elections. The scare-mongering is just about how these unelected and unaligned-to-the-ruling-party bits of the state might maybe sabotage governments that they disagree with.

    It's been broadened a bit since to basically just mean any scary G-Boogeyman that Republicans dislike, but that's at least what it used to mean. As a term it's been thoroughly poisoned and has lost any use it may once have had.

    EDIT: And yes, it's definitely taken on some Illuminati "this is the secret government" elements amongst some of the right.

    The sad thing is that I would rather much of the government be run by individuals who are not loyal to either party. People who are there because they take pride in their work and believe in due process.

  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    Any news on when we're actually going to get some kind of floor vote to formalize this impeachment inquiry? Without that I suspect the courts are going to continue to take it slow

  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Neveron wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Apparently the deep state were the people working at the state department. I hope something comes from this stuff, but I'm Eomer on so many things with this admin.

    The "deep state" was always just a scary term for "long-term government worker", the part of the state that stays the same between elections. The scare-mongering is just about how these unelected and unaligned-to-the-ruling-party bits of the state might maybe sabotage governments that they disagree with.

    It's been broadened a bit since to basically just mean any scary G-Boogeyman that Republicans dislike, but that's at least what it used to mean. As a term it's been thoroughly poisoned and has lost any use it may once have had.

    EDIT: And yes, it's definitely taken on some Illuminati "this is the secret government" elements amongst some of the right.

    Yeah, there are legitimate concerns about the Civil Service being non-reponsive to policy shifts that result from duly elected officials pursuing a different agenda from predecessors. Which is literally what we have elections for. Basically if Yes, Minister wasn't a comedy.

    People talking about the Deep State are not actually concerned about any of that.

  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Pompeo: “We are not going to comply with the impeachment hearings.”
    State Department Staff: “Get fucked, boss.”


    Rachel is the Washington Post’s Congressional Reporter

    I am enjoying a deep, deep vicarious satisfaction from this.

    I will defer enjoyment until they actually speak up. Still half expecting them to refer everything to State because it wouldn't be appropriate to comment on ongoing matters.

  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    Any news on when we're actually going to get some kind of floor vote to formalize this impeachment inquiry? Without that I suspect the courts are going to continue to take it slow

    I thought it already was

  • Options
    MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    Xaquin wrote: »
    Any news on when we're actually going to get some kind of floor vote to formalize this impeachment inquiry? Without that I suspect the courts are going to continue to take it slow

    I thought it already was

    I don’t think they have formally started, as far as I know they’ve begun an officially unofficial inquiry.

  • Options
    Twenty SidedTwenty Sided Registered User regular
    There's just a baffling amount of shit leaking out the rectum of this administration.

    I'll laugh if the user logs on the codeword server is there because somebody in the White House got disgruntled and installed it to sabotage the administration.

  • Options
    GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    There is no such thing as an “official impeachment inqury” as the result of a vote. The vote is to send articles to the Senate and before that its comittee work.

    wbBv3fj.png
  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    edited October 2019
    nt

    Xaquin on
  • Options
    Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    Neveron wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Apparently the deep state were the people working at the state department. I hope something comes from this stuff, but I'm Eomer on so many things with this admin.

    The "deep state" was always just a scary term for "long-term government worker", the part of the state that stays the same between elections. The scare-mongering is just about how these unelected and unaligned-to-the-ruling-party bits of the state might maybe sabotage governments that they disagree with.

    It's been broadened a bit since to basically just mean any scary G-Boogeyman that Republicans dislike, but that's at least what it used to mean. As a term it's been thoroughly poisoned and has lost any use it may once have had.

    EDIT: And yes, it's definitely taken on some Illuminati "this is the secret government" elements amongst some of the right.

    The sad thing is that I would rather much of the government be run by individuals who are not loyal to either party. People who are there because they take pride in their work and believe in due process.

    That's not sad. That's the goal of the Pendleton Act, and the ideal of the civil service. (The act classified jobs as political and career [since obviously the president's top advisors are going to be tied to the administration], and allowed presidents to convert jobs from the former to the latter only; amusingly, while plenty of lame-duck presidents used this to install a bunch of toadies and then protect them from removal, the posts remained merit-based after the retirements of said toadies, which resulted in a widespread system of government employees relatively focused on the task at hand rather than allegiance to a party or politician.)

  • Options
    TNTrooperTNTrooper Registered User regular
    There's just a baffling amount of shit leaking out the rectum of this administration.

    I'll laugh if the user logs on the codeword server is there because somebody in the White House got disgruntled and installed it to sabotage the administration.

    It's there cause someone leaked transcripts of Trump's calls with foreign head of states and they wanted to scare off or catch whoever did that in the future. Pretty fucking ironic.

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    TNTrooper wrote: »
    There's just a baffling amount of shit leaking out the rectum of this administration.

    I'll laugh if the user logs on the codeword server is there because somebody in the White House got disgruntled and installed it to sabotage the administration.

    It's there cause someone leaked transcripts of Trump's calls with foreign head of states and they wanted to scare off or catch whoever did that in the future. Pretty fucking ironic.

    The best part was it was Trump who was leaking because he would call friendscompletely bewildered people to brag about all his presidenting, and they would immediately call their press contacts going “you’re not going to believe this crazy shit”

  • Options
    HeirHeir Ausitn, TXRegistered User regular
    Pretty sure, in theory at least, now that there is a formal impeachment inquiry anything that has to go to the courts for enforcement (like subpoenaing the AG) should be processed much faster than a year.

    I sincerely doubt courts are going to go against a formal impeachment inquiry's legal actions. And if it does get to the Supreme Court, while we know how some folks might vote, Roberts is all about showing the respectability of the Judicial.

    camo_sig2.png
  • Options
    BlankZoeBlankZoe Registered User regular


    Adam Serwer is a staff writer for The Atlantic.

    Trump is now openly calling the impeachment proceedings a coup and an attempt to take "power" away from American citizens.

    Cool

    Cool cool cool cool cool

    CYpGAPn.png
  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    Yeah. A coup that places (checks notes) Pence in the Oval Office.

    Huzzah.

  • Options
    EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    Rumor is circulating that ukraine is offering donbass for peace, at the urging of the us, which is part if this

  • Options
    FoefallerFoefaller Registered User regular
    edited October 2019
    Foefaller wrote: »
    Dac wrote: »
    Brody wrote: »
    Dac wrote: »
    The idea that the answer to non-compliance with a subpoena should be to fine them instead of arresting them is bemusing. Because I imagine that it would go like this:

    "Pay the fine."

    "No."

    If they've successfully defied a legal subpoena that had the possible consequence of jail time and the system was too gutless to act on that, I fail to see how this would work. Because the obvious thing that would happen is that anyone that is at risk of getting subpoena'd would have their money quietly moved to off-shore accounts, and what then? The system has already proved that it's incapable of arresting them!

    No, you slap the bastard in irons. If they won't comply, they will be made to comply. If we're so fucked as a country that we won't hold someone accountable for clear and obvious crimes because we're scared of how it would 'look,' we don't deserve the democracy our forebears bled and sacrificed for.

    Congress: "Pay the fine."

    Subpoena recipient: "No."

    Congress (to recipient's bank): "Take the money out of their account."

    Bank: *Checks the law* "Here."

    Except that they've already moved their money off shore.

    Which I stated would be the obvious move in the post.

    Congress (to offshore bank): Do you still want to use the US Dollar, interact with US banks, and still be in the global market of which participation hinges almost entirely on access to both?

    Offshore bank: Yes we do *hands over check*.

    Does the House have the authority to mess with that without also having the Senate and President sign off on it?

    I assume any bank that wants to do business in the US has to comply with at least some US banking laws, and because of the Dollar's status as *the* global reserve currency and de facto tender of international trade, any bank which wants to do business internationally will eventually have to do business within the legal sphere of the United States.

    If I remember my factoids correctly, the United States is the only country that even bothers to try to collect taxes from foriegn bank accounts and tax their expats (IIRC modern offshore tax havens aren't tax havens just because they are in a country with no taxes, it's because said account is also technically for a company incorporated in that country that exists only on paper) and they can do this because the US can essentially cut a bank out of the global market if they don't play ball.

    Foefaller on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    Heir wrote: »
    Pretty sure, in theory at least, now that there is a formal impeachment inquiry anything that has to go to the courts for enforcement (like subpoenaing the AG) should be processed much faster than a year.

    I sincerely doubt courts are going to go against a formal impeachment inquiry's legal actions. And if it does get to the Supreme Court, while we know how some folks might vote, Roberts is all about showing the respectability of the Judicial.

    And if he doesn't, then at least then people will know.

    This "Schrodinger's Constitutional Crisis" is the reason why Republicans get away with this shit, and Democrats don't even try. And why there's a general apathy by the electorate. If the Democrats aren't challenging Republican fuckmuppetry beyond words and stern letters, then why should anyone not paying close attention think it's not politics as usual.

    It's why talk about impeachment was met with "Ehhhh." with support being on the negative index, but actually doing impeachment has seen support increase sharply.

    If Democrats jails those failing to respond to a subpoena, and take it up to the Supreme Court, then it shows the electorate that they're serious about this shit. And I expect the electorate to respond positively, if they can show sufficient reasoning.

    And if the Supreme Court rule in a certain way (and like you said, I think Roberts cares about legacy), then at least people will know that the Democrats did everything they could, and the country is broken, and they have to face that, one way or the other.

    But as some of us were saying at most steps through this clusterfuck, when Democrats don't fight, why should the public?

    I mean, look at the shutdown. Public got onside, because Democrats went to the mat on something important.

  • Options
    davidsdurionsdavidsdurions Your Trusty Meatshield Panhandle NebraskaRegistered User regular
    MorganV wrote: »
    Heir wrote: »
    Pretty sure, in theory at least, now that there is a formal impeachment inquiry anything that has to go to the courts for enforcement (like subpoenaing the AG) should be processed much faster than a year.

    I sincerely doubt courts are going to go against a formal impeachment inquiry's legal actions. And if it does get to the Supreme Court, while we know how some folks might vote, Roberts is all about showing the respectability of the Judicial.

    And if he doesn't, then at least then people will know.

    This "Schrodinger's Constitutional Crisis" is the reason why Republicans get away with this shit, and Democrats don't even try. And why there's a general apathy by the electorate. If the Democrats aren't challenging Republican fuckmuppetry beyond words and stern letters, then why should anyone not paying close attention think it's not politics as usual.

    It's why talk about impeachment was met with "Ehhhh." with support being on the negative index, but actually doing impeachment has seen support increase sharply.

    If Democrats jails those failing to respond to a subpoena, and take it up to the Supreme Court, then it shows the electorate that they're serious about this shit. And I expect the electorate to respond positively, if they can show sufficient reasoning.

    And if the Supreme Court rule in a certain way (and like you said, I think Roberts cares about legacy), then at least people will know that the Democrats did everything they could, and the country is broken, and they have to face that, one way or the other.

    But as some of us were saying at most steps through this clusterfuck, when Democrats don't fight, why should the public?

    I mean, look at the shutdown. Public got onside, because Democrats went to the mat on something important.

    I’ll be sending this post to all the Democratic Party federal delegation, thank you.

  • Options
    OneAngryPossumOneAngryPossum Registered User regular
    Blankzilla wrote: »


    Adam Serwer is a staff writer for The Atlantic.

    Trump is now openly calling the impeachment proceedings a coup and an attempt to take "power" away from American citizens.

    Cool

    Cool cool cool cool cool

    The next tweet tries to walk it back for plausible deniability, but this is almost certainly a trial balloon for whether he’s going to be outright calling it a coup from here out.

    Next part of that tweet chain:
    ....People, their VOTE, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of The United States of America!

  • Options
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Yes, impeaching Trump takes away people's religion...

  • Options
    JuggernutJuggernut Registered User regular
    Blankzilla wrote: »


    Adam Serwer is a staff writer for The Atlantic.

    Trump is now openly calling the impeachment proceedings a coup and an attempt to take "power" away from American citizens.

    Cool

    Cool cool cool cool cool

    We were gonna cross this bridge eventually. Best get it out of the way I guess.

  • Options
    Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    Trump is now openly calling the impeachment proceedings a coup and an attempt to take "power" away from American citizens.

    Cool

    Cool cool cool cool cool

    This, this right here, is what scares me.

  • Options
    BlankZoeBlankZoe Registered User regular
    Blankzilla wrote: »


    Adam Serwer is a staff writer for The Atlantic.

    Trump is now openly calling the impeachment proceedings a coup and an attempt to take "power" away from American citizens.

    Cool

    Cool cool cool cool cool

    The next tweet tries to walk it back for plausible deniability, but this is almost certainly a trial balloon for whether he’s going to be outright calling it a coup from here out.

    Next part of that tweet chain:
    ....People, their VOTE, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of The United States of America!
    I don't see how it walks it back at all?

    He is still calling it a coup, all the second tweet does is go "and also this coup is against YOU too!"

    CYpGAPn.png
  • Options
    joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    It’s literally the mechanism we have to avoid the necessity for coups.

    If impeaching wasn’t legally available to us, a coup would be the only remedy for a lawless executive.

  • Options
    FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    On the other hand, the President confirming what his election strategy is exactly is useful. Even if it is obvious

  • Options
    DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    edited October 2019
    Blankzilla wrote: »
    I don't see how it walks it back at all?

    He is still calling it a coup, all the second tweet does is go "and also this coup is against YOU too!"

    Very specifically and intentionally calling out all of the buzzword pain points of the fanatical Republican base that genuinely believed and still believes that the terrifying entity of Obamaclinton the Corrupt was and is trying to take away all of those things.

    Dhalphir on
  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular

    Next part of that tweet chain:
    ....People, their VOTE, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of The United States of America!

    GOP Pollster: Sir, it looks like you'll lose worse than Mondale.

    Trump: These elections are rigged!

  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Yes, impeaching Trump takes away people's religion...

    I mean, my belief in God hasn't survived this Presidency...

    Though that does predates the inquiry

  • Options
    Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Yes, impeaching Trump takes away people's religion...

    He did proclaim himself to be the chosen one, did he not.


    Like, seriously, did he or didn't he? I can't tell if I just imagined him doing something that stupid or if he actually did it.

  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Yes, impeaching Trump takes away people's religion...

    He did proclaim himself to be the chosen one, did he not.


    Like, seriously, did he or didn't he? I can't tell if I just imagined him doing something that stupid or if he actually did it.

    It feels like years ago, but it was less than three months ago.

  • Options
    XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    Couscous wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Yes, impeaching Trump takes away people's religion...

    He did proclaim himself to be the chosen one, did he not.


    Like, seriously, did he or didn't he? I can't tell if I just imagined him doing something that stupid or if he actually did it.

    It feels like years ago, but it was less than three months ago.

    He didn't proclaim himself the chosen one .... he just approved when some crazy bastard submitted that he was

This discussion has been closed.