Manafort, Cohen both guilty.

[Eleven]

Manafort was found guilty today.

Cohen pleaded guilty today.

I have read some commentary that a 2019 "blue wave" Congress trying to use this and other material to impeach Pres. Trump will simply create an easier path for reelection in 2020 (since there is no chance of conviction). I don't think that's too far off base.  Thoughts?

Edited August 22, 2018 by Eleven

[Sabel79]

I'm of two minds.  Were we not living in the worst of all possible universes right now, Trump would, even if you allow for the astoundingly suspect means by which he gained office, be gone already.  Or impeached five minutes ago.  Or left to dangle by the GOP in a self-preservation exercise and not nominated for 2020. 

The one thing that gives me a slight amount of hope is that we are still at the tip of the iceberg.  When a wholly corrupt group who have never beforehand known accountability inexplicably place themselves under a large microscope, things get seen.  There s so much more yet to drop.  Receipts all over the place.  It'll be interesting to see where things go.  And terrifying.  People will probably die.  I'm not kidding.  

[Sabel79]

Ha in general had a few hours to reflect upon it.... We're doomed. The GOP is so heavily compromised that they can't boot Trump.  Trump was only ever a cover.  The indictments of, at the time of this writing, two GOP congressman confirms this.  The Republican Party is an anti American lobbying group for Russia.  Russia is, demographically speaking, dying.  Economically, they rely on cheap oil and gas. 

What better way to promote the Russian agenda than to fully compromise the PUSA, to the extent that he has, in violation of the constitution, refused to implement Congressionally passed sanctions upon them.  That 's phase one. 

Phase two: destroy NATO.  Putin really wants to roll over former Soviet Eastren Europe.  Trump throwing toys out of strollers about NATO is not random  nor harmless.  He'll do what Vladimir tells him and allow Russia to roll over Ukraine, Georgia, and the Baltics without reply.  Thus strengthening Russia at our expense.  Of course, Trump pockets millions in the process, which is all this was ever about.  

I weep fthe r my country.  I have no confidence it will ever improve... We are all doomed. 

[Eleven]

On 8/21/2018 at 11:04 PM, Sabel79 said:

Ha in general had a few hours to reflect upon it.... We're doomed. The GOP is so heavily compromised that they can't boot Trump.  Trump was only ever a cover.  The indictments of, at the time of this writing, two GOP congressman confirms this.  The Republican Party is an anti American lobbying group for Russia.  Russia is, demographically speaking, dying.  Economically, they rely on cheap oil and gas. 

What better way to promote the Russian agenda than to fully compromise the PUSA, to the extent that he has, in violation of the constitution, refused to implement Congressionally passed sanctions upon them.  That 's phase one. 

Phase two: destroy NATO.  Putin really wants to roll over former Soviet Eastren Europe.  Trump throwing toys out of strollers about NATO is not random  nor harmless.  He'll do what Vladimir tells him and allow Russia to roll over Ukraine, Georgia, and the Baltics without reply.  Thus strengthening Russia at our expense.  Of course, Trump pockets millions in the process, which is all this was ever about.  

I weep fthe r my country.  I have no confidence it will ever improve... We are all doomed. 

Why the hell the GOP isn't tearing its party right back out of Trump's hands right now, I have no idea.  If ever there were a perfect time for GOP traditionalists to strike, this would be it.  Ryan and McConnell could fix this in an instant and have their party back.

[Frieda]

They have no spine that's why. McConnell is a crooked as they come and Ryan who's retiring and could really speak out with no repercussions is a wimp.

[TrueBlueGED]

On 8/23/2018 at 11:08 AM, Eleven said:

Why the hell the GOP isn't tearing its party right back out of Trump's hands right now, I have no idea.  If ever there were a perfect time for GOP traditionalists to strike, this would be it.  Ryan and McConnell could fix this in an instant and have their party back.

The short answer is because on their top policy priorities, they're in lock-step: taxes and the judiciary. On both fronts, Trump has done things any other Republican president would do. Now, one could argue they'd get those things from...ya know...any other Republican without also carrying the excess baggage. But that's where the longer answer comes in: it's still electoral poison for Republicans to meaningfully confront Trump. Whether it's opening the possibility of a primary challenge or suppressing general election turnout, there simply isn't a political gain to be had in opposing him. Trump's support among Republican voters is still strong; absent that changing, the behavior of elected Republicans is incredibly unlikely to change.

[WildCard]

I still don't understand why impeachment is so unlikely

[Eleven]

20 minutes ago, WildCard said:

I still don't understand why impeachment is so unlikely

Because it would be pointless unless the Republicans in the Senate realize that they can take their party back.

35 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

The short answer is because on their top policy priorities, they're in lock-step: taxes and the judiciary. On both fronts, Trump has done things any other Republican president would do. Now, one could argue they'd get those things from...ya know...any other Republican without also carrying the excess baggage. But that's where the longer answer comes in: it's still electoral poison for Republicans to meaningfully confront Trump. Whether it's opening the possibility of a primary challenge or suppressing general election turnout, there simply isn't a political gain to be had in opposing him. Trump's support among Republican voters is still strong; absent that changing, the behavior of elected Republicans is incredibly unlikely to change.

1.  Not as a group, it's not.

2.  Sure there is.  They can get their party back.

[WildCard]

18 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Because it would be pointless unless the Republicans in the Senate realize that they can take their party back.

Explain it to me like I'm 5. I'm not well versed in politics

[Eleven]

18 hours ago, WildCard said:

Explain it to me like I'm 5. I'm not well versed in politics

The House votes to impeach--they can do this with a simple majority.  Impeachment is similar to indicting someone before a grand jury.  It means that they're charged, but a trial is yet to come.

That trial is held before the Senate.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides, and the Senate needs a 2/3 vote to convict on the articles of impeachment, thereby actually removing the person from office.  The Republicans already hold a majority of the Senate, and will likely do so after the election, so a 2/3 vote to convict is impossible unless they grow a set and realize they can use this opportunity to take their party back.

In both cases in which a president has been impeached (A. Johnson and Clinton), the Senate did not convict or even come close to it.

EDIT:  As TrueBlue has rightly pointed out, the Senate was one vote short of convicting Johnson.  It didn't come close with Clinton.

Edited August 25, 2018 by Eleven

[WildCard]

4 minutes ago, Eleven said:

The House votes to impeach--they can do this with a simple majority.  Impeachment is similar to indicting someone before a grand jury.  It means that they're charged, but a trial is yet to come.

That trial is held before the Senate.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides, and the Senate needs a 2/3 vote to convict on the articles of impeachment, thereby actually removing the person from office.  The Republicans already hold a majority of the Senate, and will likely do so after the election, so a 2/3 vote to convict is impossible unless they grow a set and realize they can use this opportunity to take their party back.

In both cases in which a president has been impeached (A. Johnson and Clinton), the Senate did not convict or even come close to it.

Thanks, much appreciated

Why didn't the Senate come close in those cases? How close were they? If Clinton wasn't impeached, how did his presidency end early? 

Why is it so unlikely the Dems take the Senate in these upcoming elections? I thought they were dominating them this time around

Edited August 24, 2018 by WildCard

[Sabel79]

50 minutes ago, WildCard said:

If Clinton wasn't impeached, how did his presidency end early? 

Erm... he was impeached by the house, but not convicted and removed from office.  His presidency very much did not end early.  

Clinton’s case was pure political shithousery. Say what you will about Slick Willie, that whole saga was a national embarrassment and should never have happened.  (And yes, Bill is included in the embarrassment).

Johnson absoloutely needed to be launched. Long story short he tried to railroad Lincoln’s staff out of Washington so he could install more South-friendly people of his choosing, ignoring legislation passed over his veto to protect a good many of them. (Johnson was a southern Democrat, things worked quite differently back then) The Senate fell one vote short of removing him.  

[WildCard]

2 minutes ago, Sabel79 said:

Erm... he was impeached by the house, but not convicted and removed from office.  His presidency very much did not end early.  

Clinton’s case was pure political shithousery. Say what you will about Slick Willie, that whole saga was a national embarrassment and should never have happened.  (And yes, Bill is included in the embarrassment).

Johnson absoloutely needed to be launched. Long story short he tried to railroad Lincoln’s staff out of Washington so he could install more South-friendly people of his choosing, ignoring legislation passed over his veto to protect a good many of them. (Johnson was a southern Democrat, things worked quite differently back then) The Senate fell one vote short of removing him.  

Huh, always thought Clinton was booted outta office early. Thanks for that

Yeah surprisingly I knew about the Johnson thing, as well as the whole 180 each political party has done since then

[Frieda]

[TrueBlueGED]

5 hours ago, Eleven said:

Because it would be pointless unless the Republicans in the Senate realize that they can take their party back.

1.  Not as a group, it's not.

2.  Sure there is.  They can get their party back.

1) Sure it is. Trump is more popular among Republican voters than most Republican members of Congress. There's a reason only members who are retiring are willing to speak out. And even they aren't willing to use their power to do anything. 

2) Get their party back from what? On the major policy points, Trump is a generic Republican. Taxes, judges, regulation, immigration, etc. So he's different on trade and Russia. Like it or not, those are (and have been) second or third tier issues for decades. All he's really done is take off the thin PR veil most politicians have. But the substance of the policy is not some radical departure. 

[TrueBlueGED]

3 hours ago, WildCard said:

Thanks, much appreciated

Why didn't the Senate come close in those cases? How close were they? If Clinton wasn't impeached, how did his presidency end early? 

Why is it so unlikely the Dems take the Senate in these upcoming elections? I thought they were dominating them this time around

On the Clinton thing...I hate you for not knowing this ?

The map is abominable for the Dems. They have to do things like defend seats in WV that Trump won by 40, and win places like Texas. It's not impossible, but it's not very likely. 

[Eleven]

14 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

1) Sure it is. Trump is more popular among Republican voters than most Republican members of Congress. There's a reason only members who are retiring are willing to speak out. And even they aren't willing to use their power to do anything. 

2) Get their party back from what? On the major policy points, Trump is a generic Republican. Taxes, judges, regulation, immigration, etc. So he's different on trade and Russia. Like it or not, those are (and have been) second or third tier issues for decades. All he's really done is take off the thin PR veil most politicians have. But the substance of the policy is not some radical departure. 

Let go of the policy thing* for a minute and look at the people running the show; look also at how the primary was won.  Traditional Republicans don't like him. Fascists like him; racists like him. The people who wanted to impeach Clinton for lying about a don't like the guy who is lying about affairs with porn stars.  I can't believe that a traditional Republican like nfreeman actually likes this guy.  They might see him as preferable to Hillary Clinton; that's fine.  That's not the same as liking him.

 

*I also don't think they're in favor of all of his policies.  The tariffs?  

14 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

On the Clinton thing...I hate you for not knowing this ?

The map is abominable for the Dems. They have to do things like defend seats in WV that Trump won by 40, and win places like Texas. It's not impossible, but it's not very likely. 

The Democrats might well lose seats in the Senate.

16 hours ago, WildCard said:

Huh, always thought Clinton was booted outta office early. Thanks for that

Yeah surprisingly I knew about the Johnson thing, as well as the whole 180 each political party has done since then

What school district do we need to go after?

Edited August 25, 2018 by Eleven

[TrueBlueGED]

14 hours ago, Eleven said:

Let go of the policy thing* for a minute and look at the people running the show; look also at how the primary was won.  Traditional Republicans don't like him. Fascists like him; racists like him. The people who wanted to impeach Clinton for lying about a don't like the guy who is lying about affairs with porn stars.  I can't believe that a traditional Republican like nfreeman actually likes this guy.  They might see him as preferable to Hillary Clinton; that's fine.  That's not the same as liking him.

 

*I also don't think they're in favor of all of his policies.  The tariffs?  

The Democrats might well lose seats in the Senate.

To your first paragraph, I will simply paraphrase political science: partisanship is a hell of a drug. They may not like the persona, but as long as he's doing things they like, the persona isn't enough to produce change. Just for an example, Trump's approval among Republicans in the most recent Gallup was 87%; Gallup has never had him below 81% approval among Republicans. A Quinnipiac poll in April had McConnell's approval among Republicans at 35%, with Paul Ryan sitting at 57%. The same poll had other elite GOP figures included, with Mattis being the most popular at 75%; Nikki Haley was at 66% and John Kelly at 64%. A recent Fox News poll (the Fox polling unit, unlike the Fox network, is actually reliable) had John McCain at 42% among Republicans. Republican voters like Trump more than any other major figure in the party, and trying to dump him would absolutely have political consequences. Presidents drive party politics. Such was the case before Trump, and such will be the case after he's gone.

On policy, I already noted the tariff thing--it's a secondary issue which is easily reasoned away with something like "well, I don't agree with everything he does, but that's okay." He's capably carrying the torch for the foundations of the Republican coalition with taxes, judges, regulations, guns, voting, immigration, etc. 

Edited August 26, 2018 by TrueBlueGED

[Drunkard]

On ‎8‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 10:48 PM, TrueBlueGED said:

To your first paragraph, I will simply paraphrase political science: partisanship is a hell of a drug. They may not like the persona, but as long as he's doing things they like, the persona isn't enough to produce change. Just for an example, Trump's approval among Republicans in the most recent Gallup was 87%; Gallup has never had him below 81% approval among Republicans. A Quinnipiac poll in April had McConnell's approval among Republicans at 35%, with Paul Ryan sitting at 57%. The same poll had other elite GOP figures included, with Mattis being the most popular at 75%; Nikki Haley was at 66% and John Kelly at 64%. A recent Fox News poll (the Fox polling unit, unlike the Fox network, is actually reliable) had John McCain at 42% among Republicans. Republican voters like Trump more than any other major figure in the party, and trying to dump him would absolutely have political consequences. Presidents drive party politics. Such was the case before Trump, and such will be the case after he's gone.

On policy, I already noted the tariff thing--it's a secondary issue which is easily reasoned away with something like "well, I don't agree with everything he does, but that's okay." He's capably carrying the torch for the foundations of the Republican coalition with taxes, judges, regulations, guns, voting, immigration, etc. 

This. Trump made the GOP his b*tch and they'll continue to accept it while he polls well within the party and he continues to push the bulk of their agenda. The Democrats would be wise to STFU about impeachment and get their @sses to the polls in November instead of wasting their time protesting and acting like the PC police on the internet. The Democrats have almost no chance to take control of the Senate given the seats that will be up for grabs, their best hope is to win control of the House in order to minimize any further damage the GOP can do.

I heard they've got another tax cut on the horizon coming to help the uber wealthy and provide some more red meat to the GOP donor base as well. Apparently paying the lower capital gains rate on profits isn't enough, they want to be able to write off the amount of inflation against their gains. A tax cut like that would allow 99% of the benefits to go to the wealthy. Something tells me I'll still have the claim the whopping $10 in interest I earn from my credit union though. That's the GOP for you. Unfortunately the Democrats suck at voting so I expect the GOP to remain in full power.

Edited August 28, 2018 by Alkoholist