Donald Trump 2019

[Lurch 5950]

[gyroprotagonist 2597]

6 minutes ago, Lurch said:

 

Business 101 - if you can't fix it; feature it.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11860]

Whoever Trump's opponent is in 2020 should have one prop, a wall built of bricks with Trump's lies on them.  First brick would be "Mexico will pay for it".  I think we're around 8000 bricks right now.  A giant wall of lies, that everyone can see, like the Vietnam memorial.

[Guest Lobo]

2 hours ago, Radical Larry said:

Oh shit. The caravan is back!

And just in time for Infrastructure Week!  

[DDD Dad 14661]

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm no attorney, and as far as the Constitution goes, my expertise is pretty much limited to my morning constitution, but isn't the Supreme Court an appeals court, Donald?

Primarily, but not exclusively.

Supreme Court Original Jurisdiction

Edited April 24, 2019 by DDD Dad

[4th&Five 42018]

Tax returns???

So...he called him?

[jimmyjazz 47259]

Right.  Trump didn't call Bob Costa.  He just hit Bob Costa's phone number and called Bob Costa.

[DDD Dad 14661]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Right.  Trump didn't call Bob Costa.  He just hit Bob Costa's phone number and called Bob Costa.

[Trump's secretary dials Bob Costa.  Bob Costa answers]: Please hold for the President--

[Trump's secretary dials Trump] Mr. President I have Bob Costa on the line.

[Jive Turkey 13016]

14 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

Tax returns???

 

Yep.  So transparent.  Numerous meetings with Putin with no U.S. officials present, confiscating notes from a translator, no official records of meetings.  Something is transparent. 

[Texas Jeff 1999]

A quick thought on impeachment .... the House gets to impeach it but nothing compels the Senate to try the case on any time schedule.  Impeachment generally needs both houses to be controlled by the party opposite the president, something we do not have today.

Only two presidents have ever been impeached.  Andrew Johnson in 1868, for firing Edwin Stanton as secretary of war, and Bill Clinton in 1998 for lying under oath.  Nixon came close in 1974.

In 1864, Johnson and Lincoln ran on a split party ticket (the National Union ticket).  Lincoln was a Republican and Johnson was a Democrat, but supported Lincoln.  Lincoln was elected but killed shortly after taking office, so Johnson became president.  In 1867, a Republican Congress passed a law requiring the Senate to give advice and consent before removing people from the cabinet, partially to protect Stanton.  Later in 1867, Johnson suspended Stanton, a Republican, during a congressional recess, which was allowed under the law.  Johnson was impeached and tried by the 40th US Congress, which had Republican majorities in the House (150-65) and Senate (57-9).  Johnson was found not guilty by one vote.

In 1974, during investigation of Nixon's involvement in the Watergate break-ins and cover up, the US House started to draft articles of impeachment.  Nixon was a Republican but the 93rd US Congress was controlled by Democrats, both in the House (291-144) and the Senate (around 57-40).    By the end of July, the House had three articles of impeachment passed out of committee.  No article of impeachment against Nixon had majority Republican support from the House Judiciary Committee.  Knowing that the House would probably impeach him and that the Senate might convict, Nixon resigned.

In 1998, I got to hear my grandmother argue that a president should not be removed from office because of a blowjob.  You can't un-hear that.  Over her objections, the 106th Congress gave it a shot.  Clinton was a Democrat but Congress was controlled by Republicans, both the House (223-211) and the Senate (55-45).  Clinton was not convicted on two charges, one for perjury and one for obstruction of justice.  The votes were mostly along party lines.

Today, we have a split Congress.  The House could impeach but the Senate could just say meh, we're busy, come back later.  No president has come close to an impeachment conviction in the Senate without both houses controlled by the opposing party.

Did Johnson or Clinton commit crimes meriting removal from office?  Maybe or maybe not, but they were both fighting an opposition Congress, something Trump does not have to face.

[David Dennison 19566]

Judging from Donald Trump's tweets since the Mueller report came out, it appears Democrats are handling this well and that Madam Speaker knows what she's doing.

[GSU&UT 1799]

Love our system of Checks & Balances that totally still exists and is working.

 

[retread 2951]

Time to get the House jail ready for occupants.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

25 minutes ago, Texas Jeff said:

A quick thought on impeachment .... the House gets to impeach it but nothing compels the Senate to try the case on any time schedule.  Impeachment generally needs both houses to be controlled by the party opposite the president, something we do not have today.

Only two presidents have ever been impeached.  Andrew Johnson in 1868, for firing Edwin Stanton as secretary of war, and Bill Clinton in 1998 for lying under oath.  Nixon came close in 1974.

In 1864, Johnson and Lincoln ran on a split party ticket (the National Union ticket).  Lincoln was a Republican and Johnson was a Democrat, but supported Lincoln.  Lincoln was elected but killed shortly after taking office, so Johnson became president.  In 1867, a Republican Congress passed a law requiring the Senate to give advice and consent before removing people from the cabinet, partially to protect Stanton.  Later in 1867, Johnson suspended Stanton, a Republican, during a congressional recess, which was allowed under the law.  Johnson was impeached and tried by the 40th US Congress, which had Republican majorities in the House (150-65) and Senate (57-9).  Johnson was found not guilty by one vote.

In 1974, during investigation of Nixon's involvement in the Watergate break-ins and cover up, the US House started to draft articles of impeachment.  Nixon was a Republican but the 93rd US Congress was controlled by Democrats, both in the House (291-144) and the Senate (around 57-40).    By the end of July, the House had three articles of impeachment passed out of committee.  No article of impeachment against Nixon had majority Republican support from the House Judiciary Committee.  Knowing that the House would probably impeach him and that the Senate might convict, Nixon resigned.

In 1998, I got to hear my grandmother argue that a president should not be removed from office because of a blowjob.  You can't un-hear that.  Over her objections, the 106th Congress gave it a shot.  Clinton was a Democrat but Congress was controlled by Republicans, both the House (223-211) and the Senate (55-45).  Clinton was not convicted on two charges, one for perjury and one for obstruction of justice.  The votes were mostly along party lines.

Today, we have a split Congress.  The House could impeach but the Senate could just say meh, we're busy, come back later.  No president has come close to an impeachment conviction in the Senate without both houses controlled by the opposing party.

Did Johnson or Clinton commit crimes meriting removal from office?  Maybe or maybe not, but they were both fighting an opposition Congress, something Trump does not have to face.

People seem to forget the Senate vote on Clinton’s removal from office was closer than most remember it.  50 Senators voted to convict and remove Bill Clinton from office in 1998 for lying about a BJ.  

50

In Andrew Johnson’s case, he was one vote away from being convicted and removed by the Senate. 

[retread 2951]

If they're going to fight every subpoena, may as well go ahead and impeach him.

[kevwun 16444]

We are headed for a constitutional crisis.

[High Plains Drifter 11192]

17 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

 

I would MUCH prefer to go out with a gal who is stacked than a gal who is packing.  Just sayin'....

True story:

About ten years ago a friend of mine got divorced, and re-entered the dating scene. He met a woman on some dating app, and went to dinner with her. At the restaurant, his psycho hose beast ex was there with her new boyfriend. Angry glances were exchanged, boyfriend of ex decides he needs to show off and walks to their table and says some shit. Voices were raised, the boyfriend and his ex were asked to leave the restaurant.

After dinner the boyfriend was waiting in the parking lot. Words were exchanged between my friend and his ex's boyfriend. Boyfriend pulls gun. Friend's date pulls her CC and puts two in the guy's chest.

Guy lived.  Charges were not filed. They did not go on another date.

She was packing. Not sure if she was stacked or not.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, kevwun said:

We are headed for a constitutional crisis.

We are in one. 

[Brisketexan 106980]

We are headed for a constitutional crisis.

We’ve been there for a while.

[yoladu 4191]

3 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

My God, he's a stupid man.  

he is America, man.

 

++ I say this with no irony and solemn acceptance

Edited April 24, 2019 by yoladu

[retread 2951]

thisisfine.gif

 

[GSU&UT 1799]

10 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

We’ve been there for a while.

Yep, I know many of the lawyers on here who aren't ardent liberals think (or maybe I'm mistaken and they don't give a shit) that our laws and institutions will keep us from devolving into chaos but that ship set a long time ago.

[yoladu 4191]

2 hours ago, retread said:

If he gets to replace RBG before the '20 election, things could get interesting, and not in a good way.

if that happens in the year 2020, i am sure Mitch will support "letting the people" decide via the Presidential Election. (wink, wink)

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

10 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

We’ve been there for a while.

While this is debatable I’d say we’ve been in the most serious constitutional crisis for about a week. 

The Mueller Report going public made it clear that under no circumstances is the DOJ going to charge this sitting President with a crime.  Then it went on to outline a mountain of evidence of multiple felonies and abuses of power committed by this president while in office, many of which pertain to national and election security. 

If that isn’t a constitutional crisis, I don’t know what is. 

[Lagunamadre 1975]

51 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Judging from Donald Trump's tweets since the Mueller report came out, it appears Democrats are handling this well and that Madam Speaker knows what she's doing.

No shit. Even my dumbest Trump supporting friends admit to me that they hate his incoherent tweeting. If every subpoena elicits one of these 50+ dementia tweet storms, keep them coming. 

[GSU&UT 1799]

Jesus christ

 

[4th&Five 42018]

35 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Judging from Donald Trump's tweets since the Mueller report came out, it appears Democrats are handling this well and that Madam Speaker knows what she's doing.

If he tweets during a stroke will we know the difference?

[retread 2951]

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1120731145245794310

Quote

Jake Tapper @jaketapper

Confirming much of what's in this @NYTimes scoop, a US Gov official tells me "it's like pulling teeth to get the White House to focus the attention needed on” Russian election interference 1/

In Push for 2020 Election Security, Top Official Was Warned: Don’t Tell Trump

As homeland security secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen became increasingly worried about Russian attempts to influence the 2020 election. But she couldn’t discuss it at high-level White House meetings.https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/24/us/politics/russia-2020-election-trump.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

2/ The official says attempted Russian interference in US public affairs has continued and DHS officials and sr leaders "spent months and months trying to sound the alarm at the White House about the need to take foreign interference more seriously and to elevate the issue."

3/ In addition, the official says the Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats shared those views and felt that the Administration “was not being forward-leaning enough in notifying Congress and the American people.”

4/ Other than 1 or 2 principals' meetings before the midterm elections, and one press conference where NSA Bolton, Nielsen, FBI director Wray, and NSA Dir Nakasone warned the public of election interference,...

5/... the USG official says "in general, senior White House staff felt it wasn't a good idea to bring up issues related to Russia in front of the president." ...

6/ The USG official said DHS and other agencies made repeated requests to set up more Cabinet-level meetings on the subject and Bolton’s National Security Council rebuffed the requests. "They [DHS] kept getting the Heisman from Bolton and company," the official says...

7/ The bigger concern, the official says, was post-midterms the need to sit down and figure out how to coordinate a better whole-of-govt response, "to get everyone out of their silos. But it was like pulling teeth to get the White House to focus the attention needed on this.”

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Judging from Donald Trump's tweets since the Mueller report came out, it appears Democrats are handling this well and that Madam Speaker knows what she's doing.

Who knew doing jack shit about important issues is a winning political strategy?

/every elected US official 

[David Dennison 19566]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Who knew doing jack shit about important issues is a winning political strategy?

/every elected US official 

It's not jack shit, it's just not what you want. She knows a little bit more about how to play this than a dude in Louisiana on the internet.

[Chad Fuck 18163]

39 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

True story:

About ten years ago a friend of mine got divorced, and re-entered the dating scene. He met a woman on some dating app, and went to dinner with her. At the restaurant, his psycho hose beast ex was there with her new boyfriend. Angry glances were exchanged, boyfriend of ex decides he needs to show off and walks to their table and says some shit. Voices were raised, the boyfriend and his ex were asked to leave the restaurant.

After dinner the boyfriend was waiting in the parking lot. Words were exchanged between my friend and his ex's boyfriend. Boyfriend pulls gun. Friend's date pulls her CC and puts two in the guy's chest.

Guy lived.  Charges were not filed. They did not go on another date.

She was packing. Not sure if she was stacked or not.

Now THAT is how you cool story bro.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

It's not jack shit, it's just not what you want. She knows a little bit more about how to play this than a dude in Louisiana on the internet.

By that rationale Donald Trump is the smartest politician alive. 

[David Dennison 19566]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

By that rationale Donald Trump is the smartest politician alive. 

That must be why Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House.

 

[Chuckie Finster 23094]

22 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Jesus christ

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, David Dennison said:

That must be why Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House.

Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the House because voters like me and you speak out when we see shit going wrong.  Don’t give me the “Nancy Pelosi is smarter than you” bullshit to discount my opinion.  She is smarter than me but that doesn’t mean she’s beyond reproach for enabling a lawless dictator by inaction.  

[David Dennison 19566]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the House because voters like me and you speak out when we see shit going wrong.  Don’t give me the “Nancy Pelosi is smarter than you” bullshit to discount my opinion.  She is smarter than me but that doesn’t mean she’s beyond reproach for enabling a lawless dictator by inaction.  

You keep using the word inaction. That is not accurate. At all.

[RomaVicta 30609]

Warren is right in her call to impeach to force everyone to declare where they stand on this abomination of a president. Gauging whether Trump will be ultimately convicted shouldn't factor in at all.

Censure would be a pathetic move and allow GOPs an easy out. I'll predict censure is actually a GOP fall back position.

For me, this is a chance for the Dems to show more spine than they did in the Iraq invasion vote. I  count on the women to lead the way.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You keep using the word inaction. That is not accurate. At all.

Prove it. 

[retread 2951]

With Congressional recesses and WH delay tactics, I guess hearings could drag into the first part of 2020. DOTUS could then claim that impeachment is just a partisan attack meant to sway the '20 election.

[David Dennison 19566]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Prove it. 

Hearings, subpoenas, lawsuits.

Those are actions. They might even become articles of impeachment. Or they might not.

It's pretty clear those articles would not make it out of the Judiciary Committee at the moment. Nancy Pelosi knows how to count votes. They don't have them.

[Nivek 17420]

Now THAT is how you cool story bro.

Those were the days of our lives

[Francisco 2.0 32607]

1 hour ago, yoladu said:

if that happens in the year 2020, i am sure Mitch will support "letting the people" decide via the Presidential Election. (wink, wink)

If she passes in 2020, the Senate will have confirmation hearings lined up while the body is still warm.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

39 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Warren is right in her call to impeach to force everyone to declare where they stand on this abomination of a president. Gauging whether Trump will be ultimately convicted shouldn't factor in at all.

Censure would be a pathetic move and allow GOPs an easy out. I'll predict censure is actually a GOP fall back position.

For me, this is a chance for the Dems to show more spine than they did in the Iraq invasion vote. I  count on the women to lead the way.

Yes.  Plus, impeachment is a permanent, historical stain on a president, even without removal.  That stain needs to be put on the Trump presidency. 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, retread said:

With Congressional recesses and WH delay tactics, I guess hearings could drag into the first part of 2020. DOTUS could then claim that impeachment is just a partisan attack meant to sway the '20 election.

Pelosi can sell impeachment to the American people and to her Party but she is CHOOSING not to.

Here’s how she could do this:

Pelosi comes out and says something like:

“Over the past three years the American people have watched their votes and democracy suppressed and manipulated by bad actors, foreign and domestic.  Like all Americans of good faith we watched and waited for President Trump to lead the way to better protect our democracy from the threats laid out repeatedly by our experts.  We all wanted our President to be successful as the leader of our great nation and we believe we have given him a fair chance to do that but the evidence brought before us in the Mueller report and other areas of concern tells the story of a president with little regard for the law, our elections, democracy, or the well being of his subordinates and citizens.  This president has repeatedly put his own personal interests above that of our democracy and more importantly you, the American people.  The credible evidence and analysis brought forth in the Mueller Report gives us little choice but to seek the removal of this man from office.

 I encourage every American to read the full Mueller report and decide for themselves if they want to live in a America where this President’s behavior should be tolerated.  We have read enough of the report and made the decision that our democracy, the rule of law, and the American people would be safer and better served without Donald Trump as President.  In our republic of checks and balances you the people made the decision in November to give us, the Congress, the power to remove this president if necessary. We believe it is necessary now.  In this moment in history we must act because if we do nothing the consequences will go well beyond the results of the next election.  

We will begin the impeachment process on Monday morning with the presentation of evidence and hearings to better inform the American people of their government.  This is a serious matter and I hope our Republican colleagues will treat it with the thoughtfulness and consideration it deserves.

In the meantime I encourage every American to educate themselves of the facts and analysis laid out in the Mueller Report and our subsequent hearings. Regardless of the facts we understand many Americans will object to this move to hold our president accountable.  Their voices are important to us, they are our fellow Americans too, and we know if the voters deem our actions improper, we will be held accountable by them as well.  

However, we believe our action in this direction is demanded by our constitution and our system of representative self government.  We know history and the world is watching and we are confident both will look favorably on the decision we made here today.

God bless you and may god forever bless the United States of America”

/impeachment speech 

[American Swindle 102]

non-sequitur meme alert:

 

No disrespect Trump voters, just thought it was funny. 

[lemonlime 5503]

2 hours ago, kevwun said:

We are headed for a constitutional crisis.

We've been there at least since McConnell refused to bring the Garland nomination to a vote.  But we're the frog in the boiling water as the crisis deepens.

[henrygandorf 29228]

deutsche is turning over some of his financials.

first hole in the dam?

[David Dennison 19566]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Pelosi can sell impeachment to the American people and to her Party but she is CHOOSING not to.

Here’s how she could do this:

Pelosi comes out and says something like:

“Over the past three years the American people have watched their votes and democracy suppressed and manipulated by bad actors, foreign and domestic.  Like all Americans of good faith we watched and waited for President Trump to lead the way to better protect our democracy from the threats laid out repeatedly by our experts.  We all wanted our President to be successful as the leader of our great nation and we believe we have given him a fair chance to do that but the evidence brought before us in the Mueller report and other areas of concern tells the story of a president with little regard for the law, our elections, democracy, or the well being of his subordinates and citizens.  This president has repeatedly put his own personal interests above that of our democracy and more importantly you, the American people.  The credible evidence and analysis brought forth in the Mueller Report gives us little choice but to seek the removal of this man from office.

 I encourage every American to read the full Mueller report and decide for themselves if they want to live in a America where this President’s behavior should be tolerated.  We have read enough of the report and made the decision that our democracy, the rule of law, and the American people would be safer and better served without Donald Trump as President.  In our republic of checks and balances you the people made the decision in November to give us, the Congress, the power to remove this president if necessary. We believe it is necessary now.  In this moment in history we must act because if we do nothing the consequences will go well beyond the results of the next election.  

We will begin the impeachment process on Monday morning with the presentation of evidence and hearings to better inform the American people of their government.  This is a serious matter and I hope our Republican colleagues will treat it with the thoughtfulness and consideration it deserves.

In the meantime I encourage every American to educate themselves of the facts and analysis laid out in the Mueller Report and our subsequent hearings. Regardless of the facts we understand many Americans will object to this move to hold our president accountable.  Their voices are important to us, they are our fellow Americans too, and we know if the voters deem our actions improper, we will be held accountable by them as well.  

However, we believe our action in this direction is demanded by our constitution and our system of representative self government.  We know history and the world is watching and we are confident both will look favorably on the decision we made here today.

God bless you and may god forever bless the United States of America”

/impeachment speech 

She's said all of that. Just not the removal part. Yet.

Edited April 24, 2019 by David Dennison

[High Plains Drifter 11192]

 

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Pelosi can sell impeachment to the American people and to her Party but she is CHOOSING not to.

Here’s how she could do this:

Pelosi comes out and says something like:

“Over the past three years the American people have watched their votes and democracy suppressed and manipulated by bad actors, foreign and domestic.  Like all Americans of good faith we watched and waited for President Trump to lead the way to better protect our democracy from the threats laid out repeatedly by our experts.  We all wanted our President to be successful as the leader of our great nation and we believe we have given him a fair chance to do that but the evidence brought before us in the Mueller report and other areas of concern tells the story of a president with little regard for the law, our elections, democracy, or the well being of his subordinates and citizens.  This president has repeatedly put his own personal interests above that of our democracy and more importantly you, the American people.  The credible evidence and analysis brought forth in the Mueller Report gives us little choice but to seek the removal of this man from office.

 I encourage every American to read the full Mueller report and decide for themselves if they want to live in a America where this President’s behavior should be tolerated.  We have read enough of the report and made the decision that our democracy, the rule of law, and the American people would be safer and better served without Donald Trump as President.  In our republic of checks and balances you the people made the decision in November to give us, the Congress, the power to remove this president if necessary. We believe it is necessary now.  In this moment in history we must act because if we do nothing the consequences will go well beyond the results of the next election.  

We will begin the impeachment process on Monday morning with the presentation of evidence and hearings to better inform the American people of their government.  This is a serious matter and I hope our Republican colleagues will treat it with the thoughtfulness and consideration it deserves.

In the meantime I encourage every American to educate themselves of the facts and analysis laid out in the Mueller Report and our subsequent hearings. Regardless of the facts we understand many Americans will object to this move to hold our president accountable.  Their voices are important to us, they are our fellow Americans too, and we know if the voters deem our actions improper, we will be held accountable by them as well.  

However, we believe our action in this direction is demanded by our constitution and our system of representative self government.  We know history and the world is watching and we are confident both will look favorably on the decision we made here today.

God bless you and may god forever bless the United States of America”

/impeachment speech 

tldr

Edited April 24, 2019 by High Plains Drifter

[High Plains Drifter 11192]

2 hours ago, retread said:

With Congressional recesses and WH delay tactics, I guess hearings could drag into the first part of 2020. DOTUS could then claim that impeachment is just a partisan attack meant to sway the '20 election.

Of course it is.

 

Everything is a partisan attack designed to sway elections. So what?