Moose & Squirrel v Boris & Natasha: what's the deal with the rooskies and trumpland?

[TradeTheBeal!]

10 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

Well, I'm lying. The last time i watched fox news they had two fat black chicks on talking about how Trump was the best president ever. 

 

 

Obama strikes again!

[DogofWar1]

Here's something else that's frustrating about Dems.  They are examining this politically in the paradigm of the Clinton impeachment.

 

That's stupid.

 

The Clinton impeachment was some dumbass bull**** that they tacked on at the end of the Ken Starr investigation after every other thread fell COMPLETELY flat.  There's 10x more collusion evidence than anything else they found on Clinton.

 

The Ken Starr investigations were, in a much more real sense than the present ones, a witch hunt.  And the witch they finally found was lying about a blowjob.

 

OH NO, LYING ABOUT A BLOWJOB!

 

LE
GASP!

 

Any political price the GOP paid was almost certainly not because impeachment failed, but rather, because impeachment for that was STUPID AF.

 

 

Compare that to Trump, where his obstruction is clear and he interfered with THE most important counterintelligence investigation in modern American history.  It's vastly worse than anything Clinton did.  It's jaywalking vs. murder, metaphorically speaking.

 

I think we are underestimating the ability of the American people to recognize that.

[PleaseBlitz]

2 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

@PleaseBlitz the Democrat leadership reaction is what you disagreed with regarding this dude. You called it a bad take by Matt Stoller. They are afraid to wield power:

 

They don’t want to govern. That’s why younger people are turning to Bernie while older Dems are favoring the familiarity of Buttigeg and Beto and Biden. (Why are they all Bs?)

 

You can’t do this ****footing thing. You have to exert power and Dems leadership don’t do that. It’s cowardice.

 

Definitely standing by my position that this guy just vomits terrible takes. 

[Springfield]

19 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

Here's something else that's frustrating about Dems.  They are examining this politically in the paradigm of the Clinton impeachment.

 

That's stupid.

 

The Clinton impeachment was some dumbass bull**** that they tacked on at the end of the Ken Starr investigation after every other thread fell COMPLETELY flat.  There's 10x more collusion evidence than anything else they found on Clinton.

 

The Ken Starr investigations were, in a much more real sense than the present ones, a witch hunt.  And the witch they finally found was lying about a blowjob.

 

OH NO, LYING ABOUT A BLOWJOB!

 

LE
GASP!

 

Any political price the GOP paid was almost certainly not because impeachment failed, but rather, because impeachment for that was STUPID AF.

 

 

Compare that to Trump, where his obstruction is clear and he interfered with THE most important counterintelligence investigation in modern American history.  It's vastly worse than anything Clinton did.  It's jaywalking vs. murder, metaphorically speaking.

 

I think we are underestimating the ability of the American people to recognize that.

 

Also, the republicans impeached Clinton, failed to ratify in the senate, AND STILL WON THE WHITE HOUSE IN THE NEXT ELECTION!

 

Hello!  Democrats!  Are you listening???

 

You can impeach the president and still win the next election.  Stop being the libtard cuckolds that the republicans accuse you of being.

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LadySkinsFan]

Layers upon layers of coverups and obstruction of justice.

[visionary]

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

Have any Dem candidates come out with a position regarding impeachment besides EW?  I've updated my grading criteria to heavily weigh their position in my decision. 

 

15 hours ago, gbear said:

Well, I called my congressman to weigh in on the need to impeach even if not convicted in the Senate. I always say, take care of what you can control. Don't leave some good undone because your actions or lack of action made it undoable. Put pressure on the Senate to say what he did was good or even not that bad. Give them the chance to do right even if they are saying now they won't. If Congress can not even DO that, they are as bad as the senate SAYS they will be. 

 

I was going to call my reps but I'm not sure it is worth the breath.

 

[Springfield]

Mayor Pete came out in favor of impeachment @TheGreatBuzz

[gbear]

Always worth the call. For what it is worth, I have been told by a few activists that a call is worth more than 3 times an email because it shows personal commitment. Even if they are unlikely to change, showing voters care can still influence if enough feel that way.

Picture this, you are running in a district where 30% are strongly for an action and 50% are indifferent. Do you want to give up 30% of a likely vote for the moderate approval of 50% who will likely base their support on another issue? 

Edited April 20, 2019 by gbear

[twa]

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Have any Dem candidates come out with a position regarding impeachment besides EW?  I've updated my grading criteria to heavily weigh their position in my decision. 

 

I was going to call my reps but I'm not sure it is worth the breath.

 

 

my rep (a Dem) is on the judiciary committee, she thinks more investigation is in order.

Quote

Garcia looked to the future.

“It also seems clear from the report that the Special Counsel has concluded that Congress is now the proper authority to follow and make determinations on these claims,” Garcia said. “Congress must act now to exercise its constitutional duty for the American people to protect the rule of law and fully investigate the allegations of obstruction, corruption, and abuse of power that the Special Counsel declined to make determinations on.”

 

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2019 by twa

[Springfield]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/impeachment-would-be-a-terrible-thing-for-our-country-we-have-another-option/2019/04/19/b75c1e24-62c0-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html?utm_term=.aa5291ebc0b9

 

Quote

One of the features of Clinton’s character, both a flaw and a survival skill, was his ability to “compartmentalize” — to attend to the business of his presidency even as it was teetering on oblivion. That is one reason his job approval reached its highest point in the Gallup poll — 73 percent — the same week the House voted to impeach him in 1998. (It is also worth noting that the Republicans lost five House seats in the midterm elections that year, largely in punishment for an overreach that nearly cost them their majority.)

Quote

But there is another option: Either house, could, with a majority vote, formally censure Trump, something that has not happened to any chief executive since the Senate censured Andrew Jackson in 1834.

While this would be dismissed in some quarters as merely a symbolic act, it would be a historic rebuke of the Trump presidency — and would, properly, leave it to the voters to decide whether they have had enough of it.

 

[Larry]

1 hour ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I was going to call my reps but I'm not sure it is worth the breath.

 

Same, except Ted Yoho. 

[Llevron]

What really blows me is how Dems could not already have a plan waiting for if the report was bad. I mean, you knew it was coming, you knew what would be in it for the most part.....and yet.....nothing? How is that good leadership? They should have had a plan ready for every eventuality by now. They had 2 years to prepare for this exact moment and their responce is "we need more time". Total loss of confidence. Its almost as obvious as "repeal and replace" for 13 years and nothing once the time comes. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

^^^^I agree.  And I think they are hurting themselves with the toss up voters.  The people that definitely won't vote for Trump but will now feel less motivated to come out for Dems.  That is why I want to see what the candidates have to say.  And I think the ones that haven't made a position one way or another are also hurting themselves. 

[TradeTheBeal!]

Amused by the notion that the Dems should already have impeachment plans in place regarding the Mueller Report 48 hours after its release on Easter Weekend.  

 

How deep inside of the false-outrage media bubble does one have to be to say that with a straight face?

 

How about this...let’s reconvene after the holiday, get a hold of the unredacted report and have substantive, possibly contentious debate on the best approach going forward?

 

After all, at the end of the day that’s the main difference between the two parties.  One run a big tent full of different viewpoints and the other gets their marching orders from Jeanine Pirro and falls in line like the drones they are.

[Springfield]

9 minutes ago, Llevron said:

What really blows me is how Dems could not already have a plan waiting for if the report was bad. I mean, you knew it was coming, you knew what would be in it for the most part.....and yet.....nothing? How is that good leadership? They should have had a plan ready for every eventuality by now. They had 2 years to prepare for this exact moment and their responce is "we need more time". Total loss of confidence. Its almost as obvious as "repeal and replace" for 13 years and nothing once the time comes. 

 

I think it's politically smart to not simply come out and yell "impeach" the day after the report drops.  What if they yell that but the report showed that Trump was completely innocent and there was not real obstruction (which some right leaning undecideds believe I'm sure).  I think that it's best to let public opinion form and then make a reaction based on that.  Let the people like AOC, who are already very opinionated (and fresh), start to push for impeachment to test the waters of public opinion.  Then, if it seems like a smart move politically, get the whole party together to push for impeachment.

 

Impeachment is a political tool.  We all know that Trump will not be removed from office.  They shouldn't impeach unless it will benefit them politically and part of that is gauging public interest.  If this board is an accurate representation of public opinion (which some may argue that it IS NOT), then you'd expect them to start pushing for impeachment soon.

 

Plus, congress doesn't even come back together until Monday, correct.  These reps are generally enjoying their vacation and being private at the moment.

 

Just my two cents.

[twa]

Looks like they are floating censure as a means to placate the rubes

[Larry]

19 minutes ago, twa said:

Looks like they are floating censure as a means to placate the rubes

 

"The rubes" is the new GOPspeak for "people who think ethics are important"?

[twa]

6 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

"The rubes" is the new GOPspeak for "people who think ethics are important"?

 

No, it is my speak for those that buy it after what the Dems have been selling.

 

I could use more unflattering terms

[PleaseBlitz]

1 hour ago, Llevron said:

What really blows me is how Dems could not already have a plan waiting for if the report was bad. I mean, you knew it was coming, you knew what would be in it for the most part.....and yet.....nothing? How is that good leadership? They should have had a plan ready for every eventuality by now. They had 2 years to prepare for this exact moment and their responce is "we need more time". Total loss of confidence. Its almost as obvious as "repeal and replace" for 13 years and nothing once the time comes. 

 

I’m in the opposite camp. I would hope the adult leadership would take their time, absorb the actual report (not just the headlines or their preconceived assumptions of what might be in the report) and carefully consider their options. This is too important to do it off the cuff, and there are a lot of different things to consider and a lot of people that need to have input. I don’t see a ton of benefit to doing something quickly over doing it strategically.  Also, can we maybe not falsely equate the 72 hours since the report was released to 13 years?

 

Everyone needs to take a deep breath and remember that people thrive on twitter because their thoughts fit into 280 characters and often much less. 

 

 

Edit:  also, it “blows” you?  

Edited April 20, 2019 by PleaseBlitz

[TheGreatBuzz]

16 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I’m in the opposite camp. I would hope the adult leadership would take their time, absorb the actual report (not just the headlines or their preconceived assumptions of what might be in the report) and carefully consider their options. This is too important to do it off the cuff, and there are a lot of different things to consider and a lot of people that need to have input. I don’t see a ton of benefit to doing something quickly over doing it strategically.  Also, can we maybe not falsely equate the 72 hours since the report was released to 13 years?

 

Everyone needs to take a deep breath and remember that people thrive on twitter because their thoughts fit into 280 characters and often much less. 

 

I disagree.  They had 2 years to brainstorm the top 5 likely outcomes and have a strategy for moving forward with each one.  Also, the Mueller report clearly makes the case for obstruction.  Them waiting shows a lack of ability to act quickly and decisively with an issue that is presented.  Not exactly a good quality in my opinion, especially for candidates for president.