|
Meatball posted:They may want to, but the base won't allow it. After getting the straight racism for years they wont settle fog dog whistles. Eh, maybe they'll think they can lead the base back to dog whistles. Really though I just wanted to point out that criminality means poo poo all to them. Trump could nuke New York and they'd spin it if they thought that would help them. The only question for Republicans is going to be how impeaching or not impeaching Trump impacts their control and power. Here's a man contemplating a cat https://twitter.com/Labbars/status/972486430764290049
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
Pelosi's thing this afternoon being televised?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
eke out posted:Yes. You can look a few pages back for the lawfare link. I read that, but it doesn't seem to answer my central question, which is "What can Congress do if the White House still says 'lol no'?" Okay, impeachment makes it easier to issue subpoenas, and it blows up the Trump team's main legal objections to complying with the subpoena. But what if they say "gently caress you, we're still not releasing that because executive privilege presidential harassment fake news etc" and just continue the stonewall? Then can we get Mnuchin or Barr or someone getting perpwalked across the White House lawn?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:This is over 70% of the caucus (even if there are a few independents/Rs in there, probably not the latter)! When the gently caress will Pelosi get a clue? It seems like they're following the same playbook as when Franken resigned - let the caucus show their support throughout the day, then make the big announcement at the end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
I love that our system and parties are so hosed that 70% of the caucus and a majority of the public wants something and I'm like "yeah I'll believe this when I see it."
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:33
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:AOC comes out as a qanon follower! A few pages back but this is the big thing we need to keep in mind and what I’m scared of. That if impeachment happens people will dust their hands saying “Thank god that outlier is gone now back to normal!” when normal is what gave us Trump to begin with and the looming threat will be an actually competent fascist gaining power next
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
The crullerty is the point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
fishing with the fam posted:Pelosi's thing this afternoon being televised? If she's going to get the ball rolling on impeachment I'd think you'd have no trouble finding it on any of the cable news networks or C-SPAN
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:I read that, but it doesn't seem to answer my central question, which is "What can Congress do if the White House still says 'lol no'?" Okay, impeachment makes it easier to issue subpoenas, and it blows up the Trump team's main legal objections to complying with the subpoena. But what if they say "gently caress you, we're still not releasing that because executive privilege presidential harassment fake news etc" and just continue the stonewall? Then can we get Mnuchin or Barr or someone getting perpwalked across the White House lawn? you sue them to enforce the subpoenas in federal court, dude. what do you think that long piece on lawfare was talking about they've literally already done this, these legal fights are currently happening and the trump argument for why they shouldn't be enforced is literally "this isn't impeachment" eke out fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Sep 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:Except LBJ had him dead to rights and chose to do nothing. That's not quite the case. We never had full confirmation that Nixon did it until H.R. Haldeman's notes came out. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/31/opinion/sunday/nixons-vietnam-treachery.html It's also tricky because a lot of the sabotage was directed at motivating the South Vietnamese president at the time to be less cooperative and LBJ only had but so much room to attack Nixon without undermining the whole bullshit show that led to the US' involvement in Vietnam in the first place. They needed the full indisputable proof that they did not have. Otherwise the attack would have looked like shaky politically-motivated smearing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:Except LBJ had him dead to rights and chose to do nothing. It would be nice if Dems would draw a straight line from Nixon in 1968, through Watergate, Iran Contra, Dubya with the lies leading to the Iraq war and justifying our new torture program, and on to Trump. Increasingly blatant lawlessness because big conservatives are never held to account. Even Hastert was only held responsible for "structuring withdrawals" to conceal the hush money paid to his molestation victims.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:36
|
|
|
eke out posted:you sue them to enforce the subpoenas in federal court, dude. what do you think that long piece on lawfare was talking about I understood that, but what punishment do they face if they don't comply with a court order? Like, if there's a smoking gun, are they really going to turn it over?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:The crullerty is the point.  We got jokes! https://twitter.com/aaron_schwa/status/1176547063468908544 https://twitter.com/Kathleenhamil15/status/1176549414325719040
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:The crullerty is the point. USPOL Fall: The crullerty is the point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:I understood that, but what punishment do they face if they don't comply with a court order? In a just system they are held in contempt and are imprisoned until they comply. In this system? Who knows
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:I read that, but it doesn't seem to answer my central question, which is "What can Congress do if the White House still says 'lol no'?" Okay, impeachment makes it easier to issue subpoenas, and it blows up the Trump team's main legal objections to complying with the subpoena. But what if they say "gently caress you, we're still not releasing that because executive privilege presidential harassment fake news etc" and just continue the stonewall? Then can we get Mnuchin or Barr or someone getting perpwalked across the White House lawn? Contempt of congress and begin fining them many many large amounts of monies a day until they comply.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:A few pages back but this is the big thing we need to keep in mind and what I’m scared of. That if impeachment happens people will dust their hands saying “Thank god that outlier is gone now back to normal!” when normal is what gave us Trump to begin with and the looming threat will be an actually competent fascist gaining power next Absolutely. We get some lovely president next who doesn't want to make any changes and won't pack the courts, and we're hosed even more than we are now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:The crullerty is the point. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:42
|
|
|
beejay posted:Absolutely. We get some lovely president next who doesn't want to make any changes and won't pack the courts, and we're hosed even more than we are now. Not necessarily, due to the Great Boomer Die-Off. The Silent Generation is the ONLY generation that is majority Republican. In 10 years, they'll effectively no longer exist, and boomer numbers will also be dropping.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
beejay posted:Absolutely. We get some lovely president next who doesn't want to make any changes and won't pack the courts, and we're hosed even more than we are now. If the next president doesn’t have the ability to enact a sweeping social change program like M4A or a jobs program or whatnot, there’s practically a guarantee we’ll get a goddamned fascist as the president afterwards thanks to the Republican mantra of “if first you don’t succeed, double-down and fash harder”. At least I think that’s how the saying goes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:I understood that, but what punishment do they face if they don't comply with a court order? Trump and Pence enjoy pretty substantial legal immunity and (probably) can't be compelled to do jack poo poo, much less be incarcerated, as long as they're in office. Everybody else, no such luck, they can all be jailed for contempt of court.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
Pelosi's going to have a press conference where she asks "who wants to talk about impeachment?!" Then she'll put on a Red MAGA hat and say "Gotcha!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:47
|
|
|
Ripoff posted:If the next president doesn’t have the ability to enact a sweeping social change program like M4A or a jobs program or whatnot, there’s practically a guarantee we’ll get a goddamned fascist as the president afterwards thanks to the Republican mantra of “if first you don’t succeed, double-down and fash harder”. In all honesty the great boomer die off will probably start before they get enough base to elect a fascist again. Or so we can only hope.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Pelosi's going to have a press conference where she asks "who wants to talk about impeachment?!" Then she'll put on a Red MAGA hat and say "Gotcha!" The MAGA Hat actually says MAUI, recess continues, later suckers!
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1176543842033721344 gottem!!
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
She's stuck at this point. A majority of the caucus is in favor of impeachment, so there's no way this isn't going forward.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:51
|
|
|
And all it took was Trump going after one of their own for some lovely nepotism. Truly the Rubicon had been crossed at that moment. Paradoxish posted:She's stuck at this point. A majority of the caucus is in favor of impeachment, so there's no way this isn't going forward. This has been true since last year. It really is the fact that Trump is going after the presumed candidate that has made her move.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
That's some powerful leadership right there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
the great mattering is upon us.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:I understood that, but what punishment do they face if they don't comply with a court order? google chelsea manning
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:This has been true since last year. It really is the fact that Trump is going after the presumed candidate that has made her move. This is incorrect. We only got up to a slim majority in favor of impeachment right around the time of the Mueller testimony this summer, since then it's increased very slowly to the high 130s, up until the landslide of the last 24 hours.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
quote:The Senate Watergate Committee, known officially as the Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities, was a special committee established by the United States Senate, S.Res. 60, in 1973, to investigate the Watergate scandal, with the power to investigate the break-in at the Democratic National Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_Watergate_Committee
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Drew_Hammill/status/1176555174292262913
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
mod sassinator posted:In all honesty the great boomer die off will probably start before they get enough base to elect a fascist again. I really hope so. As much as I hate Trump, I’m just glad he’s the fascist we got rather than a competent one.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
A select committee makes sense, the next big question is who gets put on it
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:58
|
|
|
Well don't worry, nobody has breathed a word about presidential authority reforms, so we'll get a worse one soon enough
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:58
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:This has been true since last year. It really is the fact that Trump is going after the presumed candidate that has made her move. This doesn't even make sense. Republicans are going to drag Biden through the mud during this investigation and there's almost no chance that Trump is actually removed from office. I'm absolutely sure that Pelosi would rather this Ukraine poo poo just go away, but there's too much noise being made right now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:59
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:That's not quite the case. We never had full confirmation that Nixon did it until H.R. Haldeman's notes came out. Oh wow yeah, good thing they didn't attack Nixon then or he might have won in 68
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:59
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:A select committee makes sense, the next big question is who gets put on it SQUAD (never in a million years but we can dream)
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
Whoa! Slow the gently caress down Pelosi! theflyingorc posted:Not necessarily, due to the Great Boomer Die-Off. They're already a minority party, the country is set up in such a way that a minority party can still run things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 18:59
|
|