|
https://twitter.com/aedwardslevy/status/1199029764901756934
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:45 |
|
|
16% of American voters believe a literal crime is "appropriate".
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:27
|
|
|
Whenever I see a political poll I just imagine a robo dialer calling 80 year olds desperate enough to talk to anyone answering automated questions. These are the only people I imagine actually answering these polls.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
for an election that was won on such slim margins, 10% of Trump voters who think he should be impeached isn't nothing
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
eviltastic posted:Y’know, you got your law suit, your interview suit, your white collar criming suit, your international criming suit... video of ukraine crime guys and rudy gewles talking about crimes https://youtu.be/dC46RTD_ios?t=490
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
40 and 32% of independents really says it all
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
Cool that we've already dug in so hard... and our news is so loathed that normal people can't even be informed by it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:for an election that was won on such slim margins, 10% of Trump voters who think he should be impeached isn't nothing contrast with the exact same margin the other direction on the Clinton voter side though
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:Cool that we've already dug in so hard... and our news is so loathed that normal people can't even be informed by it. Normal people have never been informed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
No Safe Word posted:contrast with the exact same margin the other direction on the Clinton voter side though From my perspective at least, "This man should be impeached" is a stronger indicator of an intent to vote against him than "this man should not be impeached" is of an intent to vote for him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/LoopEmma/status/1199061855177756675
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 21:27
|
|
|
Is "consideration" in this context mean they're figuring out IF to charge or WHAT to charge? Also, Giuliani on TV this weekend blackmailing Trump tells me he will squeal the second he knows he can't squeeze himself out of this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
Strange Poon posted:Is "consideration" in this context mean they're figuring out IF to charge or WHAT to charge? They're subpoenas seeking evidence, you have to say what you're seeking evidence of, so those are probably the offenses specified on the face of the court orders.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
hi, these things don't leak unless someone wants to use it for political purposes. Could honestly be Trump side or the Dems
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 22:12
|
|
|
More details: https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1199065295870210048
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 23:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/hsu_spencer/sta...ingawful.com%2F
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
We need to start a little rumor that they can all just resign to escape prosecution.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
so now what. obviously it goes to scotus but is it gonna get stayed and will they just say "lol" and rule in favor of him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:so now what. obviously it goes to scotus but is it gonna get stayed and will they just say "lol" and rule in favor of him. It would be breaking an absurd amount of precedent and turn the executive branch into king and his court. I really struggle to imagine that Roberts would go that far
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:so now what. obviously it goes to scotus but is it gonna get stayed and will they just say "lol" and rule in favor of him. They will just issue a stay and run out the clock, because it'll take until long after the impeachment trial for the SCOTUS to rule.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:They will just issue a stay and run out the clock, because it'll take until long after the impeachment trial for the SCOTUS to rule. The default position without their testimony is that Trump is withholding it because it will incriminate him. His obstruction demonstrates a consciousness of guilt. Thus they are proceeding without waiting for them. If they do actually testify, it will be more fuel for the fire. The fire is plenty big already without them, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 00:58
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:It would be breaking an absurd amount of precedent and turn the executive branch into king and his court. Friend, we struggled to imagine that Trump would ever be elected President, and that Republicans would be allowed to get away with all the poo poo they have, but here we are. Throw conventional norms out the window. I'm not saying Roberts WILL rule that way. I'm just saying never say never.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:One poll with a terrible sample of landline-only respondents showed lower support for impeachment and all of a sudden everyone's loving pulling the fire alarm. Also the numbers he references I believe are specifically the "independent" voters in that one poll not the overall approval/disapproval for impeachment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 01:14
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:Friend, we struggled to imagine that Trump would ever be elected President, and that Republicans would be allowed to get away with all the poo poo they have, but here we are. Yeah but also ruling to expand executive powers a year out from Trump being removed for a candidate (potentially) more left than any president in decades is probably not smart
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 01:17
|
|
|
Invalid Validation posted:Whenever I see a political poll I just imagine a robo dialer calling 80 year olds desperate enough to talk to anyone answering automated questions. These are the only people I imagine actually answering these polls. You are aware that basically every poll that ever gets cited in an even somewhat-reputable publication will tell you the methodology right? That HuffPo/YouGov poll was conducted entirely via "web based interviews". I don't know poo poo about yougov, no idea how reliable it is, but it's stupid to dismiss every poll because you think they're all calling landlines in 2019. Nate Silver's a jackass but you can look at these charts, which aggregate and weight a variety of polls to get a better sense of where opinion is trending. It seems pretty clear that if democrats move forward with what they have then the GOP senate will feel no pressure to remove him. It'd be different if there was strong evidence that public opinion was trending towards impeachment in swing states, but by all indications it is not. Honestly Pelosi has bungled this poo poo since the Democrats took the house. Most people are numb to anything Trump does at this point, but why shouldn't they be? After the Mueller report came out, it was clear (and almost every democratic leader admitted) that Trump obstructed justice, but that somehow that didn't mean he should be impeached. Republicans will be able to get away with claiming that even if Trump did everything he was accused of he shouldn't be removed and part of the reason why is that is basically the same position Pelosi + House Dems adopted for years. Also, this "bribery" charge is loving stupid even if that's the technical crime that Trump committed -- it might have played well in a focus group but what went on between Trump and Zelensky doesn't seem like bribery to people who aren't federal prosecutors. And of course the democrats are letting the GOP blast anti-impeachment ads filled with conspiracy BS in a ton of swing districts without any response, because why would anyone think it was worth spending money to convince disengaged or confused voters that the president is a criminal? Apparently the plan was that enough Americans would bother watching 60 hours of impeachment hearings and that would change their mind. As incoherent and insane as the defense of Trump is, at least Republicans are making their loving case to the public. The entire democratic response to Trump's egregious behavior has been totally halfassed since he took office and without a massive stroke of luck (e.g. Bolton has Trump on tape saying "I am going to extort political favors from Ukraine using American taxpayer dollars") there's a really good chance that this whole fiasco will only strengthen Trump's support. I'm not trying to be all "nothing matters" but there's little hope of this ending well. The American people (or at least enough of them in districts and states that matter for the 2020 election) just don't care, and the democratic party seems content to not even bother making the case that they ought to care.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
So someone catch me up, who is doing all this digging and issuing Rudy subpoenas? SDNY reports to Barr so that doesnt make sense?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
cr0y posted:So someone catch me up, who is doing all this digging and issuing Rudy subpoenas? SDNY reports to Barr so that doesnt make sense? the "sovereign district" nickname doesn't come from nothing, the entire trump presidency has been repeated proof that it's difficult to control the SDNY if they don't want to play ball with you
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Gnumonic posted:You are aware that basically every poll that ever gets cited in an even somewhat-reputable publication will tell you the methodology right? That HuffPo/YouGov poll was conducted entirely via "web based interviews". I don't know poo poo about yougov, no idea how reliable it is, but it's stupid to dismiss every poll because you think they're all calling landlines in 2019. I posted this article in USPOL the other day. Web polling is still very much in its infancy https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/upshot/online-polls-analyzing-reliability.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 02:58
|
|
|
BigBallChunkyTime posted:Friend, we struggled to imagine that Trump would ever be elected President, and that Republicans would be allowed to get away with all the poo poo they have, but here we are. sure but roberts strikes me as a smart monster who won't blow the powers of goverments brains out for trumps case. another smarter monster down the road? possibly, but for some weird rear end in a top hat who is unpopular as gently caress, probably not. also if he does it now, a lefty/lib could be trump and the right would be in much deeper poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 06:13
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:sure but roberts strikes me as a smart monster who won't blow the powers of goverments brains out for trumps case. another smarter monster down the road? possibly, but for some weird rear end in a top hat who is unpopular as gently caress, probably not. also if he does it now, a lefty/lib could be trump and the right would be in much deeper poo poo. Trump has a lot of "Actually, the president is an absolute monarch" cases in the courts and while the appeals courts feel obligated to let the president have his say before giving rulings that translate to "LOL! Are you loving stupid?" the supreme court doesn't seem very interested in taking them up. These are cases that would be 7-2 or 6-3 decisions since only the most grotesquely incompetent and partisan of partisan hacks would agree with Trump's reasoning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 14:05
|
|
|
I have very little faith that anyone in politics in 2019 is anything but.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 14:06
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:Trump has a lot of "Actually, the president is an absolute monarch" cases in the courts and while the appeals courts feel obligated to let the president have his say before giving rulings that translate to "LOL! Are you loving stupid?" the supreme court doesn't seem very interested in taking them up. These are cases that would be 7-2 or 6-3 decisions since only the most grotesquely incompetent and partisan of partisan hacks would agree with Trump's reasoning. I'm hoping their fear of a Democrat president wielding king power scares them away from this line of reasoning but I don't hold-out a lot of faith in Roberts to do the right thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
ewiley posted:I'm hoping their fear of a Democrat president wielding king power scares them away from this line of reasoning but I don't hold-out a lot of faith in Roberts to do the right thing. Roberts is a partisan but he isn't a moron, same with Thomas. I'm not worried about it personally. The conservative side of the court doesn't have to answer to primary challengers and has spent most of their time trying to tamp down on executive powers because they would very much like any progressive agendas to die in congress rather than be possible via executive order.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
Shockingly, John Bolton is still an rear end in a top hat: Ruling Will Not Lead Bolton to Testify Soon, Lawyer Says quote:John R. Bolton, the former national security adviser to President Trump who resisted efforts to pressure Ukraine for help against domestic political rivals, dashed any expectation on Tuesday that he would testify soon in the House impeachment investigation in response to a court ruling involving a onetime colleague.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Shockingly, John Bolton is still an rear end in a top hat: this is actually great. Much easier to not tie themselves in knots over whether to impeach now or later
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 16:26
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:this is actually great. Much easier to not tie themselves in knots over whether to impeach now or later They can still subpoena him in the actual trial, too
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
In case anyone wants to hear what impeachment expert Michael Gerhardt thinks the rest of the process is going to look like, he was on Amicus the other day talking through what the process will look like in the Senate. There's also a transcript provided at the link if you don't want to listen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
It's really cool that these guys get to just shop around for a court ruling they like. Jesus christ.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
cr0y posted:It's really cool that these guys get to just shop around for a court ruling they like. Jesus christ. I don't think I'll ever understand the Byzantine heirarchy of the US court system(s)
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 17:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:45 |
|
|
Wistful of Dollars posted:I don't think I'll ever understand the Byzantine heirarchy of the US court system(s) Any court decision of specific import is necessarily just a matter of slow walking it to the explicitly political institution of the supreme court, which by now is managed by explicitly political entity. Simple! If you're obstructionist, they can help make it take a long long time!
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 18:19
|
|
