|
Suppose the vote were held, and there were 3 gop votes to convict, and sixteen+ vote 'present' with an implied, understood threat to Trump (from the GOP)... I mean, if we're imagining reality is anything like House of Cards and/or West Wing
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2020 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
Those of us that have been following closely have already reached out conclusions. Senators have formed their positions. The Qultists have had their minds made up for a long while. 'Low Info Voters', the ones that might swing one way or another, people who are only now starting to pay any attention to the circus (and still might not be able to recite the actual charges) are starting to form their opinions, mostly from chatting with co-workers around the water cooler or while buying coffee and a newspaper from the corner cafe in the morning. People that usually listen to Top 40 on the commute to work, but have been hearing about the impeachment trial and decided to tune in to NPR for the occasion. Folk that don't spend time on internet message boards, nor ever dive into the political dimensions of twitter. The number of people now forming an opinion - in real time - is hitting a peak. And control of the narrative at that peak point is key. Either minimizing the number of people that pay attention - keeping the peak as low as possible, in terms of population of participants - or maximizing the swing to the narrative you wish to dominate. Trump's not in a strong position here, from a social engineer's perspective. If this becomes a prolonged trial with multiple witnesses... it starts to look like '12 angry men', with Romny (et al?) attempting to sway enough of the jury pool to convict. That outcome seems extremely unlikely, but it can't really play out with a quick trial. Maybe Trump's bluffing, full stop. Maybe his chuds can't (or won't) actually primary senators that turn on him. Maybe the remnants of the Tea Party remember that they really love being the crazy radicals beholden not to the party. Maybe a popular movement begins with citizens across the US holding occupations demand that Trump #Resign, and it gets WAY more participation than anybody would expect right now. Maybe a new 'Bonus Army', with a set of demands. Maybe Putin sees it as tactically advantageous to turn the Internet Research Agency against Trump and in favor of impeachment. Maybe enough Republican senators choose not to attend the vote that the Dems participating make up 66.6%. Maybe support for removal edges over 60% nationwide and over 50% among republican likely voters and Trump is strongly encouraged - and chooses - to resign. Yeah but no the trials gunna be a short crazy ride trump won't be convicted and there'll be little dramatic reveals that prolong the drama while not really changing the outcome meaningfully throughout the process. And yeah, I don't think this course is to the benefit of the GOP. I do like the hypothesis that someone that received Bolton's book for White Housee review (and presumably put it through the review process?) is a) the author of the anonymous op-ed and b) the person that leaked the manuscript to the press at just the right time. It's a wild guess though.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2020 03:29
|
|
|
Is now a good time to mention (loudly, so it's heard the world over) that Trump isn't actually scary, that he can do gently caress-all to hurt any senators that turn on him, that every candidate he's endorsed and given the (negative) 'Trump Bump' to has lost (even the ones that were barely edging out a win, in polling, prior to the 'bump'), and that just generall gently caress any threat he makes he's a loving (really ugly) kitten? 'Cause I honestly think that's the case, and it seems like the dominant narrative is at odds with this reality. edit - gently caress, beaten empty whippet box posted:They could all stop being afraid of Trump by just removing him but noooooo Uglycat fucked around with this message at 05:20 on Jan 29, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2020 05:10
|
|
|
Harton posted:Yeah I’ve been slowly opting out of it myself. If nothing is real the why aren’t we all doing things we enjoy rather than working our lives away for corporations. I quit my job and just do odd jobs now like refinishing hardwood floors and poo poo. Way more satisfying but not nearly enough money. Money is stupid. I tell people I'm 'anticapitalist' and that 'money is gross.' I try to touch as little of it as possible. Give your labor away to people who need it, people who can't afford that labor at 'market prices.' Accept, graciously, what gifts are offered to you. Quit capitalism. Quit USD. Quit the 'exchange economy' altogether - and just give and receive. That's my advice, anyhow.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2020 08:52
|
|
|
DandyLion posted:haha oh please this would be the ACME of entertainment for my day! oh good more damaging stuff to blindside trump appeasers with GOP must end their policy of appeasement of the executive or suffer more of his shortsighted ignorant ineptitude. I hope they start to realize the price they're committing to paying, and to see what little threat Trump actually posses to them for crossing him. But they won't. We'll get just enough GOP to demand witnesses that this becomes even more of a circus, and from the looks of things there's going to be a daily drop of more damaging stuff to blindside trump appeasers with I gotta say, I kinda like the math on this expect dramatic displays of cognitive dissonance
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2020 18:39
|
|
|
Google Butt posted:Yeah seems like an own goal trying so hard to silence Bolton I've avoided actually believing Bolton would sink [e]Trump[/e - typed 'sanders' for some stupid brainfart reason) for the longest time. It just seems entirely too predictable, every time we think someone close to Trump (or The Party) is going to sink him, they don't. I mean, I've known about Bolton since W-times, and I get that he's not one of the sycophants, but there's gotta be at least one non-sycophant GOP senator (many of them have been 'round since before W too) and we haven't really seen any of them break ranks. And remember the subpoenas? Bolton had no obligation to obey Trump, when he told him not to testify in front of the House. And there was even a court ruling that Bolton could have pointed to, when ignoring Trump and showing up at the House - but Bolton didn't go with it. Bolton said he'd be happy to testify if subpoenaed by the house, he was invited by the house (who avoided subpoenaing him), he didn't show... Maybe I just coudn't bring myself to hope. Even the other day, when the leak happened, in this thread there was discussion of whether or not Bolton would deliberately cross Trump. The argument was that the book leak was timed too perfect, and the contents too damning, to imagine (at /this/ point) that Bolton wouldn't try to sink Trump. The arguments were solid and convincing, it looked then like Bolton would cross him. Still, I couldn't believe Bolton would 'aim at the king', would actually make a concerted (rather than resigned) effort to sink him. In truth, the one thing that would convince me is Trump going on a tirade about how awful Bolton is. And here it is. Maybe Trump caught wind of Bolton's willingness to make a resigned effort, and Trump's blowing it up in his head. That fits everything. But that's the most 'nothing matters' interpretation I can come to - and Trump's attacks on Bolton aren't going to soften Bolton's willingness to cross Trump. Uglycat fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Jan 29, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2020 18:49
|
|
|
We've reached a point where it is indisputable, within the political reality (and many in the GOP are operating outside of reality), that the very best move Trump could make for his party, for his nation, and for the senator's he's asking to acquit him - would be for him to resign. This whole thing ends if he simply resigns, and the whole thing dragging on does not bode well for the GOP at large or the Senators in particular. When and if the Senator's grok this, they might (privately) try to push for him to consider that option. His (strictly selfish) reaction to having that option suggested will alienate GOP senators and may prompt some to throw him under the bus - but that still seems unlikely. It's definitely time for a popular movement demanding resignation. If that movement contained a significant number of GOP voices, it might even change the outcome. Such events /could/ be engineered.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2020 19:01
|
|
|
twice burned ice posted:Any GOP senator who attempts to force Trump to resign will be risking his senate career, I suspect. Trump will obviously bloviate about the betrayal on twitter, and his complaining will almost guarantee a primary challenger from the right. The present circumstance - which is /entirely/ Trump's fault, and would quickly resolve with his resignation - is 'risking' every GOP senator's career. And Trump is toothless, completely incapable of any sort of reprisal. Certainly incapable of a reprisal that's worse than the position he's put those GOP senators at present.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2020 19:08
|
|
|
The democrat house members were all elected. Clearly, they are exhibiting the will of the people. It would be unfair for the Senate to deny the will of the people. Anything the house wants to do is the will of the people. Even if it's illegal or unconstitutional. If it were not, they would not have been elected. QED A vote to acquit nullifies the house elections and overrides the will of the people. Acquittal is undemocratic.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2020 21:19
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:Parnas just said on Anderson Cooper that Lindsay Graham knew about the Ukraine scheme and was in the loop. hosed up if true
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2020 07:04
|
|
|
Is Roberts in a position to demand Graham recuse himself? Can Roberts declare a 'mistrial'?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2020 07:46
|
|
|
Chef Boyardeez Nuts posted:Most of the GOP Senate is more vulnerable to getting primaried by Trumpists than losing in the general. If they carry Trump's water they might be hosed. If they don't they will be hosed. I don't buy that this is the case, nor do I believe this is the underlying reason we see for lockstep acquittal. At this point, any calculus by a senator based on future election outcomes is guesswork. No, the strong wall (that seems to maybe be cracking?) demands a stronger explanation.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2020 08:27
|
|
|
Is it silly for me to look to Todd Young as my bellweather? Staunchly christian (pricipled?) not-entirely-chuddy base, tea party libertarian leaning in origin, likely friendly to Pence (hoosiers all). Two weeks ago, his campaign stated quote:“The far-left has been desperate to get rid of President Trump since day one, and that has been made abundantly clear throughout this process. Now that the articles are being delivered and a trial will be held in the Senate, I will uphold my duty as an impeachment juror and carefully evaluate the legal arguments. I hope this process can be completed quickly so we can get back to the business of Hoosiers and all Americans.” He's done the 'I'm a juror and jurors aren't supposed to talk' thing through most of the process - which is definitely less than Trump was hoping to get out of a senator like this. As my bellweather, I don't see much hope for actual conviction (duh). And I don't follow the senate nearly as closely as many of y'all. Is this utter foolishness, or is there some sense here?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2020 23:14
|
|
|
Skex posted:https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1222989609258360832?s=19 I like it. If this is repeated by every dem, from rep to every presidential candidate and their surrogates, and quickly asserted by a bystander anytime a chud says 'trump was acquitted!' around a water cooler... It's short and clear. It's catchy. It's pretty firm ground to stand on. I think this fucks up Trump's and the GOP's game.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
House Of Cards option: Dem Sens vote for witnesses; motion fails... call for vote to acquit, all Dem Sens leave the building and protest together. Trump is acquitted, and a full two news cycles play 'both sides' on whether or not the result actually exonerates Trump (while right wing media attacks the dems for dereliction of duty in service of partisanship or some such). West Wing option: 'The People' stand with the dem sens, and the chief justice walks out of the trial to join them. The News Cycle declares the whole process corrupt, and protests rise puerto rico style demanding the senators and president resign. reality: house has to decide, based on the outcome, whether to take another shot and essentially 'DDoS' the senate with impeachments until the election - or to just 'move on', and focus on winning in November (most likely) Still /possible/ that some unexpected 'yes' vote extends the trial and brings bolton in to testify, but I ain't gunna believe that 'til the vote has happened. And almost certain that more details of criminal activity, implicating a larger and larger set of people (who we already know to be involved) come out every day for some time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 22:25
|
|
|
Foul Ole Ron posted:Then do... Something new? Shutting down airports is a good half-measure before shutting down rail. A week after we shut down rail, we're all hungry. But this tactic, employed popularly, does change the course.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2020 03:22
|
|
|
Republican strategy: end the trial and quickly as possible, with nothing damning admitted into evidence Qult strategy: introduce Biden here, since Ukrain wouldn't do it for us - then push more fictional conspiracy nonsense seemingly 'qonfirmed.' Dem strategy: get real witnesses called, and real documents admitted into evidence - force GOP senators to acknowledge the established facts that make acquittal so absurd Bolton & Parnas: HEY WE HAVE RELEVANT CREDIBLE TESTIMONY THAT WOULD SERVE THE DEM STRATEGY Unsurprisingly, the republican majority figured their strategic interests were served by ensuring they could claim ignorance rather than malice. The GOP might have gone for witnesses if they had even a handful of credible folk from the administration ready to testify to a narrative where everything was on the up & up. But there simply aren't any, for multiple reasons. First, any of Trump's allies that are still loyal /and/ close enough to be relevant (in a way that rivals Bolton's relevance) - have zero credibility. Dox have already dropped that undermine their testimony, implicating them in conspiracy and making them either plead the 5th (is that even an option? but, of course, nobody can /make/ anybody talk...), admit to crimes, or demonstrably commit perjury. All of that makes the job harder on GOP senators. Second, there are clearly credible witnesses prepared to testify to the crimes - and their accounts must not be admitted into testimony lest we again leave people convinced of conspiracy, rather than ignorance. And finally, there's likely a fight within the GOP itself on whether or not to allow the Qult influence over their party's official narrative. Trump keeps all his little 'q proofs' on the dl, feigning alignment with the GOP on dominant narrative (even as a wave of qultists are running for congress) while feeding the conspiracy poo poo that the FBI has rightly identified as a threat to national security. The senators take themselves much more seriously, and want to be taken seriously, and so they want to keep the qult stuff distant from any of their public statements. Romney seems to resist the qulty stuff. And the biden stuff is qulty. And the qult is built on 'butter emails' and pizzagate. It's a massive disinformation campaign designed to create an alternative narrative- a weaponized ARG. People that believe the lies constructed with the sockpuppet 'Guccifer 2.0' overlap heavily with the ones that think Trump was legit investigating Biden's son for real corruption. And by now we have a good idea of which media outlets are infected with qultists. Fox News. OANN. Fulon Gong's media outlets. Sinclair. A bunch of social media sockpuppet armies. Brietbart. Infowars. Project Veritas. Wikileaks. Guccifer 2.0. We can identify individual journalists within papers of record. We can identify editors that allow that non-sense. And the one thing, the only thing the Chief Justice saw to, through this farce - was that the qult narrative not be injected by Rand Paul. edit: the Child Sex Trafficking thing. The Qult has been fixated on this very real social disgrace from the beginning. The Biden narrative is an outter narrative, the child sex trafficking is an inner narrative of this cult. And it's /always/ projection with this cult. And the people that crafted that inner narrative knew about the Epstein stuff. It was baked in. It's pointed to by qultists as a q-confirm. Trump keeps signalling to the qult that yes, he's really working hard fighting human trafficking (which to them is a dogwhistle meaning 'bringing justice to hillary for all the children she's literally murdered and eaten in a secret satanic ritual to get high'). It's always projection, and whoever engineered the qult knew all about epstein in advance - exploiting the reveals and influencing the overton window as events played out in real time. But this is all an aside, as the Senate wasn't gunna touch that poop for all the chambers in washington. Uglycat fucked around with this message at 02:07 on Feb 3, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2020 01:59
|
|
|
Suppose, with adequate support from the electorate, the House Dems passed a new impeachment resolution every working day from now until the next Senate is sworn in? DDoS the senate, effectively. There's certainly plenty of impeachable material between now and then. Not 'hey, let's try this again and see if it sticks' (we all know it won't), but more a 'fine then, you croneys will be tied up in impeachment proceedings for the rest of your public careers.' I don't expect it to go this way, and I can definitely imagine messaging and false narratives that the GOP would use... but I can also imagine it being a useful tactic. The Senate just committed a serious dereliction of duty; hound them as 'illegitimate' until they're replaced. Make the official party position that they're not gunning for removal, but to ensure /every/ reason Trump /should/ be removed is all entered into the record, and forcing every senator to look at each of those reasons square in the face. The Senate has a habit of treating the House like they're a bunch of kids; it's time to completely flip that. The House should be lecturing the Senate for being idiot children, incapable of governance. I'm not advocating for the DDoS approach, merely entertaining it - but it would be a different strategy from 'let's find the one crime that senate republicans totally /would/ impeach for and try (and fail) once more.'
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
lol just lol holy poo poo, all of it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 11:23 |
|
|
Kirk posted:
I want so badly to disagree with this but it's so obviously and patently true
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2020 23:07
|
|