Impeachment

Political discussion here. Any reasonable opinion is welcome, but due to the sensitive nature of the topic area, please be nice and respectful to others. No flaming or trolling, please. And please keep political commentary out of the other board areas and confine it to this area. Thanks!
User avatar
Marty [Mori Chu]
Posts: 9822
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Impeachment

Post by Marty [Mori Chu] » Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:14 pm

The whole thing has gotten muddled and confusing. Mueller's team themselves issued a statement saying that some aspects of the BuzzFeed piece were inaccurate. BuzzFeed says they called back to triple-check their sources and reporting and stand by it. Rudy Giuliani is on TV all weekend being interviewed about it, and now he's saying that Trump *did* coach Cohen about his testimony, but that he didn't tell him to lie.

I think we are back where we began: We just have to wait for Mueller to issue his report.

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 2203
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Nodack » Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:44 pm

I don’t listen to anything Gouliani says. Yes I spell it that way on purpose. He just says things off the top of his head and generally says things that hurt Trump more than help. He’s just a spin doctor, not a lawyer.

I don’t think the BuzzFeed story is over yet.

User avatar
Marty [Mori Chu]
Posts: 9822
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Impeachment

Post by Marty [Mori Chu] » Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:35 am

The Political Costs of Not Impeaching Trump

"There is no way over, under, or around impeachment—only through."

https://www.gq.com/story/democrats-impeaching-trump/

User avatar
ShelC
Posts: 4769
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 6:00 am

Re: Impeachment

Post by ShelC » Wed Jun 05, 2019 12:27 pm

Dems are just as responsible for the current situation. They should've drawn a line in the sand early and started impeachment proceedings as soon as Trump broke any law.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Indy » Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:50 pm

ShelC wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 12:27 pm
Dems are just as responsible for the current situation. They should've drawn a line in the sand early and started impeachment proceedings as soon as Trump broke any law.
I agree they have some responsibility, but disagree they should have started impeachment early on. You have to wait until the special counsel's report comes out, at least. You build up some court cases that show there is merit, you get an independent assessment (from the special counsel), and then you move down that road. It can't be something you do frivolously.

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 2203
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Nodack » Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:25 pm

Especially when there is a 99.999999% chance it goes nowhere in the Senate and just makes you look like Republicans during Obama’s tenure voting to repeal Obamacare fifty times symbolically. What effect does that have? There are a lot of ongoing investigations that Mueller passed onto other people still going on. The Dems seem to want Mueller to testify and clear up a few things. He’s a shy guy but, he would answer a subpoena. Build your case. That would drive Trump more nuts than symbolically impeaching in the House and nothing else happens.

I don’t know that I would be satisfied with Dems impeaching Trump alone. Until Republicans see Trump as I see him instead of this genius messiah they see him as we will have a problem in America. Iron clad evidence or Trump doing something so bad that Republicans lose faith and turn on him or even just waiting until the next election and let America judge seems like the most likely scenarios. His base won’t care how many regulations he kills or how many wildlife sanctuaries he turns into oil fields. They would care if Trumps actions hurt their pocketbooks. Trump is enjoying a good economy and that makes him untouchable with his base. His tariffs hurt farmers, which make up a lot of his rural vote. Having to bail them out is a bad look. If his tariff wars don’t pan out and the economy suffers that would certainly lower his chances of re-election.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Indy » Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:05 pm

The GOP senators will not vote for impeachment even if they thought he committed the crimes of which he is accused. At least, not until they think it would hurt them at the polls. And by them, I mean them individually. If they think they have a better chance at re-election by voting no, even if they think he did it, they will not vote their conscience. Trump hasn't changed as a person since he ran the first time. He is who he is. And all of the GOP congressmen and Senators that said how awful of a person he is and that he shouldn't be the nominee and he hasn't even been a GOP member and he treats veterans and women and people of color poorly... they just stopped saying those things and defend him now, because they see it will be better for them if he stays in power. It is pathetic and shows what poor morals they have.

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 2203
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Nodack » Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:03 am

Our whole system is F’ed. It’s like the Crips and the Bloods running the government. It’s so embarrassing.

User avatar
Marty [Mori Chu]
Posts: 9822
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Impeachment

Post by Marty [Mori Chu] » Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:21 am

Nodack wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:03 am
Our whole system is F’ed. It’s like the Crips and the Bloods running the government. It’s so embarrassing.
I do think our system needs changes. But I do not agree with "both sides" framing, the implication that both sides/parties are equally broken and corrupt and awful. One is clearly and measurably worse than the other. One party has completely lost its honor and its principles, and the other is trying to figure out how to respond to an opponent who is willing to do anything to win, even if it's ruthless or outside the rules and norms of the system.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Indy » Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:12 am

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:21 am
Nodack wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:03 am
Our whole system is F’ed. It’s like the Crips and the Bloods running the government. It’s so embarrassing.
I do think our system needs changes. But I do not agree with "both sides" framing, the implication that both sides/parties are equally broken and corrupt and awful. One is clearly and measurably worse than the other. One party has completely lost its honor and its principles, and the other is trying to figure out how to respond to an opponent who is willing to do anything to win, even if it's ruthless or outside the rules and norms of the system.
I think it is incredibly disingenuous to think that if politicians on your side of the aisle were in control of the Senate they would have done things differently. Do you think they would have sat back and let a Trump president appoint a SC judge before an election where it looked like he would lose no matter what? Do you think if most states around the country were highly controlled by Dems that they wouldn't have looked to change laws/voting lines to stay in power? Power corrupts, and it doesn't matter what you say your morals are before you become corrupted. I honestly think you lose credibility by saying that one team in the game is the moral one and the other is immoral and if we just put the moral team in charge everything will be fine. It might short term, but it won't long term.

User avatar
Marty [Mori Chu]
Posts: 9822
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Impeachment

Post by Marty [Mori Chu] » Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:58 am

Indy wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:12 am
Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:21 am
Nodack wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:03 am
Our whole system is F’ed. It’s like the Crips and the Bloods running the government. It’s so embarrassing.
I do think our system needs changes. But I do not agree with "both sides" framing, the implication that both sides/parties are equally broken and corrupt and awful. One is clearly and measurably worse than the other. One party has completely lost its honor and its principles, and the other is trying to figure out how to respond to an opponent who is willing to do anything to win, even if it's ruthless or outside the rules and norms of the system.
I think it is incredibly disingenuous to think that if politicians on your side of the aisle were in control of the Senate they would have done things differently. Do you think they would have sat back and let a Trump president appoint a SC judge before an election where it looked like he would lose no matter what? Do you think if most states around the country were highly controlled by Dems that they wouldn't have looked to change laws/voting lines to stay in power? Power corrupts, and it doesn't matter what you say your morals are before you become corrupted. I honestly think you lose credibility by saying that one team in the game is the moral one and the other is immoral and if we just put the moral team in charge everything will be fine. It might short term, but it won't long term.
I absolutely do think that Democrats would have behaved different than Mitch McConnell did. There is no precedent for Democrats blocking a rightfully appointed Supreme Court justice nominee from even having a confirmation hearing. George W Bush appointed two justices, Roberts (the Chief Justice!) and Scalia, and the Dems happily obliged and confirmed them. They were not nominated during the last year of Bush's Presidency, but I don't think that matters. The point is that one party has decided to abandon all norms and obstruct/fight to the death over things like this, and the other has tried to retain dignity and decorum and work together. And when one side cheats, the other side that plays by the rules loses.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Indy » Mon Jun 10, 2019 12:37 pm

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:58 am
Indy wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:12 am
Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:21 am
Nodack wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:03 am
Our whole system is F’ed. It’s like the Crips and the Bloods running the government. It’s so embarrassing.
I do think our system needs changes. But I do not agree with "both sides" framing, the implication that both sides/parties are equally broken and corrupt and awful. One is clearly and measurably worse than the other. One party has completely lost its honor and its principles, and the other is trying to figure out how to respond to an opponent who is willing to do anything to win, even if it's ruthless or outside the rules and norms of the system.
I think it is incredibly disingenuous to think that if politicians on your side of the aisle were in control of the Senate they would have done things differently. Do you think they would have sat back and let a Trump president appoint a SC judge before an election where it looked like he would lose no matter what? Do you think if most states around the country were highly controlled by Dems that they wouldn't have looked to change laws/voting lines to stay in power? Power corrupts, and it doesn't matter what you say your morals are before you become corrupted. I honestly think you lose credibility by saying that one team in the game is the moral one and the other is immoral and if we just put the moral team in charge everything will be fine. It might short term, but it won't long term.
I absolutely do think that Democrats would have behaved different than Mitch McConnell did. There is no precedent for Democrats blocking a rightfully appointed Supreme Court justice nominee from even having a confirmation hearing. George W Bush appointed two justices, Roberts (the Chief Justice!) and Scalia, and the Dems happily obliged and confirmed them. They were not nominated during the last year of Bush's Presidency, but I don't think that matters. The point is that one party has decided to abandon all norms and obstruct/fight to the death over things like this, and the other has tried to retain dignity and decorum and work together. And when one side cheats, the other side that plays by the rules loses.
1) I think you meant Alito, not Scalia.
2) Both Alito and Roberts were confirmed under GOP controlled Senates.
3) The last time a DEM controlled senate approved a GOP nominated SCOTUS justice was nearly 30 years ago.

User avatar
Marty [Mori Chu]
Posts: 9822
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Impeachment

Post by Marty [Mori Chu] » Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:09 pm

When was the last time a Dem controlled senate blocked a GOP nominated SCOTUS justice for a full year without a nomination hearing?

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 2203
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Nodack » Mon Jun 10, 2019 2:36 pm

I vote Democrat because generally speaking I believe they are the party that wants to help regular people.

I don’t vote Republican because generally I believe they are the party that wants to help rich people and definitely NOT regular people.

Both sides have leaders that are corrupt and cater to those who helped get them and keep them elected. Power corrupts and our system encourages corruption. The system is broken IMO. The two sides no longer are capable of governing America the way it should be. They just cater to their base and attack everyone else. The media is set up in two camps, pro Dem anti Con or pro Con anti Dem.

I hear you Marty. I agree the Republicans have gone completely off the rails and no longer care about any rules, norms, integrity or honesty but, I won’t give the Dems a free pass. The whole thing is a circus now and NOT a government IMO. I can't blame the people too much. Your choices are be a Democrat or be a Republican for the most part. You pick a side and watch their media and you automatically hate the other side. I watch the liberal media and 95% is anti Trump. FOX News is anti Dem. Sometimes I just want the news and not the opinions.

I just spent a week visiting family in rural Illinois. Most of the people I visited lived on farms on dirt roads. They all love Trump. I just kept my mouth shut.

I am so sick of Trump and even hearing his name anymore. If there was a choice to block any mention of Trump I would choose it. And then curiosity kicks in and you wake up wondering “What crazy f*** up BS did Trump do today.” Click, on goes the tv. I don’t think I could stand four more years of Trump. A narcissistic serial lying racist sexual predator ego maniac with no empathy, honor, integrity or morals shouldn’t be our President.

It’s horrific.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Indy » Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:57 am

Marty [Mori Chu] wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 1:09 pm
When was the last time a Dem controlled senate blocked a GOP nominated SCOTUS justice for a full year without a nomination hearing?
AFAIK, never. But the GOP have only done it once in the history of their party.

I hope it is clear that I do not support the disgusting behavior of some of the GOP leadership, much less the awful person that is our president.

That doesn't change the fact that I really believe power corrupts, and people do awful things to keep power. Right now the GOP is in power, and doing awful things to keep power. I don't pretend to think that if the Dems were in complete power after not having it for so long, they would only do things to help everyone and not worry about staying in power. The GOP organization and the Dem organization make a lot of money for a lot of people. That is what is corrupting.

What percentage of the peers at your job are multi-millionaires? In the US Senate, the AVERAGE net worth is over 3M. In the House, it is over 1M. The majority of people representing all 330M people in the US are millionaires, where as median net worth in America is under 100k.

These people live a certain style of life that is not like 99% of the people they serve. That doesn't matter which side of the aisle they are on. And they are not going to give up their seat at the table just because it is the "right thing to do."

User avatar
ShelC
Posts: 4769
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 6:00 am

Re: Impeachment

Post by ShelC » Tue Jun 11, 2019 5:23 am

What percentage of the peers at your job are multi-millionaires? In the US Senate, the AVERAGE net worth is over 3M. In the House, it is over 1M. The majority of people representing all 330M people in the US are millionaires, where as median net worth in America is under 100k.

These people live a certain style of life that is not like 99% of the people they serve. That doesn't matter which side of the aisle they are on. And they are not going to give up their seat at the table just because it is the "right thing to do."
This. They need to get all lobby and foreign money out of DC. But I'm pretty sure that won't happen because very few people willingly give up wealth and power they've grown accustomed to. Dems won't shine a light on Rs because they're taking just as much money from others. So it's all political theater at this point. Get rid of lobby money, foreign money, ban politicians from becoming lobbyist after their term is done and start legitimately holding pols accountable for graft and corruption (ie, jail time). There are no consequences for anyone at this point.

User avatar
Marty [Mori Chu]
Posts: 9822
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Impeachment

Post by Marty [Mori Chu] » Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:58 am

If you don't like the big money corrupting DC, you should hate Citizens United, a SC decision hailed by conservatives and Republicans that is largely to blame for the current financial corruption and essentially bribery affecting our elected officials.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 8703
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Indy » Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:08 pm

I think most of us in this area of the site do hate the CU decision. Are you saying that Republicans in general are why we have money corrupting our political process?

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 2203
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Nodack » Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:02 pm

I think money has corrupted both parties. I think generally speaking most Americans from either party are against lobbyists influencing Washington. I think politicians in Washington are generally for lobbyists for obvious reasons. Nothing will ever change unless millions of Americans from both party’s protest in Washington.

There are organizations that are working on this very thing.

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 2203
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Impeachment

Post by Nodack » Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:43 pm

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues ... ic-policy/
Special interest lobbying distorts democracy
Business and industry far outstrip any other source of lobbying at a ratio of 34 to 1.1 In 2015 and 2016, reported lobbying spending was more than $6 billion dollars,2 nearly the same amount as all reported spending on federal campaigns during that period.3 In contrast, Congress spends only $2 billion per year on professional staff—and therefore spends $4 billion during a two-year period.4 There are roughly 20 registered lobbyists for every member of Congress5—not counting the many more unregistered individuals working for those lobbyists or the growing number of shadow lobbyists evading the lax registration requirements and enforcement.

Members of Congress are yoked to special interest lobbyists in a variety of ways. During their campaigns, candidates receive substantial amounts of funding from lobbyists. Once in office, members are understaffed and sometimes depend on lobbyists to broaden their policy reach, though only for policies that lobbyists prefer. After retiring from office or losing an election, many lawmakers and staffers go on to work for those same special interests and lobbying firms—a political golden parachute.

Although public advocacy and petitioning public officials is an important part of a participatory democracy, massive, lopsided lobbying and campaign spending undermines the democratic process. It does so by aligning the congressional agenda with the special interest lobbyists’ agenda; by blocking legislation that lobbyists oppose in order to maintain a favorable status quo; and sometimes, by allowing lobbyists to advance the priorities of their wealthy and corporate clients at the expense of the public interest.
Solution: Reduce the power of special interest lobbyists over lawmakers

Ban lobbyist fundraising. Although lobbyists are subject to the same contribution limit as other individuals—$2,700 per candidate per election—many provide far more financial support to campaigns by holding fundraisers and bundling contributions from other individuals. Banning lobbyist fundraising would end one of the most direct ways that special interests attempt to buy favorable treatment—and such bans have been incorporated into several pieces of legislation.

Ban members of Congress from accepting contributions from interests in front of their committees. Members of Congress are getting huge fundraising hauls—up to half of all the money that they raise6—from industries and groups that are under the jurisdiction of their committees. Such contributions should be prohibited. New legislation implementing this ban could require the U.S. House Committee on Ethics and the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics to identify which potential contributors are committee-related and to include a safe harbor for contributors who certify that they are not in the identified groups, as well as other reasonable exemptions. Enacting such a ban would mitigate the corrupting conflicts of interest that arise when lawmakers are dependent for funding on the same wealthy special interests that they are supposed to oversee on behalf of the American people.

Close the revolving door. As recently described in The New York Times, “Underpaid young politicos and retiring lawmakers depend on Beltway lobby shops … for the high-six-figure salaries that will loft them into Washington’s petite aristocracy.”7 Public servants should focus on the public—not on special interest-funded career opportunities. Several bills have been filed that would extend the current ban on lawmakers accepting lobbying positions—from one year after they leave public service to five years. Some proposals would even ban members from lobbying permanently. Extending the ban on lobbying would give lawmakers one less reason to elevate special interest concerns over the concerns of their constituents.

Expand lobbying disclosure. Implementing effective policies to fight the corrupting influence of special interest lobbyists depends on an accurate and effective system of lobbyist registration. Unfortunately, the current definition is all too easily evaded and has resulted in many people engaged in lobbying activities deregistering or failing to register in the first place. Fortunately, bills have been introduced in both the House and Senate that would institute a commonsense definition of lobbying that applies to anyone who makes more than one lobbying contact on behalf of a client over a two-year period. In addition to enabling enforcement of the proposals above, expanding lobbying disclosure would also allow the public to better understand who is spending money to try to influence government—as well as how much money is being spent—so that representatives are held accountable.


This article explains Lobbying pros and cons- Three Fixes For Our Lobbyist Problem
https://prospect.org/article/three-fixe ... st-problem
Lobbyists are influential because, as the main providers of policy information and expertise to policymakers, they increasingly define the terms of political debate. Even if we funded all elections publicly and banned lobbyists from running campaigns, they would still play a major role in the legislative processes for a simple reason: They know a lot of stuff. Increasingly, it is even lobbyists who are drafting the laws. Lobbyists like to say that Washington couldn't function without them. They may be right....too long to paste here but keep reading.

https://theintercept.com/2018/11/20/med ... -industry/
LOBBYIST DOCUMENTS REVEAL HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY BATTLE PLAN AGAINST “MEDICARE FOR ALL”


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ca ... x-n1013776
Catholic Church spent $10 million on lobbyists in fight to stymie priest sex abuse suits

Post Reply