Trump Admin Meltdown Thread Part III - A Democratic House

[brian]

And I know Mr. D especially doesn't want to hear this, but the Democrats are going to gain a lot in the end by waiting for more impeachable conduct to come out. If they had impeached him in June and then this came out were they going to impeach him again? This gets all of the GOP congresscritters on the record for all time and will have Trump shaking with rage over the next month or so. This is a big, big fucking win even if Pelosi fell assbackwards into it.

[L-Jam3]

Nice post, Brian.

[brian]

I gave her too much credit earlier in the summer, but even a shitty QB can win a few games if things break right. Was dumb luck for Trump to basically admit to doing crimes and making this the easiest political decision most of these simpering weaklings will ever have.

[Ryan]

If they had impeached him in June and then this came out were they going to impeach him again?

Assuming you meant June of 2017 and then left out the other June and all the other months other than June - Yes?

[mister d]

AND ... that same logic dictates we should hold today because its an absolute certainty that by February 2020 he will have committed yet another clearly impeachable offense to add to the pile.

[brian]

AND ... that same logic dictates we should hold today because its an absolute certainty that by February 2020 he will have committed yet another clearly impeachable offense to add to the pile.

The best time to do this was always this fall 12 months before the election. Trump just made it from a Stephon Curry free throw into a James Harden slam dunk. That's pretty much the only difference.

[L-Jam3]

To follow your NBA analogy, who is the Dem who is going to pick up the foul on Harden?

[brian]

To follow your NBA analogy, who is the Dem who is going to pick up the foul on Harden?

It will be interesting to see if any centrist Dems elect to not impeach. I don't doubt they'll have the votes but Pelosi might allow some of them in toss-up districts to vote no. That said, I still think they'll get the entire caucus to vote for impeachment. I think if they do this, they should be united. It sends the wrong message if some of them do the politically expedient thing as opposed to the Constitutional thing.

[DSafetyGuy]

[Ryan]

(Could James Harden even make 90% of his dunk attempts?)

[mister d]

Me when my four year old cleans up her magnets after her 7th final warning.

[brian]

If they had impeached him in June and then this came out were they going to impeach him again?

Assuming you meant June of 2017 and then left out the other June and all the other months other than June - Yes?

Literally the soonest the House could have impeached was about February 2019 (short of Republicans actually caring about Trump's crimes).

Realistically the soonest they could have impeached was immediately after the release of the Mueller Report in April 2019. Waiting a few extra months did suck a little but getting there late is better than not getting there at all.

(Now the interesting battle is going to be how many and what specific articles of impeachment are voted on. Could just be the Ukraine thing or could emcompass the full range of crimes he's committed (obstruction, etc.)

[Pruitt]

As a non-lawyer...

Wouldn't it be best to keep the focus narrow?

[Giff]

Can Moscow Mitch just ignore it like he does bills that are passed? I feel like there should be a response required of some sort.

[L-Jam3]

Since the Senate isn't going to convict, they might as well have multiple charges, just laid out in a clear, concise manner. The whole point here is to apply pressure so he either quits or loses in 2020, along with the GOP going down with him. If the charges are clear and concise, and the coward GOP Senators still vote to acquit, that's on them.

[Johnnie]

[brian]

Pelosi just officially announced the impeachment inquiry. I'm looking forward to these dumb fucks in the GOP having to put their reputations on the line for all of history in supporting this asshole.

This is like Christmas and Opening Day rolled into one.

ETA: This. These fucking morons are not playing 3D chess, they're not even playing checkers. They're just shitting in their hands and wiping it on the board and calling it a game.

[Johnnie]

So you mean the way to stop being bullied is to stand up for yourself against the bully because the bully is actually a paper tiger? Weird how that works.

[mister d]

Mr. Cynical would like to predict the unanimous senate request is nothing more than laying the groundwork for "this doesn't say what the Dems want you to think it does (and also what it clearly does) and we're obviously operating in good faith as evidenced by us calling for the transcripts". Refusing to call looks bad, refusing to acknowledge the contents is the gray they live off.

[Rex]

Yep, he’s beating this rap.

[BSF21]

Yep, he’s beating this rap.

BRB, pouring life savings into Sharpie stock.

[brian]

If he does or somehow orchestrated this whole thing to his benefit then I might finally have to begrudgingly admit he’s a political genius. Still, he’s already basically admitted to seeking the help of a foreign government to investigate a political rival. I’m not sure what could possibly be in the complaint/transcripts to change that story.

[sancarlos]

I’m guessing that the strategy will be to say that Biden and his kid were doing illegal acts in the Ukraine. He’ll admit asking the Ukraine to investigate them, but say it was because of his concern for the rule of law. He’ll try to shift the focus on to the alleged illegal acts of the Bidens.

[mister d]

Ah, but the Dems and fourth estate won’t allow for them to use minor parsing of phrases and obfuscation to avoid consequences!

[A_B]

It almost seems like the whistleblower thing had to be orchestrated at this point. Cynicism expects no bounds.

[mister d]

(This is totally going to be like the “actually, the deflator meant ...” nonsense.)

[Johnnie]

Did everyone just go "This is going nowhere and it's a trap, we're fucked" all of a sudden?

[mister d]

Define “all of a sudden”?

[Johnnie]

We've been clamoring for impeachment, get it, and then flip. So, all of a sudden, it seems like we got what we wanted and then decided it isn't good enough.

[mister d]

Oh, it’s what I wanted and finally the right thing, I just don’t think there should be any optimism at all about how the republicans respond.

[mister d]

(And when impeachment fails, I promise not to second guess the decision to act.)

[brian]

(And when impeachment fails, I promise not to second guess the decision to act.)

As long as he's convicted in the House, yes. There is no realistic scenario where the Senate convicts and he's removed from office.

[Ryan]

Eventual numerical “proof” that it cost electoral votes or senate seats is really my only failure metric. Not really expecting much progress on the remove-from-office front. For now it’s just the thought that counts, unfortunately.

[sancarlos]

[mister d]

Eventual numerical “proof” that it cost electoral votes or senate seats is really my only failure metric. Not really expecting much progress on the remove-from-office front. For now it’s just the thought that counts, unfortunately.

Right. I reserve the right to bitch about the process and messaging.

[mister d]

Mr. Cynical would like to predict the unanimous senate request is nothing more than laying the groundwork for "this doesn't say what the Dems want you to think it does (and also what it clearly does) and we're obviously operating in good faith as evidenced by us calling for the transcripts". Refusing to call looks bad, refusing to acknowledge the contents is the gray they live off.

Halfway home on this one, it would seem.

[Johnnie]

I mean, from what I can tell this looks damning.

[Joe K]

Mr. Cynical would like to predict the unanimous senate request is nothing more than laying the groundwork for "this doesn't say what the Dems want you to think it does (and also what it clearly does) and we're obviously operating in good faith as evidenced by us calling for the transcripts". Refusing to call looks bad, refusing to acknowledge the contents is the gray they live off.

Halfway home on this one, it would seem.

I’m guessing the GOP line on the transcript will be that everything is fine because Trump did not explicitly condition future aid on an investigation of the Bidens.

Also, in reading Zelensky’s comments on the call it’s pretty striking how easily foreign leaders have figured Trump out. All you need to do is mimic his language and drop some praise of Trump Tower, and Trump will think you’re the world’s greatest leader.

[brian]

Yeah, this is damning in and of itself and certainly impeachable. I'm certain the whistleblower report is much worse.

But I can't imagine anyone is surprised the GOP in the Senate are going to make a mockery on the process, but I still think that's more likely to blow up in their face than the other way around.

I get the standard arguments about the GOP base and hurr durr, but there's going to be a very clear distinction between how the Democrats will do this -- having hearings, gathering evidence, respecting impeachment as a serious legal preceding, arguably the most serious legal proceeding that can be undertaken in the United States of America with how the GOP is going to obfuscate and possibly not even have an actual trial in the Senate like a banana republic would.

There's plenty of stupid Americans, but there's plenty who understand the difference between the two approaches as well. It would be wise in my opinion for the Senate to treat the matter seriously and then have their stupid vote to acquit. Making a mockery of the proceeding is likely to blow up in their face more than bringing impeachment in the first place.

[mister d]

This we agree on.