The case for impeachment
- Thread starter MaeZe
- Start date
It's an interesting defense strategy, confessing to the crime you're accused of, and then saying, "Yeah, I did it. So what? Get over it."
He’ll be asking for his Nobel for the Syria/Kurd 5-hour cease-fire any day now.
It's not even a strategy. It's confirmation the US Senate has already decided to either dismiss or vote against impeachment.
Corruption from the top is the new normal. Get over it.
-cb
Last edited:
It's an interesting defense strategy, confessing to the crime you're accused of, and then saying, "Yeah, I did it. So what? Get over it."
Mulvaney didn't even understand the problem when he said quid pro quo was business as usual. It might be when your goal is something that benefits the US or other Western nations. He appeared oblivious to the fact that forcing Zelensky to investigate the 2016 election interference conspiracy theory that Ukraine and the DNC conspired, not Russia, was just as bad as Trump wanting Zelensky to turn up dirt on Biden and his son.
So, it's coming out that Trump had/has an addiction to illegally obtained OTC UK allergy medicine, among other things....
https://crooksandliars.com/2019/10/we-need-talk-about-picture-donald-trump
He published the evidence himself.
https://crooksandliars.com/2019/10/we-need-talk-about-picture-donald-trump
He published the evidence himself.
Trump and his people must be desperate. According to this, he is backing down and they are looking for another location:
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/news...er-backlash/ar-AAJ2W0B?li=AAggNb9&OCID=FIRPLC
Of course, that's what his spokesman says today. Tomorrow it may well be back to Doral.
Let's parse this.
"I would be willing to do it at NO PROFIT"
So Trump still heads the Trumps organisation as well as running the US, despite him saying otherwise. Or is he? ( link ) I'm confused.
" or, if legally permissible,"
He never consulted a lawyer about this before tweeting (does he ever?). Not even Jared nor his daughter nor his sons.
"at ZERO COST to the USA."
Doral was in the doldrums and needed a boost in marketing ( link ), which POTUS gladly provided. So the US delegation would be paying nothing, but what about the foreign delegations? I bet they would be paying the Don's double or triple his dues.
"But, as usual, the Hostile Media & their Democrat Partners went CRAZY!"
Read: some people know how to read the constitution; the WH chose to ignore it.
-cb
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2013
- Messages
- 8,582
- Reaction score
- 8,522
- Location
- The Seattle suburbs
- Website
- www.reneedominick.com
Stephanie Ruhle had an explainer about this on the Chris Hayes show Friday evening.
Doral's a hot mess, inside and out. Right now they only have 2 VIP "villas." (One of which is the notorious Nicklaus villa that has had repeated and persistent bed bug issues.) Would the other world leaders be expected to stay in the main hotel? How do they secure their individual communications? How do they keep the leaders of the western world physically safe inside a hotel? So, naturally, there would have to be more villas built. Trump wouldn't "profit" per se, but the improvements to the property--5 new villas at a minimum, plus improvements to the other two--would be done at taxpayer expense.
Then there's the golf course. Because of the physical location of Doral, it's a security nightmare to get to. They'd have to build 2 helipads, and the only place to do so on-property would be on the golf course. After the meetings, of course, the helipads would have to be removed, and damage to the course would have to be repaired. Which means he gets a remodel of the course at taxpayer expense, too. To the tune of tens of millions.
And on the backside, you have what would amount to a massive upgrade to his facility at taxpayer expense.
Let no one say DT doesn't have the Art of Making Anyone But Him Pay His Way Through the World down pat.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,124
- Reaction score
- 10,886
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
I think Mulvaney looked out the window and noticed vultures circling overhead. Or maybe it's all the buses circling his office in anticipation of his being tossed under their ravenous wheels?
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/20/7717...ks-admits-it-wasnt-a-perfect-press-conference
Implausible deniability?
Or maybe he wants us to believe his admission that there was indeed quid pro quo was because it was "opposite day"?
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/20/7717...ks-admits-it-wasnt-a-perfect-press-conference
Implausible deniability?
Or maybe he wants us to believe his admission that there was indeed quid pro quo was because it was "opposite day"?
Last edited:
But it has to come out of a budget and the House is not about to budget a large sum to upgrade Trump's property that is supposed to be 'perfect'. I sure his minders told him there's no way a planned G7 meeting is an emergency.
Of course given Trump's history and his claim he was only trying to help and all those meanies in the press attacked him, could mean he's really planning to try to use Doral and this is part of the con.
Last edited:
Trump is all about marketing and appearances. Doral is no exception.
The announcement has put Doral on the map. If it's deemed good for the G7 (and it's the ONE best place in the entire US for this according to the WH), then that message has gone through. Never mind the bed bugs. Never mind the later retraction - because it was fueled by the CRAZY Dems and the press. Marketing job done.
It's like the Ukraine affair. It's based on a puff of smoke, but people see the government invested in knowing what happened during the VP Biden era and that seeds the doubt right there. Should the government investigate the Bidens? That's a lingering question that was created out of thin air and the GOP will feed on it all the way to 2020. The damage to Biden is done and it will take his campaign a lot of effort to reverse this. If it ever recovers from it.
Who cares about the truth? If it's a tiny bit complicated to piece it together for the Average Joe, then the lies and the conspiration theories win.
-cb
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2013
- Messages
- 8,582
- Reaction score
- 8,522
- Location
- The Seattle suburbs
- Website
- www.reneedominick.com
I agree 100% with the first line, but Doral is already "on the map" for the people who can afford to play there. Pretty much any dedicated weekend golfer knows about Doral's famed Blue Monster course (it's a PGA stop from long before Trump owned the property), and average Joe/Josie Trump Supporter isn't very likely to be going golfing at Doral. Greens fees are $500-695 for one round, plus they have to pay for a mandatory caddy ($25-125 with cart, $125 and up, if walking), and the "recommended" gratuity for the caddy. Basically, walk-in golfing at Doral's premier courses will run 1 person $800 minimum. If you stay at the resort, add the rooms and restaurants and snack bar and bottled water, which are all ridiculously overpriced. That's just not attainable for most people. And the ones who can afford it know better than to golf in Florida in the summer (which is when Trump needs the traffic).
I'm sure POTUS considers having the name "Trump Doral" on people's minds a marketing win, since that's all a narcissist really cares about, but I'm not convinced he isn't rabidly disappointed. "Name recognition" isn't going to result in cash in the door, and he knows it. The improvements he might have gotten, though...that would have been a big windfall. Enough to blunt the severe decline in the resort's operating expenses, and the annual slow months.
You're definitely right about this. Never has a flim-flam man had it so easy.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,124
- Reaction score
- 10,886
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
This is exactly it, I think. This was the best advertising Doral could ask for.
For whatever reason, Trump's people would prefer he not be running against Biden. They think they can more easily take on Warren (Biden's likeliest replacement candidate), probably by painting her as
Not to be too pessimistic. Trump's approval ratings are as low as they've ever been, and a slim majority of Americans now favor impeachment and removal from office, not just an investigation. His own chief of staff has publicly admitted to the behavior being investigated and looks positively idiotic in his attempts to walk it back.
Expect increasingly desperate, and vicious, distraction measures. Whether they work with anyone besides his most loyal base remains to be seen. Whether or not the Senate's inevitable refusal to vote for conviction and removal will result in an anti-GOP backlash by moderates (and possibly demoralization of some GOP voters) also remains to be seen. The election is still a year off, and a lot can happen in a year.
Last edited:
Forget golfing. Trump thinks like a mafia boss. He's pointing at Doral for those want to grease his paw (and optionally turn this place around). THAT's the marketing message.
-cb
What really worries me is that I haven't seen much, if any, indication that the Dems have learned anything from 2016 insofar as countering the TeaOP's (and Russian/bad actor) tactics that proved so effective in dividing and demoralizing and clouding the waters. And that was before so much of this insanity had become entrenched and normalized and even celebrated by three years of living it, before so much power had been grabbed and justice debased and organs of the government compromised by metastatic tumors. The Dems still seem like they're walking around with the white gloves to slap their enemies for the customary duel at dawn, when the TeaOPers have Glocks in their waistbands and are just drawing and shooting people in the backs in broad daylight.
To OP: I keep thinking - impeachment for what?! There was no obstruction nor was there any move to obstruct. President Trump talked about something related to obstruction, but since when was airing out your thoughts illegal and obstructionist? Paper tigers, my friend. Also, I'm not sure who is telling
you President Trump is verging on dictatorship, but he's a typical traditional liberal. You need to go to a real dictatorship or read some history books before making such claims.
What worries me is that some people would rather side with the idea that speech is illegal. If that's the case, the
whole lot of us writers have no hope
in the future.
you President Trump is verging on dictatorship, but he's a typical traditional liberal. You need to go to a real dictatorship or read some history books before making such claims.
What worries me is that some people would rather side with the idea that speech is illegal. If that's the case, the
whole lot of us writers have no hope
in the future.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2011
- Messages
- 11,751
- Reaction score
- 12,201
- Location
- Atherton Tablelands
- Website
- snailseyeview.medium.com
This is nonsense. Maybe read up on the basis of the impeachment inquiries. Start with the Emoluments Clause.
The mention of dictatorship is a combination of strawman and no true Scots dictator.
Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine, for one. And its bizarre push to hide it all, for two.
White House admits lawyers hid transcript of damning Trump call in top-secret server
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/po...0190927-ngc5j2khcvf75m73k4kcaha534-story.html
Here’s all the evidence of obstruction of justice in the Mueller report, in case you forgot
https://qz.com/1670783/all-the-evidence-of-obstruction-of-justice-in-muellers-report/
Mueller insists his report did not exonerate Trump on obstruction charges
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...earing-special-counsel-testifies-trump-russia
-cb
Last edited:
I think it’s long odds that the GOP-controlled Senate will vote to impeach, but I’m not really sure at this point why they wouldn’t. Tmurp is damaging the GOP brand. Pence is an odious creep, but he’d cheerfully sign every bit of regressive social policies the GOP puts in front of him, he might actually listen to expert advice on foreign affairs, and he probably wouldn’t be flogging his own business interests from the White House.
You’d think the GOP would’ve been willing to ditch Tmurp last year already in favor of Pence?
You’d think the GOP would’ve been willing to ditch Tmurp last year already in favor of Pence?
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2011
- Messages
- 16,926
- Reaction score
- 5,297
- Location
- Near the gargoyles
- Website
- www.alessandrakelley.com
According to legal scholars, the grounds for impeachment are as simple as presidential misconduct or abuse of the office of president.
(Republicans in Congress have no grounds to complain, given their excuse for impeaching President Clinton, when many of them piously said that no crime need have been committed, only the act of looking bad.
And of course the current investigation is turning up vastly more grave and alarming and probably criminal actions by Trump and his handlers.)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 14,708
- Reaction score
- 24,667
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Website
- elizabethbonesteel.com
I actually think this tremendously worrying. It suggests a fairly major shoe lurking somewhere in the background. They could have had all their "own the libs" BS without the policyless foreign policy and all the grift and nepotism.
Why didn't they remove him in favor of Pence? I find it hard to believe it's down to how much they don't want to admit they might have been wrong to choose him as their nominee.
You are echoing the GOP message. It is not the truth as you could easily check for yourself if you would read the actual Mueller Report.
Mueller clearly spelled out multiple crimes of obstruction of justice that Trump committed. He said it was up to Congress to impeach the POTUS and he was unable to indict Trump. Barr covered this up with flim-flam moves knowing few people would actually read the report.
Does it bother you that you are allowing the GOP to fake you out?
These are the 10 episodes Mueller investigated for obstruction of justice
Trump himself, in his own words, in a public interview with Lester Holt, said he fired Comey "because of this Rusher [Russia] thing."
Just curious, how do you square that in your mind?
And all of this was before it came out that Trump asked Zelensky for dirt on Biden in exchange for aid and approval of military purchases.
That is specifically against the law.
He also asked Xi for dirt on Biden in exchange for not implementing some of the tariffs on Chinese goods.
That is specifically against the law.
If there was legitimate Biden corruption the country needed to know about, it wouldn't be up to Trump to trade military aid for evidence. It would be up to the CIA and/or the FBI to investigate.
That is what Obama did, he left the investigation of Russia's interference in the 2016 election up to the FBI. Trump likes to pretend that is not what happened, but that is what the evidence clearly shows.
He also wanted Zelensky to make up evidence it was Ukraine and not Russia that interfered in the 2016 election and to specifically claim the DNC released their own emails conspiring with the Ukraine. This is one of Trump's conspiracy theories he uses to pretend, in his own mind, that Russia didn't help him win the election. His pathologic narcissism (well documented) causes him severe mental distress when he hears that he only won the election because Russia helped him. Just like he obsesses over his inauguration crowd size (well documented), he obsesses over the insinuation he was not legitimately elected.
Edited to add: cbenoi1 said this better than I just did.
Last edited:
I imagine the Articles of Impeachment will help you out there. They're coming.
I'll even quote a Republican on impeachment.
He's so liberal evangelicals and the GOP will defend anything he does. And the judges and war against brown people and....Good grief.
But maybe besides reading history books, we can also listen to those who have lived under dictatorships.
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brie...rs-urge-dc-holocaust-museum-to-stop-rejecting
https://time.com/4717077/holocaust-survivor-trump-immigration/
You should worry, since Trump is echoing Hitler and other dictators with his attacks on the press.