SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50246324
"The US House of Representatives has passed a resolution to formally proceed with the impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.
The measure details how the inquiry will move into a more public phase. It was not a vote on whether the president should be removed from office.
This was the first test of support in the Democratic-controlled House for the impeachment process.
The White House condemned the vote, which passed along party lines.
Only two Democrats - representing districts that Mr Trump won handily in 2016 - voted against the resolution, along with all Republicans, for a total count of 232 in favour and 196 against."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Trump Impeachment: House Votes to Formalise Inquiry
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 319 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
-- Lord Acton
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bradley13 on Friday November 01 2019, @03:26PM (56 children)
"So, they couldn't even get a super majority in the House, which they rule. How in hell do they expect to get that super majority in the Senate?"
They don't. It's all a political circus. As near as I can tell, watching from afar, the Democrats hope to discredit Trump and demoralize his base. What they don't seem to realize is that they are only pissing his base off. They don't have any impeachable offenses, not even close. If they start public investigating of all the sordid details from the Ukraine, for example, they will definitely find dirty laundry. The problem is: it's likely to stem from Obama's presidency.
Of course, they may turn up something new on Trump - I'm sure they'll use this as a giant fishing expedition, in hopes of finding something, anything that they can use. They had best pray that they do find something, because they can no longer stop the train. They've made so much noise that, once they start this inquiry, it will go through.
The Democrats are gambling big-time. If they screw this up, which seems likely, they will destroy their election chances in 2020, for every office from President all the way down to Dog Catcher.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday November 01 2019, @03:42PM (31 children)
I doubt it. It's all about mobilizing the base. If Trump voters are complacent or apathetic, angry Democrats could overwhelm them. Trump even helps by keeping Democrats outraged with every other tweet.
The bigness of IMPEACHMENT doesn't matter. We already knew that it's extremely unlikely for the Senate to remove Trump from office. So it's just one political stunt of many that will occur over the next long year.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/01/trumps-approval-rating-among-republicans-falls-wapo-abc-news-poll/4120897002/ [usatoday.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @04:22PM (28 children)
What the hell?! Has America (and/or sock puppets) fallen so far as to not care about morals? Everything has to be political games?
There is a lot of at least superficial evidence of:
1) collusion with foreign powers for elections (e.g. Muller report)
2) taking foreign money while in office (exactly which countries were on the no-fly zone, and which were not? Proposal of G7 summit at the Trump resorts. Refusal to release tax records. Refusal to turn over assets to a blind trust. What was with that China fashion deal)
3) obstruction of justice (e.g. firing a civil servant 1 week before they were eligible for retirement benefits)
4) abuse of power (e.g. holding foreign aid to Ukraine hostage in order to get dirt on the Bidens)
5) breaking of the constitution/basic human morals (e.g. separating families at the borders, not accepting asylum petitions, misappropriation of funds to build the border wall)
I'll accept that any, or indeed all, of those allegations could be spurious slander, within the rights of a president, coincidences, and "not his choice." But is it so inconceivable that some people actually want at least in inquiry into it, just to be sure?
It's sad, but I actually think it's true, that Trump could shoot somebody on main street and his supporters would still support him. Tribal politics is what it is, but I think everybody who says "he's our guy, so he must be okay, give me a fig-leaf excuse so I don't have to think anymore, USA! USA! USA! USA!" is a major problem.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Friday November 01 2019, @04:44PM
As you have stated your position above, there is nothing wrong with your reasoning. Clear, lucid, rational, I like it. Where the problem comes in, is in the cast of characters playing in this drama charade. Few of those actors are any more reputable than Trump himself. Start with that old hag, Pelosi, who only voted for a national increase in minimum wage, if she were guaranteed that her husband's employees in American Samoa were exempted from any such increase.
Given a world in which most of our elected officials were clean, I think that I could agree with you. But, in our real world? Those who aren't dirty are trying very hard to get dirty, and this impeachment attempt is just so much smoke and mirrors, to keep us distracted.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday November 01 2019, @04:46PM (2 children)
This should have been something you figured out about two decades ago, not in 2019. The rise of cable news might be to blame. Although it has gone into turbo mode since Trump did stuff like mock McCain and a disabled reporter without apologizing or quitting the race, as was expected at the time.
1. The ends justify the means.
2. It's all a numbers game. Like measuring the mood on Wall Street.
3. Some last minute October surprise can flip the race in favor of Democrats or Republicans.
4. The two-party system exacerbates the game mentality.
4b. Trump has set back third party candidates for a long time. Would-be third party candidates will follow his example and try to "take over the tent" instead.
5. There is a pendulum effect. One party enjoys 1-2 Presidential terms, and maybe 2 years control of Congress, and then the pendulum swings back.
Look at the numbers I linked. 49% support impeachment and removal, 47% oppose. Those are very similar to this generation's highly polarized Presidential election results.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04 2019, @07:51PM (1 child)
President Trump never mocked a disabled reporter. He was mocking the person in the story who was caught in a web of their own lies. He told that story a dozen times before and CNN knew that. They lied about it anyway. Fake news.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04 2019, @08:57PM
Yes. Mocking.
Very Presidential behavior. Right up there with picking sixth grade names for people and having to have a pejorative adjective for every one of your opponents that plays to your base of bullies and frightented supporters. Yup.
That's the President to me! (aka Why should I give a shit WHO he was mocking with that gesture. Reality is he thought it would be funny and powerful to show that's what his opponents look like. Disgusting in any human being and reprehensible in the President of the United States of America. As in literally beneath contempt.)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @05:56PM (23 children)
The issue with an "inquiry" is that it's not really an inquiry. An inquiry would imply some people are swayable in their views. Even if the Ukrainian President himself said he felt in no way pressured, people would nonetheless try to claim Trump was engaging in a threatening "quid quo pro." And in fact the Ukrainian president has said exactly [time.com] that. When even the alleged victim is claiming there is no crime and all you have left is partisans, well - it looks like something being driven more by partisan motives than any genuine concern. Similar for things like the Mueller report. I'm not sure how that supports your case in any way. Remember, it was supposed to be a rock solid proof of criminality? In reality after two years of nonstop investigation at the cost of millions of taxpayer dollars absolutely 0 wrongdoing, at least to the standards of US law, was discovered. Nobody really cared, they just looked for another wild goose chase to go down which is where Ukraine enters the story.
I voted for Obama in 2008. I did not vote in 2012 or 2016. I've always considered myself extremely liberal, but the recent issues such as this have made me decide to likely vote for the orange man in 2020. The reason is in part because I simply cannot in any way, shape, or form relate to what the democratic party has turned into - but also because, in my opinion, they have been attempting to destroy Trump from day 0. Trump may not be a great president, or person, but a democracy requires that we make some effort to work together. And indeed Trump's first speech after winning the presidency did indicate some desire for reconciliation. I've no idea if it was sincere or not and indeed we may never know. The first calls for "resistance" were thrown almost immediately. All shortly following Trump's election:
---
Tim Kaine, Hillary's VP choice:
Loretta Lynch, Obama's Attorney General:
---
Fight in the streets? Do "what needs to be done" which may include dying? Coming from politicians at the highest level of our political systems? All because you don't like the guy that got elected? That's just so messed up. I fear that the democratic party I used to know is gradually transitioning to something much more awful, and dangerous. The fortunate thing is also think the DNC is dying and will probably die if they do not win in 2020. And hopefully from their ashes we can actually get a liberal party of the sort that can represent the people once again, and not the sort pushing for the formation of the brownshirts when they lose an election.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @07:48PM (14 children)
Frankly, I think that even just asking the Ukranian President for a "favor" is, at best, problematic.
For the umpteenth time, the Mueller report did not exonerate Trump; Mueller made it clear that if his investigation could have done that he would have clearly stated so. The conclusion was that, as per DoJ policy, he could not indict a sitting President. Mueller clearly laid out the facts along with an exhortation for Congress and the People to do their jobs. Instead, partisans in the Republican party and on Fox "News" decided that there was "nothing to see here" because chicken-shit Republicans in the Senate were not willing to go against a President in the own party.
Another bit of revisionist history. Ukraine "enters the story" because a whistle blower complaint came to light, despite yeomans efforts within the DoJ to keep it concealed.
Huh? You seem to have a rather idiosyncratic view of the content of those quotes. My interpretation was that they would use every legal means at their disposal to oppose the President's policies. But I'm sure you knew that already. And what is so god awful wrong with getting better people elected to public office, challenge egregiously bad policies in the courts, publicly protesting, etc? You know, like the way free peoples have a right to challenge their elected officials? Or do you not really believe in democracy after all? Not to put too fine a point on this but neither Sen Kaine nor Attorney General Lynch have attempted to lead an army of goons to stage a putsch in DC. In contrast, our President has been somewhat more ambiguous about following the rule of law. [axios.com]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 02 2019, @03:39AM (13 children)
I suggest, put arguing with GP on hold. Take another serious look around at various events over the past three years. People being denied service at restaurants and such because of their political views and affiliations? That shit can turn very deadly, without warning. To date, the R's have been the victims, and the R's have handled the situation(s) rather gracefully. It would only take ONE instance for bodies to start hitting the ground, and we'll have what amounts to a civil war spreading across the nation.
Would you be outraged, and incensed, if it were gays being denied service? Blacks? Asians?
The talking heads mean exactly what they say, when they call for "resistance" and "fighting in the streets". They are instigating all the worst, intentionally.
I gave GP an additional "insightful" mod, because he is insightful.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 02 2019, @05:42PM (1 child)
"Be nice to us or we'll murder you!!"
Mmmhhmmmm, nice freedom values you're promoting.
Runaway is the true fascist as we long suspected. And lawl at handled gracefully, wtf bizarro world you living in Mr. Thinskin?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 02 2019, @07:05PM
Well, if you're too stupid to understand what is written, there is no point in arguing with you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 03 2019, @04:41AM (10 children)
"Be nice to me and my brown shirt buddies, or things could quickly turn ugly"? Wow. This is low, even by your standards.
Actually, that has already happened, more than once. (No, I'm not going to google it for you. You can still operate your keyboard with your thumbs, even while you jerk off here on SN.)
Again, this has already happened. Yes, it even continues to this day. (Again, you can do your own damn google search just as much as anybody else.)
Haven't heard of it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is going on. Considering all of that, the screams howls of outrage from the alt-right come across as rather hollow, frankly.
I always post as AC, so I have no mod points to give out. But if I did, I would be more than happy to downmod you as a gibbering idiot.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 03 2019, @05:01AM (9 children)
To summaraize your lengthy post:
You don't give a damn about justice, you want vengeance for things that have happened over the past ten years, hundred years, even thousand years.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 03 2019, @07:02AM (8 children)
Oh, dear me! People don't approve of my political views! Help! I'm being oppressed!</sarcasm>
You are shitty at reading comprehension. First, we are not just talking about injustices that happened "tens, hundreds, or even thousands" of years ago. We are talking about discrimination that gays, blacks, etc. are facing even to this very day! When you start caring about that, I might start giving a damn about MAGA hat wearers facing the disapproval of their neighbors. And just to make this crystal clear for you, MAGA hat wearers can easily take off their hats to conceal their identity; blacks and asians can't quite so easily change their skin color. It looks to me like what you really object to is that your alt-right buddies are being called out on their odious views and the policies they support.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 03 2019, @07:31AM (7 children)
My advice? Get the Dems out of their identity politics mode, and things will improve almost immediately. I'm perfectly happy to "reach down" and help another man up, out of abject poverty. I'm not willing to join him in poverty. I'm happy to "give a guy a break" if he needs it, and wants it. I'm not willing to join him in misery.
All of this identity politics bullshit is designed to take something from the white hetero male - Christian or not - and none of it is designed to actually improve people's lives.
A famous black guy said it - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3cGfrExozQ [youtube.com]
Seriously, just stop talking about it all the time. I can (and have) walked out on a job site, met a bunch of strangers, and worked with them all day long. They are identified as Superintendant, Foreman, Carpenter 1 through whatever, Carpenter's Helpers 1 through whatever, Equipment Operator 1 through whatever, Laborers 1 through whatever. Hard hats help - you meet these guys in their work "uniforms". Meeting any or all of them in street clothes, you often times fail to recognize them. As time passes, you learn their names, you realize that the Super is Mexican, the Foreman is Cajun, etc etc. We don't talk about race. We talk about THE JOB. If the word "black" is used, it is descriptive, as in, "One of the carpenters sent me to get his level from the tool trailer, the short black guy." The guy in the tool trailer responds with, "You mean Anthony?" "Yeah, Anthony needs his 8 foot level."
Help a fellow man up, stop trying to pull other men down. It is the Social Justice Warriors and their ilk who are holding people down. You intentionally IDENTIFY every one who is "different", and try to punish white people for that difference.
Gay violence? Maybe you should consider changing your search terms, and you'll find articles like this one - https://americansfortruth.com/issues/homosexual-hate/victims-of-homosexual-murderers/ [americansfortruth.com] Gays aren't always the innocent victims, after all. Sometimes, they are the monsters. You won't find any demographic that has no monsters in it's midst. Gay monsters are rare, you say? Statistically speaking, gays are relatively rare, so, yes, gay monsters are going to be rare. But gays aren't special - statistically, they harbor as many lowlife scum as hetero white males.
Get over it, and stop defining people based on their color, gender, orientation, or whatever.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 03 2019, @05:27PM (1 child)
Idiot, projection is a bad tactic when you are being called out for supporting bigotry.
You're just another delicate snowflake melting under the light of truth.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday November 03 2019, @06:35PM
Let me show you some projection - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrBxZGWCdgs [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04 2019, @12:53AM (2 children)
As a white hetero Christian male, I object to you trying to co-opt me as the poster boy for your misbegotten cause. YOU ARE FAR LESS OPPRESSED THAN YOU SUPPOSE, DIMWIT!!!
And what the hell is this non sequitur doing here?!? Who is punishing white males for the sole reason of being "different"? We were talking about various minority groups facing discrimination. It is the action of some alt-right types which is getting most of the loud disapproval. And, it pains me to admit this, but a lot of this BS is coming from white hetero "Christian" males. Just stop looking for new and inventive ways of being mean to minorities. And at the very least, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT USE ME AS THE (supposedly oppressed) POSTER BOY FOR YOUR CRUSADE!!!! I object to being shoe-horned into that role.
For the record, I have no interest in "defining people based on their color, gender, orientation, or whatever". Rather, I am calling out deplorable policies and political tactics that seem to have discrimination against and silencing of various minority groups as their main intent. When that stops I will likely quickly "get over it".
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday November 04 2019, @05:29AM (1 child)
You object to being shoehorned into a role? Alright then, stop all your liberal friends from shoehorning me into some kind of role. I'm not the oppressor.
Uh-huh. And, not once on SN have I ever voiced an opinion against such tactics? I've never once suggested that Prison for Profit is evil? I've never suggested that Stop and Frisk in NYC is evil? I've never once mentioned Driving While Black? And, remember, I've often pointed out that most of this oppression takes place in liberal cities and states.
I really don't care what you object to. It is YOUR PARTY, and YOUR AGENDA that oppresses most minorities, and especially blacks. Liberals simply freak out when they think of a black man legally owning a weapon. Their first reaction to a black man and a gun, is to shoot. THOSE COPS WHO ACTUALLY DO THE SHOOTING ARE ENFORCING LIBERAL LAW! Conservatives, rednecks, hillbillies, threepers, oathkeepers, preppers, and a whole lot more insist that ALL AMERICANS have the right to keep and bear arms. But, your do-gooders in Washington, D.C. want to take all of our guns. Every presidential hopeful on your side has made outrageous statements about taking away our guns. They have already succeeded in taking the black man's guns, and now they want to take ours so they can oppress all the rest of us.
I've got things I'd like to do with a shoehorn, since you've mentioned it. All of them painful to liberals and progessives.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04 2019, @05:18PM
Don't make so many assumptions. I am not what you think I am. You seem to think I am a liberal progressive. I'm not. I currently have no political party affiliation. In fact, about ten years ago I was registered Republican while living in Arizona. I'm also a Christian (somewhat) conservative. I used to attach the evangelical label to that but these days I am shying away from it because some loud mouths have co-opted that label to turn it into new and inventive ways to take away rights from various other non-hetero, non-white, non-Christian folks. And your brandishing of a shoe horn doesn't scare me; if anything, it just convinces me even more that wild-eyed gun-nutters like you really do need to be disarmed for the safety of everyone (including you). Next time, try to be less of a shitty person.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04 2019, @11:13PM (1 child)
Your sin number 1: You think you are REACHING DOWN to PICK THEM UP. Not your job or your judgment call, dude. Best thing you can do is make them equal to you. And it ain't done by looking down on minorities.
Your sin number 2: You think that because you have a Cajun or Black friend this qualifies you to know what your Black friend actually has experienced in life. And just because you don't care - and you probably don't and you're not trying to be a bad guy, still doesn't mean that you might not be understanding the racist attitudes you exude because you don't know differently. Nor does it mean that they're seeing you as Mr. Nice White Man, or maybe they are. Point is you don't know what you think you do.
Your sin number 3: Yes, gay people are people. They are a minority to begin with. So aberrant behavior occurs. (so long as you do not regard being homosexual as an aberance, a delusion very many people still hold to today and it has only been since 1974 that being gay has not been directly codable as deviant psychologic behavior).
Stop fucking thinking you know jack shit about any of these things because you have read a fucking polemic web site, OK?
Oh, and rape is about violence and getting sexual release through violence. Whether heterosexual or homosexually done... actually same drives go on there as far as anyone can tell. So it ain't about the sex, even. It's about violence. And fuck off for thinking anyone else thinks different.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday November 05 2019, @12:23AM
If your sin number 1 is really a sin, I'll be happy to answer for it, rather than the liberal sin of thinking "dem niggas is stupid!"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @07:56PM (2 children)
For now, the partisan whistleblower at the center of this is refusing to testify. Another nothingburger.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday November 01 2019, @09:00PM (1 child)
For now, every single thing we know the whistleblower would have testified to has been released into the public, so there is no need for the whistleblower's testimony any longer.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 04 2019, @01:03AM
And the coup de gras is that it now appears that the whistle blower is willing to answer written questions from Republicans. [cnn.com] I just love watching mendacious politicians getting hoisted on their own petard; it fills me with glee. Any bets on what Republicans' next move will be?
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday November 01 2019, @08:59PM (2 children)
When the alleged victim is still completely dependent upon the good will of the alleged perpetrator one might well disregard a voiced denial and instead look at the evidence that a 'favor' was asked for in the context of requesting a purchase of military armament and withheld aid funds. Or, another way: If I ask you to shoot someone should the prosecutor not care that you come out and say you'd have done the killing anyway?
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 02 2019, @05:09AM (1 child)
So in other words we should simply disregard what all involved parties say and just jump to your own conclusion based on unspoken words? Don't you see this is literally how things like the Witch Trials happened.
- "No sir, I am not a witch and did not cast a spell on this person."
- "No sir, I don't feel like she is a witch nor has there been any sort of a spell cast on me."
- "Thank you, this court has taken your testimony into consideration. We've now decided. The witch must be casting a spell on the poor soul to make him lie. BURN THE WITCH!!"
It's quite terrifying that people are so quick to throw all logic and evidentiary standards to the wind when it suits their needs. It emphasizes that much of our modern civility has not been because of any sort of institution or system of laws, but through things that were much more organic. That's good and bad. Good since it emphasizes the inherent goodness we have, but bad because it should those organic factors start to fade - so might our civility.
As always the one thing I'd add here is that I think a lot of this modern stupidity is just being driven by the internet. Take your average lefty, take your average righty, and they'd get along perfectly fine. It's only when the media, on both sides, is claiming that the opposition is the embodiment of Lucifer himself that we lose our minds and start acting like monkeys.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 03 2019, @04:30AM
And it's quite terrifying (to me) that you suck so much at elementary logic. No, I'm not going to bother to deconstruct your "witch trial" analogy for you. Do your own God damn homework, chuckles!
Indeed. My take: you should have studied harder in school, rather than spend so much time on the internet. Also, it would probably do wonders for your perspective to get out into the real world once in a while. Just sayin'.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 03 2019, @02:08AM
I'm coming to a similar conclusion (also a liberal) with respect to Trump. For me, it has been the way the media has hounded him. To back up a bit, I caucused for Bernie Sanders all the way to the State convention in 2016. Being a Bernie supporter made me very aware of how the media was 100% on Hillary's side -- like that day the Washington Post ran 16 negative Bernie stories in 16 hours. I voted in 2016, but I voted 3d party because nothing could make me vote for a murdering $epithet like HRC.
Since the election, I've seen the media do nothing but negative press on Trump. Just wall-to-wall negativity. I also watched how Obama got treated in the press despite extending and embracing GWB policy -- Obama was an epic disappointment from a liberal policy perspective and yet the press lionizes him.
So yeah -- I see it as fake news. It fucking is. It's propaganda. And the Democrats -- what a bunch war loving wall street fellating turds. Given the amount of disgust I feel for BOTH the DNC and the MSM, the only logical choice is to vote in a way that kicks them both in nads. And that means voting for Trump. And let's be honest here -- unlike Obama, Trump has not gotten us into any new wars. It would be good if he got us out of some (and don't give me that shit about Obama and Iraq -- he left on GWB's timetable after Iraq refused to extend SOFA -- he tried to extend the war, failed, and declared himself a peacnik), but not getting into more wars is something at least, and something I wouldn't trust the Democrats to avoid.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday November 03 2019, @11:22PM
It's not uncommon for potential witnesses, including a victim to be reluctant to say anything bad about the defendant when they fear retaliation.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by rcamera on Friday November 01 2019, @04:58PM (1 child)
once the (R)s in the senate state on the record that dangling federal dollars in front of foreign leaders in return for dirt on political opponents is fair-play, then the (D)s get to start playing that same game. they're just testing the (R)s to make sure they're on-board before playing with the new rules
/* no comment */
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @07:55PM
Indeed. That is the real hazard in a nutshell. Whatever precedent is set today is certainly going to be used in the future. It is amazing to me how much Republicans are blind to the long game, all for such a ridiculous short term gain. Are they really willing to die on that hill for this yutz of a President?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday November 01 2019, @03:47PM (3 children)
I look at the timeline of events in Ukraine. I can't argue the stem was in Obama's presidency. But, I wonder how much of the root system was planted during the Bush administration. The shit didn't really hit the fan until 2010, but all the players were in place long before that. And, the Kock brothers were hovering right there, ready to swoop in like a pair of vultures to pick the carcass.
(Score: 2, Informative) by fustakrakich on Friday November 01 2019, @05:17PM (1 child)
Europe and Russia have been interested in Ukraine for a thousand years or more. This is a very old war
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday November 01 2019, @05:23PM
So, that root has tapped deeply into Ukraine? Sounds so vulgar, doesn't it? ;^)
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 02 2019, @05:45AM
Like others have mentioned this probably goes back much further. Ukraine has always has a troubled relationship with Russia dating back (in modern times) to at least the 1930s. Even during WW2 some in Ukraine initially aimed to side with Hitler seeing their invasion as a liberation from communist control. That history alongside extensive nationalists efforts throughout history is where the slur of Ukrainians as fascists (as said by Russians) derives from. As an interesting aside there is even a nuance here in the Russian language itself. Most of all countries you use the preposition "in" - in America, in Russia, in Bulgaria, etc. But Ukraine, the term of which can translate to something like the borderlands in Russian, uses the preposition "on" - on the grass, on the tree, on the borderlands.
Suffice to say, ethnic Ukrainians are not fond of this distinction and it's still somewhat of a language 'jab' even if not necessarily intended as such. This is also the reason that, I doubt most are aware, but why many use phrasing such as "He's from the Uraine." as opposed to "He's from Ukraine." At some point the meaning of the word leaked through the languages in a rather subtle way. I decided to learn Russian following our recent efforts at creating a new Red Scare to try to see what the other side was saying. Not exactly fluent yet (to say the least), but it's a beautiful language. And it's also quite interesting how different the standard of online discourse is in a different language. It emphasizes that there's either something really wrong with us or, and much more likely in my opinion, how polluted our discourse is by government and corporate actors alongside their useful idiots, to quite ironically, use a term likely coined by Lenin in his efforts to manipulate the soviet population.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @03:56PM
I don't think that's the goal. The DNC has learned the lesson of Trump 2016 and Kavanaugh. Their 'September surprise' was 'grab her by the pussy.' That sort of stuff was not designed to get more Hillary voters, but to discourage Trump voters. And it had what seems to have had, literally, 0 effect. Kavanaugh had a similar result.
So I think the goal of the impeachment is to try to bring in DNC voters. The way they will do this is drag on the circus just long enough such that the acquittal in the senate will happen just before the election. They can then spin the senate acquitting Trump as emphasizing the need to come vote and reshape the senate and congress.
And I do think it's probably their best bet. Certainly better than what's becoming the increasingly trite sex allegations or 'he secretly said something nasty in private'. At the same though it's a big gamble. I personally think that the impeachment charges are horseshit. Calling that phone call quid quo pro is stretching things to say the least, and even if it were - that's not a crime. If enough people ending up seeing the charges are politically motivated, the entire strategy stands to backfire hard since I think everybody is fed up with rampant partisanship and the idea of actively voting for it is going to deter voters that might have otherwise voted.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by canopic jug on Friday November 01 2019, @04:03PM (6 children)
There's a long list of incidents of treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors the whole time he has been in office. It's just that some in the public seem to have become inured to criminality. Take the forged weather map, which is a federal crime [cornell.edu]. The press, being part of the problem, just laughed it off as did social control media. He really could just shoot someone, anyone, in the middle of the street and you all would just shrug it off, maybe even with a chuckle.
There used to be a system of checks and balances between the different branches of the US government. We'll soon see if any of that system is left, but it's looking like the Republicans are instead going to treat this as a partisan issue rather than a constitutional obligation [bloomberg.com]. He's one of theirs, they need to help rope him in.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday November 01 2019, @04:47PM (5 children)
The chuckle? Maybe. If he shot Pelosi, maybe.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @05:20PM (1 child)
FBI? CIA? NSA?
We've got a domestic terrorist hoping for the assassination of a congresswoman. Yall'qaeda picking up steam!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 02 2019, @05:16AM
According to IRC, Ol' Runaway had to take some mandatory days off, for no discernable reason. You know what that means! Guys in the shiny black SUVs with the Nice Suits, and wires paid a visit to his bosses. Runaway may not be long for SoylentNews!
(Score: 2) by canopic jug on Friday November 01 2019, @05:32PM (1 child)
She has been protecting him for months for no apparent reason. However, it would not be out of character for him to turn on an ally, old or new.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 02 2019, @03:22AM
That is nonsense. She's been holding back her fellow crazies, because she is lucid enough to realize this impeachment simply cannot go anywhere. Protecting Trump? Pelosi would eat his heart, if she had to climb up his ass to get at it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @07:13PM
She'd cut his balls off if he tried.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by edIII on Friday November 01 2019, @06:39PM (5 children)
Wow, you Trumpers are so full of shit, that we could use said shit to power the planet for the next 1000 years. Trump could be butt-fucking your wife while slitting the throats of your children, and you would STILL be excusing his behavior. "The wife was naggy, and the children were insolent, and just look at his remarkable accomplishments!"
1) It doesn't stem from Obama's presidency. Not even likely. It's 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000% Trump. They've flat out admitted to the substance of the impeachment claim. It's not even in question that he did it.
2) Obama's presidency, and your clear allusions to Biden, are a separate issue.
3) It was 10000000000000000000000000000000000000% an impeachable offense.
What was done again? Lemme see:
1) Held up Congressionally pre-approved military aid to a country that is in contention with Russia.
2) DEMANDED that the highest authority in that country investigate his political rival in order to receive said aid.
3) Hid the evidence the very moment people started questioning what happened.
That is not the actions of the innocent, but actions of a President in clear violation of his oath of office. Did Orange Anus have other options? You bet he fucking did. He had to be a mafia boss tough guy handling the "massive corruption" of the deep state all by himself. That was highly inappropriate. He could've called for a press conference, stated the corruption, and then demanded CONGRESS investigate it. He could've publicly come out with the facts as he knew it. Even if he was wrong, it would've been a whole different story to do it out in the open in the press, and most importantly, it would not be Orange Anus doing anything. There was an appropriate governing body that handles these sorts of things, and Orange Anus could've followed PROCEDURE. You Republicans love procedure over substance right?
None of that happened because Biden was already cleared, and it wasn't about corruption, but manipulating elections. If Trump can't be impeached for this clearly impeachable behavior, then the America we know is absolutely dead. Democracy has died.
I'm of the position that the corrupt fucker could be impeached for the Emoluments Clause alone. It's amazing that you delusional partisan trolls are okay with massive payoffs in the hundreds of millions going to his family. Republicans lost their shit in the 70s and demanded President Carter sell a small fucking peanut farm to satisfy the Emoluments Clause, but a Republican President can have foreign delegations spending millions to rent out rooms and property that clearly provide profit.
You guys have zero respect left from me. I used to be able to at least respect some Republicans and their viewpoints, but after this, the Republican party deserves to die and be replaced again.
Don't mind me. Keep your head stuck firmly up your ass because you can't stand the thought of no longer "winning".
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @07:24PM (2 children)
You should spend some time investigating Biden and his son
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @08:19PM
Two wrongs do not make a right. Or to put it another way, "But all the other kids were doing it too" is not a valid defense when children misbehave, so why in the world would it be a valid defense for anybody older?
I hear it from my kids, and it fails to fly.
I hear it from developers too lazy to follow good coding practices or basic security / due diligence.
I hear it from politicians.
I'm tired of hearing it. I don't care if Johnny did it too - I expect Johnny's parents to punish him, just like I have to punish you. You screwed up, you need to accept the consequences.
Sadly, I'm not allowed to put developers or politicians into Time Out and take away their toys until they learn to play nicely.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Friday November 01 2019, @09:44PM
Why? This was already investigated by both the United States and the Ukraine. Biden and his son were cleared. I don't need to do shit.
Now, do you know who *should* be doing something about it? CONGRESS!!! They investigated Hillary how many fucking times again?
No, the appropriate action was:
1) A press conference. The President of the United States stands up and lays out his claims and states that he is presenting his facts to CONGRESS.
2) CONGRESS can listen to the President of the United States, speaking to them directly in the Capitol. Not in secret to a few and hiding/manipulating the evidence on hidden servers, but to ALL the legally elected Congressmen and Senators, and the PUBLIC.
3) After reviewing the FACTS, CONGRESS can then engage their machinery and determine if an inquiry is warranted. Not in a clearly partisan matter, but in a bipartisan matter.
4) If the evidence proves illicit activity then the Department of Justice can get involved.
So no, I don't have to do a fucking thing. There is mother fucking procedure for this, and elected representatives to carry out said procedure. Not a delusional dotard in office pretending to be fucking Batman fighting the deep state, and whatever other conspiracies he believes, in secret.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday November 01 2019, @09:04PM (1 child)
Holding back like that can cause stress, man. Tell us how you really feel!
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Friday November 01 2019, @10:43PM
That you can only make cheeky comments and can't make constructive comments about the arguments? That you need to avoid the truth in plain sight like it was the plague? Talk about anything *but* what Trump actually did?
Just like Republicans :)
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Friday November 01 2019, @06:42PM
Really, it's forcing the GOP to declare it's position on the idea that Trump could commit murder in public with impunity. Essentially, if the President is now the king (not the watered down limited monarchy of today's UK, the old school off with their heads monarchy). Then the voters will have to decide what they think of that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01 2019, @06:45PM
Whatcha talkin' 'bout, Bradley? His base has been pissed off since they were the Teabaggers! (Not knowing what the term actually means!) I mean, Trump can hold rallies, but really no one and nothing can make his base any more angry than they already are. Fortunately, recent studies hold promise of treatment for Alzheimers, and a hair test, so there is hope for them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 02 2019, @07:09AM (2 children)
I didn't vote for Trump last time around but the 24/7 360 degree negativity is excessive and disgusting. If Democrats vote to impeach, I will vote for Trump -- it would be my very first vote for a Republican president since I started voting (My first vote was for Bill Clinton during his first campaign). Impeachment shouldn't be used as a partisan tool and if Democrats can't figure that out, they need another lesson at the polls (losing by running warhawk HRC was lesson #1, being tops on divisive hyper-partisan corruption, that deserves a lesson #2).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 02 2019, @11:51PM (1 child)
Bullshit
The most corrupt president with a staggering record of lying is the one you'll finally vote for because everyone is angry at his corrupt lying bullshit?
You are a liar, no wonder you would feel simpatico with Trump.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 03 2019, @02:22AM
Winning hearts and minds. Anyway, not lying. The DNC hasn't learned the 2016 lesson yet, so it needs another spanking. Last time I was content to vote 3d party, which is essentially like not voting in that it doesn't effect the vote spread in any fashion. Comments like yours harden my resolve to effect that spread by voting for the DNC/MSM's main opponent and give Trump make that a 2 point spread: -1 for DNC/MSM, +1 for Trump.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday November 03 2019, @11:15PM
I'm pretty sure that even if Trump tweeted "I have committed many High Crimes and Misdemeanors hugely and I liked it" along with a video of his HC&M highlights his base would claim there were no impeachable offenses.