Impeaching Trump: Make America Sane Again

[SeattleUte]

McConnell and Graham, both of whom have specifically said they are not and will not be impartial and will do everything they can do to acquit Trump, are required to swear an oath that they will be impartial during the Senate trial. Will they recuse themselves? I don't think any senator is truly impartial, but why would they announce that they will violate their oath?

One other, and very unrelated, thought... It's kind of funny that Jim Comey, who obviously loathes Trump, may be more responsible than any other individual for both Trump's election (the "reopening the investigation" announcement shortly before Election Day), and for his acquittal and reelection (his sloppy handling of the Russia investigation, etc.). Although publicly calling Comey the "most corrupt" FBI official in history (typically moronic and hyperbolic Trump), Trump should be sending Comey a very nice Christmas basket.

This is not an original thought. I have said repeatedly that especially if you're not happy Trump is your president, you should loath Comey--whose overriding motivation seems only to be his ambition.

[SeattleUte]

Should all the Democratic Senators that have made public statements making clear that their mind is made up that Trump is guilty or corruption, abuse of power, and criminality be recused as well? Here's just a few examples ... I imagine there are plenty more:



With all due respect, I find the suggestion that Senators must be neutral and unbiased when considering the articles of impeachment to be laughable. No one believes that will ever happen, on either side. Impeachment is a political process, not a legal or criminal one. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I don't find it too troubling that the Senate majority leader acknowledges that.

Agree. Jeez, the biggest problem with too many Trump haters is their double standard.

[frank ryan]

Should all the Democratic Senators that have made public statements making clear that their mind is made up that Trump is guilty or corruption, abuse of power, and criminality be recused as well? Here's just a few examples ... I imagine there are plenty more:



With all due respect, I find the suggestion that Senators must be neutral and unbiased when considering the articles of impeachment to be laughable. No one believes that will ever happen, on either side. Impeachment is a political process, not a legal or criminal one. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I don't find it too troubling that the Senate majority leader acknowledges that.

Why don’t you? With your outrage about partisans? This grandstanding gets a pass?

[PaloAltoCougar]

Should all the Democratic Senators that have made public statements making clear that their mind is made up that Trump is guilty or corruption, abuse of power, and criminality be recused as well? Here's just a few examples ... I imagine there are plenty more:



With all due respect, I find the suggestion that Senators must be neutral and unbiased when considering the articles of impeachment to be laughable. No one believes that will ever happen, on either side. Impeachment is a political process, not a legal or criminal one. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I don't find it too troubling that the Senate majority leader acknowledges that.

Agree. Jeez, the biggest problem with too many Trump haters is their double standard.

I regret not adding the apparently obligatory tu quoque disclaimer; I guess my "no Senator is impartial" comment wasn't enough. I was just marveling that while most congresspersons try to slap on a gossamer-thin veneer of solemn impartiality, McConnell and Graham used the very words contained in the oath they will be required to declare when/if the trial begins, and said they wouldn't abide by them. I suppose you have to admire their candor. Why not eliminate the oath altogether?

[SeattleUte]

I regret not adding the apparently obligatory tu quoque disclaimer; I guess my "no Senator is impartial" comment wasn't enough. I was just marveling that while most congresspersons try to slap on a gossamer-thin veneer of solemn impartiality, McConnell and Graham used the very words contained in the oath they will be required to declare when/if the trial begins, and said they wouldn't abide by them. I suppose you have to admire their candor. Why not eliminate the oath altogether?

Among the ethically challenged, I always prefer brazen candor to hypocrisy.

[Eddie]

I know there are some folks here who really really hate Trump and can't imagine why ANYONE would vote for someone as horrible and corrupt as he is. All I can say is that your bias blinders don't allow you to see what some of us have tried to explain over and over and over again.

When you talk about Trump's corruption, they just see it as business as usual in Washington. No different than Biden's kid getting a great paying gig, the Clinton Foundation taking in piles of money for access to the Secretary of State, or so many other stories of career politicians and their family members becoming wealthy. So the cries of corruption really don't phase them.

What they have noticed, borrowing from Bill Clinton: "It's the economy, stupid!" The question that is often asked is simply - are you better off now than you were 3 years ago. And in spite of Elizabeth Warren telling them otherwise. I understand that a lot of that is confirmation bias. But the friends and family I have who voted for Trump (and who say they will vote for him again) all believe that whatever he is doing - it's resulting in a great economy. Several have told me that they were skeptical voting for him the first time around, but they've been pleasantly surprised at how well he's done and are more certain to vote for him in 2020.

But if all you see is Russia, Ukraine, being too friendly with North Korea, trade wars with China, exiting the climate accords, ending the Obamacare mandates, and locking up undocumented immigrants - then you are ignoring what they are seeing. You're allowing confirmation bias to drive everything you see. The reality is that Trump isn't all good or all bad in their eyes. The country is doing OK, even better than OK, in their minds - and they're hoping the economy just keeps humming along. If it does - be prepared for Trump to win re-election.

It isn't just the idiots voting for Trump. And thinking that it's just the deplorable people or the dumb people who will vote for Trump is a fallacy that will put him in office for another 4 years.

Saying that the Democrats share some of the blame may sound like a copout or deflecting blame to folks like Frank - but the reality is that if the Dems weren't ignoring half of America that was suffering through difficult economic times and seeing Dem policies as just expanding and continuing to inflict pain on them - then a guy like Trump could (and I think likely would) be beaten. But the needs of the middle class and lower middle class have been largely ignored and overlooked by the Dems. At least that's how they feel - they aren't poor enough to take advantage of the freebies, but they see themselves paying for them. And they feel like Trump has been a champion for them, in spite of his many character flaws.

But just keep telling yourselves that he's a horrible person that only horrible people would vote for. Truth is - I know a lot of pretty good people who have and will vote for him again.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Interesting, a major evangelical magazine (it was founded by Billy Graham) is calling for Trump to be removed from office.

[beefytee]

I know there are some folks here who really really hate Trump ....

I'm one of those guys who really really hates Trump, but I agree with most of what you wrote.

I do think that seeing Trump as "business as usual in Washington" is a pretty cynical view of things though, but I agree it is a common view.

[swampfrog]

I know there are some folks here who really really hate Trump and can't imagine why ANYONE would vote for someone as horrible and corrupt as he is. All I can say is that your bias blinders don't allow you to see what some of us have tried to explain over and over and over again.

When you talk about Trump's corruption, they just see it as business as usual in Washington. No different than Biden's kid getting a great paying gig, the Clinton Foundation taking in piles of money for access to the Secretary of State, or so many other stories of career politicians and their family members becoming wealthy. So the cries of corruption really don't phase them.

What they have noticed, borrowing from Bill Clinton: "It's the economy, stupid!" The question that is often asked is simply - are you better off now than you were 3 years ago. And in spite of Elizabeth Warren telling them otherwise. I understand that a lot of that is confirmation bias. But the friends and family I have who voted for Trump (and who say they will vote for him again) all believe that whatever he is doing - it's resulting in a great economy. Several have told me that they were skeptical voting for him the first time around, but they've been pleasantly surprised at how well he's done and are more certain to vote for him in 2020.

But if all you see is Russia, Ukraine, being too friendly with North Korea, trade wars with China, exiting the climate accords, ending the Obamacare mandates, and locking up undocumented immigrants - then you are ignoring what they are seeing. You're allowing confirmation bias to drive everything you see. The reality is that Trump isn't all good or all bad in their eyes. The country is doing OK, even better than OK, in their minds - and they're hoping the economy just keeps humming along. If it does - be prepared for Trump to win re-election.

It isn't just the idiots voting for Trump. And thinking that it's just the deplorable people or the dumb people who will vote for Trump is a fallacy that will put him in office for another 4 years.

Saying that the Democrats share some of the blame may sound like a copout or deflecting blame to folks like Frank - but the reality is that if the Dems weren't ignoring half of America that was suffering through difficult economic times and seeing Dem policies as just expanding and continuing to inflict pain on them - then a guy like Trump could (and I think likely would) be beaten. But the needs of the middle class and lower middle class have been largely ignored and overlooked by the Dems. At least that's how they feel - they aren't poor enough to take advantage of the freebies, but they see themselves paying for them. And they feel like Trump has been a champion for them, in spite of his many character flaws.

But just keep telling yourselves that he's a horrible person that only horrible people would vote for. Truth is - I know a lot of pretty good people who have and will vote for him again.

These authors agree with you. It's mostly an analysis of the recent UK elections, but touch on problems within the left generally.

The Left is in crisis. We no longer present a cohesive movement, and we no longer form coherent political parties. We are a fractured and ill-defined mess, our goals are diffuse and scattered, and we are hemorrhaging supporters from what should be our base—the working class, liberals, and racial and sexual minorities. It is not clear that left-wing parties and movements are currently listening to that base or have its best interests at heart.

Let’s start with what isn’t going to work. It simply will not do to blame these electoral results on the idea that the majority of the population is ignorant, hateful, or unaware of their own best interests. This is the attitude—made popular throughout the educated left by a growing commitment to elitism and critical theories—that got us into this mess in the first place. This attitude is particularly worrying because it leads leftist activists to double down on exactly those things that are killing the left.

If left-leaning parties around the world hope to have any future electoral success, they need to ditch both elitism and identity-based theory and develop some self-awareness. They need to start listening to the people they are supposed to represent so that they can understand what people actually want from a left-wing party. Only in this way can the left heal its fractures and form a strong and principled movement, with political parties that the general public can trust and respect.

The policies of left-wing parties need to come from the people—not represent revolutionary ideologies most do not share or appreciate having imposed upon them for their own good. The public will not stand for this—nor should they. It is absolutely right to reject the social engineering projects of theorists, activists, and the privileged elite who, like self-appointed philosopher kings, want to order society according to their ideological vision of how things should be rather than how they are or realistically could be.

People who reject the ideologues’ vision are not all racist, sexist, and xenophobic bigots or radical capitalist absolutists. Liberals and working people, who form an overlapping majority, generally have strong opinions on what will make their lives better and society fairer, and they are increasingly deciding that right-wing parties are closer to providing this. Barely electable as those might be, that’s still miles better than being totally unelectable. This is a point our left-wing parties seem utterly unable to grasp—as our elections keep demonstrating. This calls for humility and introspection from the left, rather than doubling down and denigrating the masses for their wrongthink.

In the US, the Democratic Party is flailing, as it attempts to satisfy both its economic and identitarian wings, in the run-up to the 2020 elections. While the majority of the left and center—and a significant part of the right—hope that a reasonable, electable presidential candidate will emerge from within the Democratic Party, they’re forced to stare wild-eyed as the vast majority of the current and past hopefuls catalogue their pronouns in their Twitter bios and declare that “the future is female” and “the future is intersectional.”

[imanihonjin]

McConnell and Graham, both of whom have specifically said they are not and will not be impartial and will do everything they can do to acquit Trump, are required to swear an oath that they will be impartial during the Senate trial. Will they recuse themselves? I don't think any senator is truly impartial, but why would they announce that they will violate their oath?

One other, and very unrelated, thought... It's kind of funny that Jim Comey, who obviously loathes Trump, may be more responsible than any other individual for both Trump's election (the "reopening the investigation" announcement shortly before Election Day), and for his acquittal and reelection (his sloppy handling of the Russia investigation, etc.). Although publicly calling Comey the "most corrupt" FBI official in history (typically moronic and hyperbolic Trump), Trump should be sending Comey a very nice Christmas basket.

I assume you also feel that those Senators who are running for president will also recuse themselves, right?

[PaloAltoCougar]

I assume you also feel that those Senators who are running for president will also recuse themselves, right?

I don't think anyone is going to recuse themselves. In any political proceeding, an oath of impartiality is almost certainly a tissue of lies.

[imanihonjin]

I don't think anyone is going to recuse themselves. In any political proceeding, an oath of impartiality is almost certainly a tissue of lies.

I am confused by your initial post then. It seemed you were suggesting that McConnell and Graham should recuse themselves. If you were genuinely asking the question as to whether they are going to recuse themselves and not whether they should, it seems like you already knew the answer to begin with.

Edit: Perhaps it was my inadvertent use of the word "will" rather than "should" that has caused the confusion.

[Mr Bean]

Interesting, a major evangelical magazine (it was founded by Billy Graham) is calling for Trump to be removed from office.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...chment/600376/

This one rational guy notwithstanding, 82% of white evangelicals stated they want Trump on the ballot. Nearly half of them said that he could not do anything to lose their support; which is clearly true, because i'm not sure the guy could do much more to merit loss of support except shooting someone on 5th avenue and they would still love him. If that person was a registered democrat, the vast majority of these southerners would shout yippee.

There isn't a group in America that is doing a better job of manifesting its hypocrisy of holding their religion in one hand, and Trump's junk in the other. You're welcome for the mental image. And I won't discriminate, about 50% of Mormons are showing their own hypocrisy my parents included.

And by the way, dissing on my parents and evangelicals is hacking at the branches of the problem instead of the root. The common thread among all these people is religious consumption of fox news.

I watched a fox anchor interview Giuliani and he admitted he intervened in the ouster of Yovanovich (which is a huge problem in and of itself that the fox anchor just breezed right past). Rudy said he did it because she was corrupt and this anchor nodded her head like "yep, that's true". There isn't a media outlet that more consistently calls something white for things that are demonstrably black. The vast majority of what is on that channel is blatant horse-shit propaganda.

[beefytee]

I am confused by your initial post then. It seemed you were suggesting that McConnell and Graham should recuse themselves. If you were genuinely asking the question as to whether they are going to recuse themselves and not whether they should, it seems like you already knew the answer to begin with.

Edit: Perhaps it was my inadvertent use of the word "will" rather than "should" that has caused the confusion.

This didn't clear things up for you?

I regret not adding the apparently obligatory tu quoque disclaimer; I guess my "no Senator is impartial" comment wasn't enough. I was just marveling that while most congresspersons try to slap on a gossamer-thin veneer of solemn impartiality, McConnell and Graham used the very words contained in the oath they will be required to declare when/if the trial begins, and said they wouldn't abide by them. I suppose you have to admire their candor. Why not eliminate the oath altogether?

[PaloAltoCougar]

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...chment/600376/

This one rational guy notwithstanding, 82% of white evangelicals stated they want Trump on the ballot. Nearly half of them said that he could not do anything to lose their support; which is clearly true, because i'm not sure the guy could do much more to merit loss of support except shooting someone on 5th avenue and they would still love him. If that person was a registered democrat, the vast majority of these southerners would shout yippee.

There isn't a group in America that is doing a better job of manifesting its hypocrisy of holding their religion in one hand, and Trump's junk in the other. You're welcome for the mental image. And I won't discriminate, about 50% of Mormons are showing their own hypocrisy my parents included.

And by the way, dissing on my parents and evangelicals is hacking at the branches of the problem instead of the root. The common thread among all these people is religious consumption of fox news.

I watched a fox anchor interview Giuliani and he admitted he intervened in the ouster of Yovanovich (which is a huge problem in and of itself that the fox anchor just breezed right past). Rudy said he did it because she was corrupt and this anchor nodded her head like "yep, that's true". There isn't a media outlet that more consistently calls something white for things that are demonstrably black. The vast majority of what is on that channel is blatant horse-shit propaganda.

Agreed, but given the tight races in battleground states, even a little leakage among evangelicals could be a major hit to Trump's reelection chances. BTW, Trump's tweeted response to the editorial was predictable but still very funny:

A far left magazine, or very “progressive,” as some would call it, which has been doing poorly and hasn’t been involved with the Billy Graham family for many years, Christianity Today, knows nothing about reading a perfect transcript of a routine phone call and would rather..... a Radical Left nonbeliever, who wants to take your religion & your guns, than Donald Trump as your President. No President has done more for the Evangelical community, and it’s not even close. You’ll not get anything from those Dems on stage. I won’t be reading ET again!

I enjoy the obligatory rip on his target's ratings or dismal business prospects (e.g., "the failing New York Times" which continues to amass record profits), the "perfect transcript", calling any evangelical publication "far left", etc. And I'm sure the editor is crushed to learn Trump won't ever read his publication again--as if Trump ever reads it. Or anything else.