The Impeachment Of Donald Trump

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
What Will Happen to The Trump Toadies?
Look to Nixon’s defenders, and the Vichy collaborators, for clues.


Irony, declared dead after 9/11, is alive and kicking in Trump’s America. It’s the concepts of truth and shame that are on life support. The definition of “facts” has been so thoroughly vandalized that Americans can no longer agree on what one is, and our president has barreled through so many crimes and misdemeanors with so few consequences that it’s impossible to gainsay his claim that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it. Donald Trump proves daily that there is no longer any penalty for doing wrong as long as you deny everything, never say you’re sorry, and have co-conspirators stashed in powerful places to put the fix in.

No wonder so many fear that Trump will escape his current predicament scot-free, with a foregone acquittal at his impeachment trial in the GOP-controlled Senate and a pull-from-behind victory in November, buoyed by a booming economy, fractious Democrats, and a stacked Electoral College. The enablers and apologists who have facilitated his triumph over the rule of law happily agree. John Kennedy, the Louisiana senator who parrots Vladimir Putin’s talking points in his supine defense of Trump, acts as if there will never be a reckoning. While he has no relation to the president whose name he incongruously bears, his every craven statement bespeaks a confidence that history will count him among the knights of the buffet table in the gilded Mar-a-Lago renovation of Camelot. He is far from alone.

If we can extricate ourselves even briefly from our fatalistic fog, however, we might give some credence to a wider view. For all the damage inflicted since Inauguration Day 2017, America is still standing, a majority of Americans disapprove of Trump, and the laws of gravity, if not those of the nation, remain in full force. Moral gravity may well reassert its pull, too, with time. Rather than being the end of American history as we know it, the Trump presidency may prove merely a notorious chapter in that history. Heedless lapdogs like Kennedy, Devin Nunes, and Lindsey Graham are acting now as if there is no tomorrow, but tomorrow will come eventually, whatever happens in the near future, and Judgment Day could arrive sooner than they think. That judgment will be rendered by an ever-more demographically diverse America unlikely to be magnanimous toward cynical politicians who prioritized pandering to Trump’s dwindling all-white base over the common good.

All cults come to an end, often abruptly, and Trump’s Republican Party is nothing if not a cult. While cult leaders are generally incapable of remorse — whether they be totalitarian rulers, sexual Svengalis, or the self-declared messiahs of crackpot religions — their followers almost always pay a human and reputational price once the leader is toppled. We don’t know how and when Donald Trump will exit, but under any scenario it won’t be later than January 20, 2025. Even were he to be gone tomorrow, the legacy of his most powerful and servile collaborators is already indelibly bound to his.

Whether these enablers joined his administration in earnest, or aided and abetted it from elite perches in politics, Congress, the media, or the private sector, they will be remembered for cheering on a leader whose record in government (thus far) includes splitting up immigrant families and incarcerating their children in cages; encouraging a spike in racist, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic vigilantes; leveraging American power to promote ethnic cleansing abroad and punish political opponents at home; actively inciting climate change and environmental wreckage; and surrendering America’s national security to an international rogue’s gallery of despots.

That selective short list doesn’t take into account any new White House felonies still to come, any future repercussions here and abroad of Trump’s actions to date, or any previous foul deeds that have so far eluded public exposure. For all the technological quickening of the media pulse in this century, Trump’s collaborators will one day be viewed through the long lens of history like Nixon’s collaborators before them and the various fools, opportunists, and cowards who tried to appease Hitler in America, England, and France before that. Once Trump has vacated the Oval Office, and possibly for decades thereafter, his government, like any other deposed strongman’s, will be subjected to a forensic colonoscopy to root out buried crimes, whether against humanity or the rule of law or both. With time, everything will come out — it always does. With time, the ultimate fates of those brutalized immigrant and refugee families will emerge in full. And Trump’s collaborators, our Vichy Republicans, will own all of it — whether they were active participants in the wrongdoing like Jared Kushner, Stephen Miller, Kirstjen Nielsen, Mike Pompeo, and William Barr, or the so-called adults in the room who stood idly by rather than sound public alarms for the good of the Republic (e.g., Gary Cohn, John Kelly, Rex Tillerson), or those elite allies beyond the White House gates who pretended not to notice administration criminality and moral atrocities in exchange for favors like tax cuts and judicial appointments (from Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan to Franklin Graham and Jerry Falwell Jr.).

Such Trump collaborators are kidding themselves if they think that post-Trump image-laundering through “good works” or sheer historical amnesia will cleanse their names of the Trump taint as easily as his residential complexes in Manhattan have shed their Trump signage. A century of history — and not just American history — says otherwise.
more...
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
White House Officials "Shushed" Lawmakers Who Asked Questions During Iran Briefing
Sen. Mike Lee, a Republican, expressed his extreme discomfort with the way President Trump's team treated Congresspeople in a briefing about the administration's Iran strategy.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Here's one that will get the youth vote out! Jesus, they'd be rioting in the streets like the sixties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vermont bill would ban cellphone use for anyone under 21

A Vermont lawmaker has introduced a new bill that would ban the use of cellphones by anyone under the age of 21.

State Sen. John Rodgers’ proposal would punish anyone under the age threshold found with a cellphone with up to one year in prison, a $1,000 fine or both, news station WPTZ reported.

Rodgers argued that young people are too immature to use cellphones, citing the role the devices play in fatal car crashes.

“In light of the dangerous and life-threatening consequences of cellphone use by young people, it is clear that persons under 21 years of age are not developmentally mature enough to safely possess them, just as the General Assembly has concluded that persons under 21 years of age are not mature enough to possess firearms, smoke cigarettes or consume alcohol,” the bill says, according to the outlet.

The bill also argues that cellphones are a driving force in bullying and can fuel radicalization.

“The Internet and social media, accessed primarily through cell phones, are used to radicalize and recruit terrorists, fascists, and other extremists. Cell phones have often been used by mass shooters of younger ages for research on previous shootings,” the bill reads.

But even Rodgers said he may not vote for the legislation, adding that he just wanted to make a point.

“I have no delusions that it’s going to pass. I wouldn’t probably vote for it myself,” he told the Times Argus.
 

PJ Diaz

Well-Known Member
Here's one that will get the youth vote out! Jesus, they'd be rioting in the streets like the sixties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vermont bill would ban cellphone use for anyone under 21

A Vermont lawmaker has introduced a new bill that would ban the use of cellphones by anyone under the age of 21.

State Sen. John Rodgers’ proposal would punish anyone under the age threshold found with a cellphone with up to one year in prison, a $1,000 fine or both, news station WPTZ reported.

Rodgers argued that young people are too immature to use cellphones, citing the role the devices play in fatal car crashes.

“In light of the dangerous and life-threatening consequences of cellphone use by young people, it is clear that persons under 21 years of age are not developmentally mature enough to safely possess them, just as the General Assembly has concluded that persons under 21 years of age are not mature enough to possess firearms, smoke cigarettes or consume alcohol,” the bill says, according to the outlet.

The bill also argues that cellphones are a driving force in bullying and can fuel radicalization.

“The Internet and social media, accessed primarily through cell phones, are used to radicalize and recruit terrorists, fascists, and other extremists. Cell phones have often been used by mass shooters of younger ages for research on previous shootings,” the bill reads.

But even Rodgers said he may not vote for the legislation, adding that he just wanted to make a point.

“I have no delusions that it’s going to pass. I wouldn’t probably vote for it myself,” he told the Times Argus.
"Too immature to use cellphones" but not too immature to go to war in Iraq. Yeah, that makes sense.
 

Budzbuddha

Well-Known Member
Trump reportedly told associates he killed Qassem Soleimani because he was under pressure from GOP senators before his impeachment trial...

Associated Press/Alex Brandon

  • President Donald Trump told associates that he assassinated Iran's top military leader last week in part to appease Republican senators who will play a crucial role in his Senate impeachment trial, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
  • In a lengthy piece detailing how the president's top advisers coalesced behind the strike on Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, The Journal reported that Trump had told associates he felt pressure from the senators.
  • One of Trump's most outspoken supporters, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, appears to be the only congressional lawmaker Trump briefed about his plan to assassinate Soleimani in the days leading up to the strike.
  • Graham has criticized the president's foreign-policy choices in the past — most notably Trump's withdrawal of troops from northern Syria and his handling of Saudi Arabia.
  • Publicly, Trump has said he approved the strike on Soleimani because the general was plotting to bomb the US Embassy in Iraq. The administration has not provided evidence to support this claim. ( Anybody surprised ? )
President Donald Trump told associates that he assassinated Iran's top military leader last week in part to appease Republican senators who'll play a crucial role in his Senate impeachment trial, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

In a lengthy piece detailing how the president's top advisers coalesced behind the strike on Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, The Journal reported that Trump had told associates he felt pressured to satisfy senators who were pushing for stronger US action against Soleimani and who will run defense for him on impeachment.

One of Trump's most outspoken supporters, GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, appears to be the only congressional lawmaker Trump briefed about his plan to assassinate Soleimani in the days leading up to the strike.

"I was briefed about the potential operation when I was down in Florida," Graham told Fox News. "I appreciate being brought into the orbit."

The South Carolina Republican, an Iran hawk, celebrated the controversial strike, which the administration did not seek congressional authorization to carry out. After Iran retaliated by hitting US-occupied Iraqi bases on Tuesday, Graham called the move "an act of war."

Graham has criticized the president's foreign-policy choices in the past — most notably Trump's withdrawal of troops from northern Syria and his handling of Saudi Arabia following the country's murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a US resident.

Trump said on Thursday that he approved the strike on Soleimani because the general was plotting to bomb the US Embassy in Iraq.

But the administration hasn't released any evidence to support the claim that Iran was planning such an attack on the embassy, or any other imminent attack.

During an interview with Fox News on Thursday night, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the Trump administration didn't know "precisely when" or "precisely where" an attack would have targeted.

Democratic lawmakers — and a few Republicans — were infuriated by a classified briefing they received from the Trump administration on Wednesday concerning the US strike that killed Soleimani and a top Iraqi militant leader.

The lawmakers said they weren't provided any evidence of an imminent and specific threat posed by Soleimani — evidence of which is required to legally launch an attack without congressional authorization.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee called the briefing, which Pompeo helped lead, "probably the worst briefing, at least on a military issue, I've seen in nine years I've been here."

History will show Trump as the most scandal ridden , deceptive , criminally connected piece of shit President , America ever elected.
All those Dystopian video games you played .... has become reality.
Canada , Mars , Inter-dimensional rift are all looking pretty fuckin good ...
 

Budzbuddha

Well-Known Member
And Part 2 from PUPPETFUCK PENCE ....


Mike Pence Claims Intelligence Behind Soleimani Hit Too Sensitive For Congress..... ( It’s TOO SENSITIVE TO SHARE ) :wall:



The information supporting the Trump administration’s rationale for assassinating Iran’s top commander is simply too sensitive to share with Congress, Vice President Mike Pence flatly insisted in an NBC interview Thursday.

Gen. Qassem Soleimani had to be killed last week because he was orchestrating an “imminent” attack on Americans, the Trump administration has claimed.

But Pence said the information backing up that claim can’t be shared. “Some of the most compelling evidence that Qassem Soleimani was preparing an imminent attack against American forces and American personnel also represents some of the most sensitive intelligence that we have,” Pence said on the “Today” show. “It could compromise those sources and methods.”

( insert laughter .... )


Pence was responding to a scathing attack by Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee on the Trump administration’s briefing to lawmakers about the attack. Lee called the briefing so devoid of substance that it was “insulting and demeaning.” It was “probably the worst briefing, at least on a military issue, I’ve seen in my nine years” in the Senate, Lee said.

Classified information — including highly sensitive information — is often shared with members of Congress, noted Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.). It could have been presented to fewer senators on the appropriate committees, or with more identifying source information eliminated, she said on CNN.

They refused to do even that,” Duckworth noted. “They could not address” the issue of the imminence of an Iranian attack on a U.S. target, she said, adding, “They showed nothing to us that we couldn’t see in the media.

Duckworth said the attitude was: “You’re just going to have to go along with what we say. That’s not how our system of checks and balances
works.”

The Trump administration was supposed to demonstrate to Congress that such an attack was legal. Without such intelligence, Congress can only take President Donald Trump at his word. The Washington Post has documented that Trump has made false or misleading claims more than 15,000 times since the start of his term.

Pence insisted that those who were made aware of the intelligence “in real time” know that Trump “made the right decision.”

As for Trump, he appeared mystified by Lee’s criticism. “I get along great with Mike Lee. I’ve never seen him like that,” Trump told reporters at the White House Thursday.

Trump claimed “numerous senators and numerous congressmen and women” said the briefing for lawmakers on the attack was “the greatest presentation they’ve ever had.” That appears to contradict Pence, who revealed that the key intelligence he said supported the attack was not provided.

Vote Asteroid 2020 .... * grabs popcorn
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Another Vindication For Clinton As Probe Reportedly Hits Dead End | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC

Rachel Maddow relays reporting from the Washington Post and CNN that a federal investigation into Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, Uranium One, and other pet right-wing narratives has found nothing worthy of criminal investigation, and reviews the other such investigations and suggestive media reports that have previously failed to incriminate Clinton. Aired on 01/10/20.
 

dandyrandy

Well-Known Member
And Part 2 from PUPPETFUCK PENCE ....


Mike Pence Claims Intelligence Behind Soleimani Hit Too Sensitive For Congress..... ( It’s TOO SENSITIVE TO SHARE ) :wall:



The information supporting the Trump administration’s rationale for assassinating Iran’s top commander is simply too sensitive to share with Congress, Vice President Mike Pence flatly insisted in an NBC interview Thursday.

Gen. Qassem Soleimani had to be killed last week because he was orchestrating an “imminent” attack on Americans, the Trump administration has claimed.

But Pence said the information backing up that claim can’t be shared. “Some of the most compelling evidence that Qassem Soleimani was preparing an imminent attack against American forces and American personnel also represents some of the most sensitive intelligence that we have,” Pence said on the “Today” show. “It could compromise those sources and methods.”

( insert laughter .... )


Pence was responding to a scathing attack by Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee on the Trump administration’s briefing to lawmakers about the attack. Lee called the briefing so devoid of substance that it was “insulting and demeaning.” It was “probably the worst briefing, at least on a military issue, I’ve seen in my nine years” in the Senate, Lee said.

Classified information — including highly sensitive information — is often shared with members of Congress, noted Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.). It could have been presented to fewer senators on the appropriate committees, or with more identifying source information eliminated, she said on CNN.

They refused to do even that,” Duckworth noted. “They could not address” the issue of the imminence of an Iranian attack on a U.S. target, she said, adding, “They showed nothing to us that we couldn’t see in the media.

Duckworth said the attitude was: “You’re just going to have to go along with what we say. That’s not how our system of checks and balances works.”

The Trump administration was supposed to demonstrate to Congress that such an attack was legal. Without such intelligence, Congress can only take President Donald Trump at his word. The Washington Post has documented that Trump has made false or misleading claims more than 15,000 times since the start of his term.

Pence insisted that those who were made aware of the intelligence “in real time” know that Trump “made the right decision.”

As for Trump, he appeared mystified by Lee’s criticism. “I get along great with Mike Lee. I’ve never seen him like that,” Trump told reporters at the White House Thursday.

Trump claimed “numerous senators and numerous congressmen and women” said the briefing for lawmakers on the attack was “the greatest presentation they’ve ever had.” That appears to contradict Pence, who revealed that the key intelligence he said supported the attack was not provided.

Vote Asteroid 2020 .... * grabs popcorn
Trump and klan are liars.
 
Top