The Gloves Should Always Be Off

After Obama was elected, it was determined that the previous administration, whose crimes were at the time consider unprecedented, should not be investigated and prosecuted. And I agreed with it- Obama wanted a fresh start and didn’t want to poison the well. Then the Republicans shit in the well, poured lsd and and jet fuel in it. And now we are faced with an even more lawless administration.

The Republicans, seeing that they never get punished for their misdeeds, went full ahead on their crazy crime spree, and now are appointing one of their own to prosecute the lawkeepers:

Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Tex.), President Trump’s pick to serve as the next director of national intelligence, has made his name in Congress as one of the GOP’s most dogged critics of perceived anti-Trump bias at the FBI and in the special counsel’s investigation of his alleged Russia ties.

Ratcliffe, who was first elected to the House in 2014, sits on the powerful House Judiciary and Intelligence committees, both of which are investigating President Trump for suspected financial crimes, foreign collusion and obstruction of justice. It is from that perch that Ratcliffe last week steered one of the more memorable Republican exchanges with former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III during public hearings, accusing him of violating “every principle in the most sacred of traditions” of prosecutors by writing “180 pages about decisions that weren’t reached, about potential crimes that weren’t charged or decided.”

The next time a Democrat is in power, full speed ahead and some motherfuckers need to go to jail. You can start with soft targets like Wilbur Ross if the decrepit fucker is still wheezing. Not only take the gloves off, but throw them away or these ruthless motherfuckers in the Republican mob will just keep on keeping on.

And, of course, ITMFA.






179 replies
  1. 1
    SFAW says:

    John:
    IATMFA

    All of them, starting with the Traitor-in-Chief’s consigliere

  2. 2
    Yutsano says:

    Tsk tsk tsk John.

    You sound uncivil.

    Partisan.

    Dare I say it: SHRILL!

    Why, the media would be 200% in the tank about Democratic overreach and how dare such partisan shenanigans be allowed to commence!

  3. 3
    rikyrah says:

    👏👏👏👏👏
    Absolutely on point, Cole.

  4. 4
    eemom says:

    The next time a Democrat is in power

    In power WHERE? It appears you are referring exclusively to the presidency. So what happens if we win the WH in 2020 and lose both houses of Congress?

    Meanwhile, of course, Democrats control half of Congress. But [insert Pelosi master plan].

    What a joke this place has become.

  5. 5
    Mary G says:

    There should be severe consequences and long jail terms for all of them, but now that the Turtle has packed the courts a lot of convictions will probably be overturned.

  6. 6
    debbie says:

    I’d still like to know what this “below the law” even means.

  7. 7
    rikyrah says:

    Ed Overbeek (@EdOverbeek) Tweeted:
    Dan Coats is gone because he wanted to stop Russian interference. John Ratcliffe is getting the job because he doesn’t. It’s as simple as that. https://twitter.com/EdOverbeek/status/1155882893094211584?s=17

  8. 8
    John Cole says:

    @eemom: Dems control the house but not the justice department or white house. I think Nancy should be impeaching by now.

  9. 9
    Sab says:

    @debbie: Below the law = under the law, in other words subject to the law.

  10. 10
    RAM says:

    I said at the time Obama was making a HUGE mistake not prosecuting the Bush torturers and the banksters that tanked the world’s economy. I didn’t understand at the time, and I still don’t why a Constitutional lawyer decided to ignore the law, even if it might have been politically inexpedient. Those decisions didn’t necessarily directly lead to Trump but they certainly emboldened the political criminal class to keep pushing the envelope and so we find ourselves today with a blatant criminal in the White House and the criminal crew he hired to run the government who have no fear they will face any legal consequences.

  11. 11
    oatler. says:

    @John Cole: But “Nancy SMASH” is precious cargo on this site, as I’ve learned the hard way.

  12. 12
    debbie says:

    @Sab:

    To be honest, it seemed to me he was saying Trump was being treated worse than the average citizen. I would like hime to give an explanation, though.

  13. 13
    Incitatus for Senate says:

    As a non-insane person, I will vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is, with one caveat. If they refuse to try and hold these people responsible in the courts the nominee can fuck off and die. We desperately need to hold the rich and powerful to the same legal standards as the rest of us.

  14. 14
    hells littlest angel says:

    The next time a Democrat is in power, full speed ahead and some motherfuckers need to go to jail. You can start with soft targets like Wilbur Ross if the decrepit fucker is still wheezing. Not only take the gloves off, but throw them away or these ruthless motherfuckers in the Republican mob will just keep on keeping on.

    Absofuckinglutely.

  15. 15

    Since NP is doing it wrong, what would you do if you were in her place?

  16. 16
    jl says:

    ” Then the Republicans shit in the well, poured lsd and and jet fuel in it. ”
    You forgot ‘then lit it on fire and drank it”

    I thought Obama went too easy on various GW Bush administration crimes. But, excusable, since we really didn’t know how degraded, corrupt and depraved the GOP had become. As far as anyone knew at the time, it might have worked. But know we know better.

    If either Biden or Sanders get the nomination, and wins, we need to put pressure on them to go further in taking systematic and formal action to fix the rot. In their own very different ways, they are too soft wrt to vigorous action that is needed to repair our democracy. We have good evidence that Warren and Harris will be much more proactive and vigorous.

    Edit: in one hypothetical future, it would be interesting to see a president Sanders, who dreams of a popular mass political uprising that will push the feds to do what he wants to do, have to deal with pushing him to do stuff he’s said he doesn’t want to do, like take vigorous proactive measures to remove corruption from SCOTUS.

  17. 17
    Jay says:

    FYI: The Poor People’s Campaign, led by Rev. William Barber and Rev. Liz Theoharis, are currently marching what appear to be hundreds of protesters around a detention center close to the U.S.-Mexico Border near El Paso, Texas —> https://t.co/HEQjDfQb6W— Jack Jenkins (@jackmjenkins) July 29, 2019

  18. 18
    Jay says:

    Wow. Just before candidate Trump gave a major speech on energy policy, campaign adviser Tom Barrack shared a copy of it w/ UAE & Saudi officials — and arranged for language requested by UAE officials to be added to the speech, w/ the help of Paul Manafort. https://t.co/HP0BaSIjL7— Caroline Orr (@RVAwonk) July 29, 2019

  19. 19
    Mezz says:

    When I teach my History of American Presidents’ class, even though we never get to Obama (hell, even GHWB) in detail, I give an overview of a lot of the more recent ones, with good factual evidence in support.

    In class I now suggest Obama’s utter inability to detect the profound bad faith of Republicans is a huge liability regarding his historical reputation and ranking. It keeps him from ranking too high. He can’t be that smart and “11-dimensional chess” if he couldn’t intuit that Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan et al were thoroughly cretinous pieces of shit.

    (I still miss Obama like hell though)

  20. 20
    zhena gogolia says:

    By all means, let’s attack Nancy Pelosi. That’s the very best use of our time and energy.

    ETA: Oh, and Obama too! What fun!

  21. 21
    Mr Stagger Lee says:

    I want Stephen Miller nailed jailed and not only that accidentally dropped off in a country that extradites criminals against humanity to The Hague.

  22. 22
    eemom says:

    @oatler.:

    There is no point in engaging with morons and pod people.

    Who knows, maybe they’re right and there is a master plan. Might as well wait and see at this point.

  23. 23
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @schrodingers_cat: How do you know eemom isn’t a sock-puppet for Nancy Pelosi, trying to undermine impeachment by making its supporters look like half-witted, spittle-flecked, poo-flinging assholes?

  24. 24
    Professor Bigfoot says:

    @RAM:

    I said at the time Obama was making a HUGE mistake not prosecuting the Bush torturers and the banksters that tanked the world’s economy. I didn’t understand at the time, and I still don’t why a Constitutional lawyer decided to ignore the law, even if it might have been politically inexpedient.

    Oh, that’s easy. He would have been (rhetorically and politically) lynched.

    He damn near was anyway.

    And it wasn’t the lack of prosecution that brought about Trump— it was Obama’s mere *existence.*

  25. 25
    PJ says:

    @zhena gogolia: One thing Nancy Pelosi can do, that some other people here seem to not take into consideration, is count Democratic representatives in favor of impeachment. At the moment, that number is somewhere around half – nowhere near enough to actually get a favorable impeachment vote. The hearings that are getting started now should raise that number, and get the public in purple states pushing their representatives towards impeachment, but until that happens, having an impeachment vote just gives Trump something to crow about.

  26. 26
    chris says:

    @jl:

    since we really didn’t know how degraded, corrupt and depraved the GOP had become.

    Um, no.

    Ketchup is a vegetable.

    Newt fucking Gingrich

    Ken Starr

    Iraq

    Alberto Gonzales

    Big Dick Cheney

    ETA: I could go on for quite a while.

  27. 27
    Jay says:

    We have come to bring the attention of the nation to the border. We demand full congressional hearings on what is happening right now. We are asking for a pastoral visit at the detention facility with the people who are on a hunger strike. pic.twitter.com/Rkbtz35Ibt— Rev. Dr. William J. Barber II (@RevDrBarber) July 29, 2019

  28. 28
    J R in WV says:

    @eemom:

    What a joke this place has become.

    If you think that, why on Earth are you ever commenting here? Really?

    For quite a while I had you pied, but then I took everyone off the pie list. Now I have one guy, Hardesty, on my pie list, not caring what he/she had to say about everything. You continue to balance on the edge of that point!

    Seriously, why come here if you think it’s just a joke?

  29. 29
    jl says:

    Looks like McConnell’s dirty work is finally getting some attention. Maybe some deal he has with Russian oligarchs to invest in KY was the straw that broke the camel’s back? Whatever the trigger, I hope he can’t scurry out of the spotlight.

    @atrupar
    Here’s Mitch McConnell using “modern day McCarthyism” and complaining about alleged liberal efforts to “gaslight” about his record on Russia in the same video clip
    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1155924712091820033

  30. 30
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Mezz: okay… I’ll play, since Cole has created a thread of trolly shit-posting: What would Obama have done if he were as smart as you?

    ETA: I can probably answer this myself: “If Obama had told people McConnell was an asshole…”

  31. 31
    Jay says:

    @PJ:

    As of today, 106.

    Less than a month ago it was 42.

  32. 32
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @schrodingers_cat:

    Since NP is doing it wrong, what would you do if you were in her place?

    1) Would have been ready when the Mueller Report was released. Would have had staff ready to stay up all night reading it, and summarize and highlight the worst parts for me by the next day.
    2) I would have summarized the evidence in a public address, and said – as Warren did – that this was a brief for impeachment. Crimes were committed, but the DOJ wasn’t going to prosecute a President, so it’s up to the House.
    3) I’d have authorized the House Judiciary Committee to begin an impeachment inquiry in late April, not late July.

    This ain’t rocket surgery.

  33. 33
    jl says:

    @chris: I admit the case is arguable.

  34. 34
    Professor Bigfoot says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Man, I’m making popcorn and sitting in my comfortable chair to see the reply to this one. It’s bound to be… fascinating.

  35. 35
    Jay says:

    It’s true: thousands of water bottles sitting in an empty field in Dorado, Puerto Rico.After I posted about it earlier today someone drove out there & took this video. Location: road 693, toward the beach after you pass Krispy KremeFEMA is getting back to me with details pic.twitter.com/U4BAedk7E4— David Begnaud (@DavidBegnaud) July 29, 2019

  36. 36
    eemom says:

    @J R in WV:

    Dude, if I had a quarter for every idiot “I pie you I pie you not” comment I’ve received from you, I’d have a lifetime supply of gum balls.

  37. 37
    kindness says:

    Yea John you are right. Can we start with Mitch McConnell?

    @eemom: What the fuck is your problem?

  38. 38
    Jay says:

    Hello Twitter!We are a group of @amazon workers calling for accountability and transparency in the tech we build.With the detentions and abuses of people in concentration camps by ICE, we are reminded of the role IBM played during the Holocausthttps://t.co/pMX25yBWZy— Amazonians: We Won't Build It (@WeWontBuildIt) July 29, 2019

  39. 39
    zhena gogolia says:

    @PJ:

    My own highly liberal representative has not yet come out in favor of it, so I have some sense of what she’s up against.

  40. 40
    chris says:

    @jl: I’m with Charlie Pierce on this, Reagan fed the monkey brains to the Republican party and started the prion disease that is the modern “conservative” movement.

  41. 41
    Baud says:

    For a place that constantly complains that Trump is doing Awful Thing X to distract us from Awful Thing Y, we sure spend a lot of time debating the minutiae of Nancy Pelosi’s decision making.

  42. 42
    J R in WV says:

    @eemom:

    There is no point in engaging with morons and pod people.

    Amazing, I agree — — wait, whut? You don’t want us to engage with you? Whut?

  43. 43
    Baud says:

    The Republicans, seeing that they never get punished for their misdeeds

    by the voters, first and foremost.

  44. 44
    Jay says:

    Since vast-majority of asylum-seekers tell us all of their “non-valuables” ($, docs, phones, jewelry) are thrown away by CBP, I took charge of their meager possessions, these shoes & a small duffel bag of toddler clothing, a toy dinosaur, dragon ball z tokens, & a baby blanket pic.twitter.com/TmTh1AdH76— Taylor Levy (@taylorklevy) July 28, 2019

  45. 45
    MJS says:

    With so many complaints about Pelosi’s “inaction” I’m starting to think the latter part of last week never happened. Or maybe some people just like to complain and moan, regardless of what the reality is.

  46. 46
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Baud: by the voters, first and foremost.

    one thing emo-politics teaches us is that things like “voters” and “the Constitution” are just pathetic excuses establishment Dems use to distract us from the fact that they don’t have any balls

    (and while I am in favor of formal impeachment inquiries, it’s far from a slam dunk, and very unclear what will/would happen after)

  47. 47
    J R in WV says:

    @eemom:

    Dude, if I had a quarter for every idiot “I pie you I pie you not” comment I’ve received from you, I’d have a lifetime supply of gum balls.

    Seriously, why do you come here if you think it’s a joke?

    That’s the kind of hard question you can’t answer, right? Right?

  48. 48
    zhena gogolia says:

    @Jay:

    I can’t deal with it.

    The horror and cruelty of this traitorous regime is really getting to me.

  49. 49
    brantl says:

    @eemom: EABOSD

  50. 50
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @ RachelMorris
    She is a US citizen who was *carrying her passport* when ICE picked her up. They still held her for 32 hours because when they questioned her without a lawyer or guardian present, she gave “inconsistent information.” She is 9 years old.

    A fourth grader carrying her passport to school with her

  51. 51
    gorram says:

    I think the long shadow cast by this is that that moment of mercy by Obama really demonstrated to the worst people that there’s no repercussions for bad actions, and here we are.

    I don’t think that deterrence should be the first or foremost thought people have with law enforcement, but the people who bleat loudest about it are known to project, and this just seems like a typical case.

  52. 52
    Baud says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    I think I read that she actually lives in Tijuana, but attended school in the U.S., so that’s why she carried her passport. It’s unconscionable what they did to her, nonetheless.

  53. 53
    joel hanes says:

    @RAM:

    I didn’t understand at the time, and I still don’t why a Constitutional lawyer decided to ignore the law

    Because he judged, and I think correctly, that (a working majority of) this nation would not stand for an uppity near man sitting in judgment over white MOTUs, and the resulting fracas would make any other task impossible, and prevent his re-election.

    And because he really believed that it was his mission and duty to bring us together.

  54. 54
    debbie says:

    @schrodingers_cat:

    Fall for Trump’s “trap” and rush into an impeachment hearing with “feelings of criminality” instead of actual financial records, “he saids and she saids” instead of sworn statements, and self-righteous fury instead of a rock solid case. Clearly, right is on our side and it never takes anything more than that to win. As if.

    What would happen? We’d have strengthened Trump by losing moderates in the process. Once again, we would have fucked our own chances in 2020 and earned nothing more than four more years of this hellhole.

    Here’s what I’d like to see: Conduct inquiries, compile conclusions based on the evidence at hand, then author a Declaration of Independence–type document listing Trump’s wrongdoings (like the colonists’ grievances against the King). Introduce a bill to censure Trump and put every member of Congress on the record. Then use that document as the basis for a nationwide presidential and congressional campaign.

    Night all.

  55. 55
    Gelfling 545 says:

    Is Ross still wheezing? He looks embalmed to me.

  56. 56
    randy khan says:

    @eemom:

    There is no point in engaging with morons and pod people.

    Fine advice. I’ll keep it in mind.

    I don’t think Pelosi is infallible, but I also am pretty confident that she’s not in any position to push an impeachment vote now because I know she can count to 218. In any event, you don’t want to have an impeachment vote unless you know that it’s going to pass and that it’s going to be at least neutral politically. (As a matter of justification, one could have been held pretty much any time after January 20, 2017, but that’s not the point.) We’re not remotely there yet.

  57. 57
    joel hanes says:

    @J R in WV:

    don’t waste your time

  58. 58
    Jay says:

    @zhena gogolia:

    It was pointed out at the time, that the US would pay a steep price for not prosecuting Bush Crimes.

  59. 59
    Starfish says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    establishment Dems use to distract us from the fact that they don’t have any balls

    The whole establishment should be replaced by women, and we can laugh and laugh about comments like this.

  60. 60
    Gelfling 545 says:

    @PJ: Exactly. And as always, call your congresspeople.

  61. 61
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @joel hanes: Because he judged, and I think correctly, that (a working majority of) this nation would not stand for an uppity near man sitting in judgment over white MOTUs, and the resulting fracas would make any other task impossible, and prevent his re-election.

    also, as a lawyer, he had some vague idea about things called “defense attorneys”, “judges”, “juries”, “appeals courts”, “limitless resources on the other side”….

    Also, and IANAL, but from what I understand acquittals can serve as legal precedents in future prosecutions. That’s why (again, from what I understand) trump’s people quickly put out, after the Stormy Daniels story came out, the laughable story that trump was worried about Melania’s reaction, so that his case would fit the John Edwards precedent

  62. 62
    Jim Parish says:

    @chris: I’m not sure of that. The seeds were being planted as much as a decade earlier, as the right wing of the GOP declared war on the moderates. Nixon got James Buckley to run (as a Conservative) against Charles Goodell in 1970; Jeff Bell primaried Clifford Case in 1978; and Alphonse D’Amato primaried Jacob Javits in 1980. In two of those, the right-wing candidate won the seat. Those three are the examples that come to mind; I’m sure there are others, probably in the House.

  63. 63
    Jay says:

    My legal name is Teresa Valdez. Obviously I am not the most at risk and I have incredible privilege, but between this and the synagogues repeatedly being shot up, the “if they come for you” keeps arriving on my doorstep and it is making me queasy.— (((Tae Phoenix)))🖖🏽 (@TaePhoenix) July 29, 2019

    I’ve been carrying Federal ID with my US citizenship clearly spelled out since Trump began his occupation of the White House.For years, people told me I was being hysterical and paranoid.I’m so tired of being right.This needs to end. Now. https://t.co/AUqvzikFbt— (((Tae Phoenix)))🖖🏽 (@TaePhoenix) July 29, 2019

  64. 64
    Janesays says:

    The next time a Democrat is in power, full speed ahead and some motherfuckers need to go to jail.

    That’s a nice sentiment that I wholeheartedly agree with, but I’m gonna go ahead and toss it in the same pile as other pipe dreams like eliminating the filibuster and packing the Supreme Court.

    Sorry, I just have little faith in our party leadership to do much besides give stern finger-waggings.

  65. 65
    Gelfling 545 says:

    @low-tech cyclist: When most of your members didn’t yet support it?

  66. 66
    Janesays says:

    In all seriousness, is there anybody out there who genuinely believes Donald Trump will ever spend even as much as one nanosecond behind bars after he is out of office?

  67. 67
    A Ghost To Most says:

    My contrarian view is that if the country survives the fascist coup, and comes out the other side, the destruction of the GOP and the cancervative movement will make all this worth it.

  68. 68
    Gelfling 545 says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: When it’s plain to all that he doesn’t give a hoot in a high wind what Melania thinks.

  69. 69
    Baud says:

    @Janesays:

    I think he’ll pardon himself and the Supreme Court will uphold it in a 5-4 vote. But maybe the NY AG can get him.

  70. 70
    Yutsano says:

    @Janesays: Oh I do. Most likely not for anything federal mind you. But the state of New York is all up in their business now.

    @Baud: Inb4 mindmeld.

  71. 71
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @eemom:

    There is no point in engaging with morons

    Unless you’re a labor lawyer and that’s most of your job

  72. 72
    A Ghost To Most says:

    @Janesays: I do. State charges can’t be pardoned away by feds. He may flee the country first, though.

  73. 73
    Mike in DC says:

    Take off the gloves. Then coat your handwraps in glue and roll them in crushed glass.

  74. 74
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Jay:

    As of today, 106.

    Less than a month ago it was 42.

    It’s almost as if Nancy Pelosi is doing things, but we don’t get to see how she spends every minute of her day.

  75. 75
    zhena gogolia says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    inorite?

  76. 76
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Janesays: Honestly? If he loses the election I wouldn’t be surprised to see some charges arising from 2-3 investigations (some state-level, some federal) a few weeks after he’s ejected. He might not go to jail from those, though.

    If he wins in 2020, I don’t think he’ll ever be charged.

  77. 77
    Suzanne says:

    @Janesays:

    Sorry, I just have little faith in our party leadership to do much besides give stern finger-waggings.

    You don’t give them enough credit. I’m sure they are also excellent at sending Strongly Worded Letters/Memos/Emails. I bet their stinkeye game is also on point.

  78. 78
    Paula says:

    YES.

  79. 79
    Baud says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Nancy has a deep understanding of Baud’s Inequality Theorem, which states N(C) >>> N(S), where

    N(C) = Number of people who criticize Dems for not doing X, and

    N(S) = Number of people who will support Dems for doing X.

  80. 80
    Janesays says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: There is one thing Obama could have done, and we already know what the consequences of that would have been.

    He could have disclosed to the American people in October 2016 that the Russians were definitely trying to meddle with with our elections and that we needed to be gravely concerned about it.

    He didn’t, specifically because he wanted it to be a joint statement and McConnell told him if he (Obama) moved forward by publicizing the Russian interference, McConnell would accuse him of playing partisan games.

    So what!

    Why didn’t he do it and let McConnell say whatever he was gonna say? Why was he so obsessed with the appearance of presidential impartiality that he allowed McConnell to roll him so hard?

  81. 81
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Baud: nice! Is there a special corollary for the sentiment of Daily Kos posters?

  82. 82
    Janesays says:

    @MisterForkbeard: Yeah, honestly.

    People like him (specifically, former presidents) don’t go to jail in America. Ever.

    Just to be clear… I’d absolutely love to be wrong and would gladly eat a dozen crow pies for the honor, but I’m definitely not going to get my hopes up on him ever facing real justice. Because this is America, and people like him pretty much never face real justice.

  83. 83
  84. 84
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Janesays: because Obama was a sleeper republican. Duh.

  85. 85
    Feathers says:

    Let’s be honest. The problem goes back to when LBJ kept quiet about Nixon’s sabotage of the Paris peace talks during the ‘68 election. This was cemented by Ford’s pardon of Nixon. So Reagan felt perfectly safe making sure Iran didn’t release the American hostages until Carter was out of office.

    Post-Goldwater Republicans have been perfectly willing to accept foreign help in winning elections. The difference now is that they are willing to let foreign nationals directly interfere in domestic affairs and balloting.

  86. 86
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Baud: well played

  87. 87
    Procopius says:

    @PJ: You’re absolutely right. IMHO this is the predictable result of electing Blue Dogs, New Democrats, and LEO and Intelligence veterans in such large numbers. Thanks, Rahm. I believe the number of nominal Democrats who have publicly stated they are in favor of impeachment is about 90. 218 are needed. I’ve been forced to come around to thinking Pelosi knows what she’s doing.

  88. 88
    Janesays says:

    That said, there’s no reason to not try to make the man’s post-White House life a holy nightmare, and by all means, I hope they do everything possible to ruin him and bring him to justice. I just don’t have a ton of faith that they’ll succeed.

  89. 89
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Janesays:
    I certainly think it’s possible. Why, in my very own country a former prime minister is being tried on charges of criminal breach of trust, abusof power, and money laundering. This time two years ago I would have thought such a trial impossible.

  90. 90
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Janesays: @Janesays: The two things that will kill our side are closely related; cynicism and the cult of the savvy.

  91. 91
    Janesays says:

    @Procopius: It’s actually up to 107 Democrats right now – which is a substantial jump from where it was just two weeks ago (86). Add in Amash and it goes to 108, but that’s still 110 short of being able to successfully impeach him.

  92. 92
    Procopius says:

    @Jay:

    As of today, 106

    Oh, that’s good. I was behind the times. Last week’s number. Thanks for the current count. Well, at this rate it may be possible to reach 218 before the Christmas break. I think we’ve gotta do it before the New Year.

  93. 93
    Jay says:

    @Procopius:

    105 Democratic Party Senate and House members as of today, 1 Independent. More than doubled in less than a month.

  94. 94
    Baud says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    This is how I feel too. I think we’re in this mess in large part because of those characteristics.

  95. 95
    Amir Khalid says:

    FYWP has refused me permisson to edit my own comment to fix a typo.

  96. 96
    Janesays says:

    @Steve in the ATL: No, he wasn’t a sleeper Republican, but he was an idealist to a fault and had more faith in the good intentions of Republicans than he ever should have.

    Do you not think he should have disclosed the Russian meddling in October 2016?

  97. 97
    Procopius says:

    @Janesays: Thank you. Even better. It’s hard to keep up.

  98. 98
  99. 99
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Janesays: I was kidding about that. But yes, I think he should have revealed it. Easy to say that in hindsight; maybe there were important considerations at the time that we don’t know about.

  100. 100
    Baud says:

    @Janesays:

    Only in hindsight. I’m confident that if he had done it at the time, it would have been seen as putting the foot on the scale to promote Hillary. I don’t think it would have had a positive effect.

  101. 101
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Janesays: Obama didn’t do it because it would have been ineffective and made things WORSE.

    Basically, if there was a public warning from Obama and the Republicans en masse went against it, you’d get a lot of media talk about how Obama was trying to rig the election in favor of Hillary. It would have been extremely damaging and probably wouldn’t have amounted to much in the way of positive effects.

    @Janesays: I’m skeptical Trump faces jail time just because our system REALLY isn’t set up for that. I mean, what are we going to do – he can’t go into general population. You can’t put him in Solitary. He’d have to be constantly surrounded by Secret Service agents, etc. Even aside from the “we don’t put white rich Republican politicians in prison” rule, I just don’t think ANYONE wants to deal with the actual process of putting a former President into jail.

    Best we’d get would probably be home arrest. And maybe court orders not to use Twitter or appear on TV/radio.

  102. 102
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Janesays:

    and we already know what the consequences of that would have been.

    What? we know the consequences of a counterfactual hypothetical?

    Why was he so obsessed with the appearance of presidential impartiality that he allowed McConnell to roll him so hard?

    He thought McConnell would do exactly what he said he would do, the media would both-sides it, and that it probably wouldn’t have had a big effect. The fact that almost three years later, when we know exponentially more than we did then, both about what the Russians did, and what trump did, and the vast majority of people either don’t believe it or don’t care, doesn’t do a lot to undermine that judgment.
    ETA: and, maybe he was wrong. As with impeachment, there’s a case to be made that he should have done it even if it didn’t work. But the idea that it would have created a moment of great ludicty among the American people is a stretch.

  103. 103
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Baud: Yep. Totally agree with that. That’s exactly what McConnell would have said, and the media would have gone with a “If this was actually true, McConnell and the Republicans would back up Obama because they’re PATRIOTS” and then assumed Obama was lying.

    It would also have given Republicans a clear reason to regard Hillary as illegitimate (ObAma RiGgeD tHe EleCtIon), as well as getting a bunch of die-hard leftists lots to yell about about Hillary had rigged the election just like she totally rigged the primary, etc. Not that either of those groups need an excuse, but it would have been a really, REALLY bad environment.

  104. 104
    Jay says:

    The Deep State strikes again, blocking the Trump administration's efforts to… have the National Security Advisor get involved in lobbying Trump to support an industry plan to get rich by exporting US nuclear technology to the Middle East. pic.twitter.com/tBQNeSAKt9— Susan Simpson (@TheViewFromLL2) July 29, 2019

    There’s a full thread naming nyms.

  105. 105
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Janesays: Do you not think he should have disclosed the Russian meddling in October 2016?

    Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security
    Release Date: October 7, 2016
    DHS and ODNI Seals
    For Immediate Release
    DHS Press Office
    Contact: 202-282-8010
    The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

    The people who cared, knew.

    A lot of people who knew didn’t care. And still don’t.

  106. 106
    Amir Khalid says:

    @MisterForkbeard:
    And if Trump the unjailable defied such a court order, how would the judge punish him?As I understand, drawing and quartering is not an available option

  107. 107
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @MisterForkbeard

    : ObAma RiGgeD tHe EleCtIon

    Gaaaaah—MySpace flashbacks—make it stop! Make it stop!

  108. 108
    Janesays says:

    @MisterForkbeard: You may be right that it would have been ineffective, but there is no possible worse scenario than what actually happened. Trump gets elected by a bigger margin and actually wins the popular vote? It’s not as if losing the popular vote has made him behave in a circumspect manner and govern in a more restrained way than if he had won an actual mandate.

  109. 109
    Baud says:

    @Amir Khalid:

    Well, once he’s out of office, it becomes a lot harder to ignore a court order.

  110. 110
    Mary G says:

    My theory is that Obama felt he could only do one big thing, and he chose the ACA over prosecutions. Holder did get a lot of civil settlements with big fines, which means dick to the bankers. He should have demanded resignations of CEOs, loudly, even if they couldn’t be gotten.

  111. 111
    Jay says:

    The announcement of the ratfucking should have been from the IC or FEC.

    Unfortunately, the IC was much more concerned with keeping secrets than protecting the US.

  112. 112
    Baud says:

    @Janesays:

    but there is no possible worse scenario than what actually happened.

    That’s hindsight. Everyone expected Hillary to win. Probably would have if it weren’t for Comey.

  113. 113
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Janesays: And you knew all of this in October of 2016?

  114. 114
    Janesays says:

    Obama allowed his agencies to issue a press release that received very little attention, but he could have himself addressed the nation. Even Biden admits it was a mistake not to be more proactive in informing the public of the Russian interference.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/23/mitch-mcconnell-russia-obama-joe-biden-359531

    Joe Biden said Tuesday that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell stopped the Obama administration from speaking out about Russian interference in the 2016 campaign by refusing to sign on to a bipartisan statement of condemnation.

    That moment, the former Democratic vice president said, made him think “the die had been cast … this was all about the political play.”

    He expressed regret, in hindsight, given the intelligence he says came in after Election Day. “Had we known what we knew three weeks later, we may have done something more,” Biden, a potential 2020 presidential candidate, said.

  115. 115
    Baud says:

    @Janesays:

    Again, hindsight.

  116. 116
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Baud: To be fair, Obama could have used his time machine.

  117. 117
    chris says:

    @Jim Parish: Oh, I agree. My political awakening, such as it was, came when I saw a little verse chalked on the wall at my US high school. It will be familiar to many.

    “Don’t change dicks in the middle of a screw,
    Vote for Nixon in “72.”

    And George Wallace was being taken seriously and lawn order was the watchword of the day. Bunch of fucking hypocrites then and today.

  118. 118
    Janesays says:

    @Baud: She absolutely would have if it weren’t for Comey. But it’s wrong to think that is the sole reason she lost. There are numerous different factors that played into Cheetolini being able to claim the presidency because of fewer than 80,000 votes in three critical states. We had no control over Comey’s behavior. But that doesn’t mean we didn’t have control over other things – like the choice to not fully amplify the warning that the Russians were coming.

  119. 119
    Baud says:

    @Janesays:

    I agree Comey was only the coup de grâce. I also don’t believe it would have helped because hate fever was so high in 2016.

  120. 120
    Janesays says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    It would also have given Republicans a clear reason to regard Hillary as illegitimate (ObAma RiGgeD tHe EleCtIon), as well as getting a bunch of die-hard leftists lots to yell about about Hillary had rigged the election just like she totally rigged the primary, etc. Not that either of those groups need an excuse, but it would have been a really, REALLY bad environment.

    You say that as if there was some magical scenario in which they wouldn’t have regarded Hillary Clinton’s election as illegitimate.

  121. 121
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Janesays: Obama “addressed the nation” a lot. I remember in 2010 he did giant campaign rallies for House Dems. Didn’t help. I remember he made a lot of speeches about how important the 2016 election was. 4.4 million people who voted for him in 2012– so who presumably were at least somewhat favorably disposed toward him– stayed home. I remember a speech Obama gave in Osowatamie KS on Republicans’ trickle down economics and wealth inequality, a speech so good even my phlegmatic self thought it was gonna get people riled up. It didn’t.

    Children are being tortured, American citizens being thrown in jail with no due process. Are a lot of your politically disengaged acquaintances in Meatspace up in arms? Trump showers honors and affection on a tyrant who torture to death an American college student. Do you know a lot of non-online people offended by that? Two children were shot by a white supremacist last night, it’s barely a leading story on national news.

    ETA: now what in the Sam Hill put that comment in moderation?

  122. 122
    Jay says:

    @Janesays:

    And the IC knew all this long before October 2016. They should have put it out there in 2015 and hammered it home daily, which in theory, could have changed the MSM’s coverage.

  123. 123
    Ryan says:

    Don’t forget Barr. We could inpeech him tomorrow/

  124. 124
    tybee says:

    @chris: my fave from that era was “dick nixon before he dicks you”.

  125. 125
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @Gelfling 545:

    @low-tech cyclist: When most of your members didn’t yet support it?

    When most of my members didn’t support or oppose it either.

    Besides, an impeachment inquiry was apparently begun last Friday. No vote was taken, it just kinda happened.

    Always seemed to me that the best way to build up support for something was to make the case for it. And the body that should make the case for impeachment is the House Judiciary Committee. But first, they would need to do the work of building the case. So you charge them with that task. Which would be an inquiry into whether Trump had committed high crimes and misdemeanors.

    If you’re Pelosi, you’ve also got to think about timing. Is it a good idea or a bad idea to have the House debating impeachment, or the Senate having an impeachment trial (not that I think Mitch will allow a trial) in the middle of the Democratic primaries? I think that would be a bad idea – instead of the candidates being able to focus on their messages, every question from the media would be about impeachment. You want this thing to be over before Iowa. Hence an April start for the inquiry, so it can run four or five months before the Judiciary Committee starts debating specific articles of impeachment, followed by the debate in the full House and possibly a Senate trial, and still finish up in 2019.

    Now, the inquiry’s not going to start until after Labor Day. Give them four or five months, and you’re at one end or the other of January. Then the Judiciary Committee debate, then the full House, and you’re probably into March, all but overshadowing the primaries. But that’s what we’re stuck with if we go forward now.

  126. 126
    Janesays says:

    To be clear, I loved Obama, I consider him the best president of my lifetime, and on a personal level I am deeply and forever grateful for his signature legislative accomplishment, the Affordable Care Act, which has been a lifesaver for me.

    But that doesn’t mean I think the man is above all criticism, and on the matter of his dealings with Republican leadership, I think he showed them far more deference on the notion that they were generally acting in good faith than he should have.

  127. 127
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @chris:

    “Don’t change dicks in the middle of a screw,
    Vote for Nixon in “72.”

    I remember that, and another satirical GOP slogan: “Nobody can lick our Dick.”

  128. 128
    Janesays says:

    @Ryan: We could, but then McConnell would immediately table it in the Senate, and that would be the end of it. He would still be the Attorney General. The rules for using impeachment to remove an officeholder are the same for Cabinet members as they are for the president and vice-president and every other federal office holder. 2/3 majority needed in the upper chamber to convict and remove. Good luck with that.

  129. 129
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Janesays: Disagree. What happened (Trump wins) was really, really bad. But this particular warning wouldn’t have really mitigated that at all if the Republicans were going to do what they said they were going to do.

    So you have a couple of ways this could have played out: Obama makes his proclamation and Republicans and the media claim it’s Obama Rigging.
    1a) Hillary loses by more than she did and takes a few more reps/senate seats with her. This is BAD and considerably worse than what happened. We’d have lost the ACA for sure, for example.
    1b) Hillary can’t actually win in this scenario, because she would have almost certainly gotten LESS votes than she did in real life. But if she did somehow win: Instantly dogged down by media-approved republican ratfucking. Republicans refuse to consider any business from Hillary at all because she’s illegitimate. This is a question of degree – some republicans already said they wouldn’t consider and Supreme Court nominees from Hillary. But we’re talking total embargo and instant impeachment inquiries. It would have gotten really bad REALLY quickly.

    Basically, it’s all downside and no upside. Obama waited on it because to do any good it required McConnell and the Republicans to have the best interests of the Nation at heart. They didn’t.

    @Amir Khalid: Pretty much. If Trump disobeys a court order and can’t effectively be jailed, there really isn’t a whole lot we could do. Crippling fines? I guess, maybe. But then expect to see endless Republican whining (parroted by the media) about how awful the Democrats are being and the whole thing is politically motivated.

    But I do think we’ll get some charges and convictions is he’s tossed out in 2020. I don’t know what the effects of those will be, but there’s a number of charges basically ready to go.

  130. 130
    Jay says:

    Through interviews on three continents with more than 30 individuals—activists, national security experts, relatives of the forcibly disappeared, and American, European, and Middle Eastern government officials—a clearer picture has emerged about the extent to which Saudi authorities have gone to imprison, repatriate, and even murder countrymen who dare to protest the kingdom’s policies or somehow malign the image of the nation.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/07/how-saudi-arabia-makes-dissidents-disappear

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia_lobby_in_the_United_States

  131. 131
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Janesays: okay, I’ll ask you: What could he have done differently in those dealings that would have changed any votes in the House or Senate? That would have forced McConnell or Boehner/Ryan to bring up votes they didn’t, or to whip votes differently in their caucuses? what action by Obama would have changed votes in the midterms in 2010 or ’14?

    You think Obama thought McConnell was “acting in good faith” on Garland?You think Obama didn’t know Boehner was afraid of his own caucus? They. Had. The. Votes. Voters gave them those votes. Obama wasn’t deferring to them. He was deferring to the fucking Constitution.

  132. 132
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Janesays: I think everyone agrees with you here, but we also think Obama largely grew out of deference and dealmaking after his first term.

  133. 133
    Baud says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    Nothing prevents Trump from being jailed after he’s out of office.

  134. 134
    low-tech cyclist says:

    Getting back to what John Cole said:

    After Obama was elected, it was determined that the previous administration, whose crimes were at the time consider unprecedented, should not be investigated and prosecuted.

    I really expected some sort of workaround – that Obama would, in as low-key a manner as possible, have the Bush Administration books opened so that who did and ordered what would be publicly available. And then legal orgs outside the government could make the case for charging particular officials, and all but force the DOJ to act on those cases that were sufficiently strong. And Obama’s AG would with Greatest Reluctance authorize whatever U.S. Attorney had jurisdiction to bring those cases.

    The opening-the-books part still needs to happen. And the Bushies damn well need to be prosecuted for any crimes they committed where the statutes of limitations haven’t expired by 2021.

  135. 135
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @MisterForkbeard: I don’t. When you get people talking about when Obama gave too much to Republicans, if you dig a little it usually comes back to the ACA and/or the Stimulus, when Obama was negotiating with Blue Dog Dems as much, sometimes more, than with Republicans.

  136. 136
    Zelma says:

    @Procopius:

    “You’re absolutely right. IMHO this is the predictable result of electing Blue Dogs, New Democrats, and LEO and Intelligence veterans in such large numbers. Thanks Rahm.”

    I get so frustrated with this kind of talk. Does anyone remember the the ACA passed by 2 votes? One of those votes was my son’s boss, a so-called Blue Dog Democrat. And a lot of the other ayes were Blue Dogs. He lost his seat and so did a lot of the others. And they knew they would probably pay a political price for their vote. Representatives “represent” their constituents. And a lot of those constituents are a lot more conservative than the folks here.

    I’ve talked about my freshman Congressman, Jeff Van Drew. He is far too the right of me, but he was able to win in an R+2 district. And it was closer than it should have been given that his opponent was a blithering idiot and a right wing nut job. If a better candidate had won the primary, I’m not sure what the outcome would have been.

    But on most issues, Jeff will vote with the Democrats and that’s enough for me. Sometimes, when I listen to the presidential candidates, I wonder if the Dems have a death wish. They’re up their fighting about the details of health care policy when they ought to be reminding the voters that the Republicans want to take away what was won. 70% of voters support Medicare for those who want it; 70% oppose Medicare for all. Think about it!

    Maybe the voters are wrong-headed by they’re the ones who get to decide.

  137. 137
    Baud says:

    Jesus H.

    Yang qualifies for third and fourth Democratic debates

  138. 138
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Zelma: JVD drives me crazy, I wish he would shut up about “moving on”, but that personal tic of mine aside, I agree with you. A lot of people seem to have convinced themselves that a smaller, purer party will win elections through righteousness, and pass legislation with passion.

  139. 139
    zhena gogolia says:

    @Zelma:

    How dare you remind people of reality?

    In fairness to the Dem candidates, though, it was the moderators who framed the questions to make them all look like crazy soshulists. Those stupid “raise your hand” questions.

  140. 140
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Baud: Not legally. I just don’t think we’ll do it, for the simple reason that it’s a security/logistical/political nightmare for basically everyone involved.

    @Zelma: Procopius is basically a troll. His game is to criticize Dems no matter what. In this case, he’s reluctant forced to believe that Nancy Pelosi knows what she’s doing because Dems are just as bad as Republicans, dontcha know.

  141. 141
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @zhena gogolia: as @Baud: ‘s prayerful post reminds us, the debates are a fucking clusterfuck, because of delusion, ego and Tom Perez trying to retroactively appease the ’16 BernieBots (And I wasn’t paying any attention when he set the debate requirements, and there’s no way he could have foreseen all the crackpots and entitled boring white guys who thought “Why not me?”)

    ETA: @MisterForkbeard: you have to admire the invocation of Rahm!! in reference to the 2018 elections though. THat’s some dedication to the old school.

  142. 142
    Brachiator says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    I’m skeptical Trump faces jail time just because our system REALLY isn’t set up for that.

    I agree with you and with all the points you have made.

    And yet, Trump is a criminal. As are a number of Republcans. Trump has pushed us to the point where we must consider the possible fate of presidents who engage in criminal acts, where we do not subject them to impeachment.

    ETA. I would love it if the Democratic candidates in a presidential debate said the following:

    “My first act as president? Well, the very first thing I will do, after delivering my inaugural address, will be to direct that Trump be charged with obstruction of justice, and taken into custody by federal marshals, to prevent his potential flight to Moscow to evade prosecution.”

  143. 143
    opiejeanne says:

    @Amir Khalid: I just stumbled upon a Gordon Ramsey show that he made inn Malaysia, and he served dinner to that Prime Minister. The show was done in 2011, and he was referred to by the Buddhist monk as the Honorable Prime Minister, but maybe that’s just proper form.

    It made me sit up straight when I thought I realized who they were talking about.

  144. 144
    BretH says:

    @chris: Meese is a pig

  145. 145
    Brachiator says:

    @Jay:

    Through interviews on three continents with more than 30 individuals—activists, national security experts, relatives of the forcibly disappeared, and American, European, and Middle Eastern government officials—a clearer picture has emerged about the extent to which Saudi authorities have gone to imprison, repatriate, and even murder countrymen who dare to protest the kingdom’s policies or somehow malign the image of the nation.

    Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, are currently engaged in suppressing their citizens, and the official Trump administration policy towards oppressive authoritarian regimes seems to be solely based on Trump’s admiration of tough guys.

    Oddly enough, this pleases an number of people of varying ideologies who believe that the US has no business being involved in international affairs, except to make trade deals.

  146. 146
    Jay says:

    @Brachiator:

    How’s that NAFTA2.0 doing?

  147. 147
    Aleta says:

    Alan Dershowitz @AlanDersh
    I stand by the constitutional (not moral) argument I offered in my controversial oped: if a 16 year old has the constitutional right to have an abortion without state or parental interference, how could she not have the constitutional right to engage in consensual sex?

    Richard W. Painter @RWPUSA
    Why is @AlanDersh trying to lower the age of consent in this op-ed? 15? Really?

    Pé Resists @4everNeverTrump

    What you are arguing for is a constitutional right for ADULTS to have sex with 16 year olds, not the other way around.

    Pé Resists @4everNeverTrump
    
1) the minor isn’t being punished for statutory rape; the ADULT is
    2) minors CAN legally consent to sexual intercourse… with other minors
    3) abortion is about a right to control one’s medical decisions, not about having sex

    Melissa Jo Peltier 


    That’s a “Constitutional” argument?
    I must’ve missed a page of the Constitution.

    JustGoDrumpf @JustGoAway13

    Yeah, I think (the rights Dershowitz wants) were drawn from the Pederalist Papers.




    Alan Dershowitz @AlanDersh
    I challenge my readers to distinguish the cases, as a matter of constitutional law. I did not suggest that it is moral to have sex with a 16 year old, but rather that the issue presents a constitutional conundrum worthy of discussion.

    I also pointed out that, statutory rape laws are applied quite selectively and often against young teenagers. That’s why I also say there are Romeo and Juliet exceptions. Lets debate not name call.

    *

    Max Kennerly @MaxKennerly
    

Statutory rape laws criminalize the perpetrator’s conduct, not the victim’s.
    *
    Thus, the question is: does the adult perpetrator have a constitutional right to have sex with a minor? The victim’s rights don’t change the answer, which is and should be “absolutely not.”
    *
    Asha Rangappa @AshaRangappa_
    
It would also shift (and raise) the government’s burden of proof, from a presumption that there was no consent to proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim did not consent

    Elizabeth de la Vega @Delavegalaw


    Correct. It’s a transparent attempt to protect adult men under the guise of support for the “rights” of 16 year old girls. It merits no analysis whatsoever, imho.

    Andrew C Laufer, Esq @lauferlaw


    You’re so disingenuous. Shame on you. You’re a blight upon our profession.


  148. 148
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Aleta: I’m guessing he ain’t gonna find the Vinyard more welcoming this summer. Or is it the Cape?

  149. 149
    Miss Bianca says:

    @Procopius:

    I’ve been forced to come around to thinking Pelosi knows what she’s doing.

    Well, that’s damn big-hearted of you, son.

  150. 150
    Aleta says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: His Constitutional right to other people’s dinner parties is in peril.

  151. 151
    Baud says:

    @Aleta:

    the issue presents a constitutional conundrum worthy of discussion.

    So is the issue of whether I have the constitutional right to kick Alan Dershowitz in the balls, but he never wants to debate THAT.

  152. 152
    joel hanes says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    I mean, what are we going to do – he can’t go into general population. You can’t put him in Solitary. He’d have to be constantly surrounded by Secret Service agents, etc

    Solution: Gitmo

  153. 153
    opiejeanne says:

    @Aleta: Doesn’t he wander around the beach sans culottes? In the buff?

    Sorry for inflicting that image on everyone.

  154. 154
    opiejeanne says:

    @joel hanes: I wonder why we can’t put him in solitary. I mean, why the hell not? Put him in the SuperMax in Colorado along with Noriega.

  155. 155
    chris says:

    @BretH: Ayup. And who was the guy who said that trees cause pollution?

  156. 156
    TenguPhule says:

    @schrodingers_cat:

    Since NP is doing it wrong, what would you do if you were in her place?

    A suggestion was made that she could bludgeon to death Trump and Pence with the House Mace and then as President, offer a bounty for McConnell’s scalp. //

  157. 157
    Harbison says:

    @Baud:
    No

    I thought the race was too close to call and was certain that Trump’s support was understated. I posted that here and told anyone who would listen.

    Guess what 2020 is not going to be a landslide for the democratic candidate.

    The fuckwits who substitute politics for therapy are still a huge contingent among Ds. People are just assuming Ds are going to win in 2020 so gosh let’s pick the most sparkly and wonderful candidate that checks all of our boxes.

    I thought 2016 would be a wake up call for such people. I was wrong about that

    People need to put aside whatever misgivings they have about Harris and get behind her because she is the only candidate I’ve seen who will do whatever it takes to win.

  158. 158
    Sab says:

    @J R in WV:She is almost Trumpian in her desperate need for attention, negative or positive.

  159. 159
    Baud says:

    @Harbison:

    I like Harris.

    I don’t like Bernie.

    Voters will choose who they choose.

    Not interested in whiners.

  160. 160
    Brachiator says:

    @Aleta:
    Wow. Sounds like an overheard conversation between Dersh and Woody Allen.

  161. 161
    TenguPhule says:

    @Baud:

    by the voters, first and foremost.

    Fuck the voters. Why do they get to decide which crimes against humanity go unpunished?

  162. 162
    Baud says:

    @TenguPhule:

    It’s how democracy works.

  163. 163
  164. 164
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Harbison: This trolling approach is almost clever. It lets you claim to be supporting a Dem candidate while actually take shots at that candidates character.

  165. 165
    TenguPhule says:

    @Amir Khalid:

    As I understand, drawing and quartering is not an available option

    Never say never.

  166. 166
    TenguPhule says:

    @Baud:

    It’s how democracy works.

    Rule of law can’t survive favoritism.

  167. 167
    Ken says:

    @TenguPhule: With the Ratcliffe precedent in hand, the next Democratic president could find an appropriately deranged website – say, one claiming that top Republicans are controlled by lizard people – and then have the suspect lizard people arrested. Eventually if you skin enough of them, you’ll find the real lizard person.

  168. 168
    Ken says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    And maybe court orders not to use Twitter

    I’m anticipating that anyway, the first time he reveals some classified information. And you know he will, he doesn’t understand the concept now.

  169. 169
    J R in WV says:

    @joel hanes:

    @J R in WV:

    don’t waste your time

    I know, but still….

  170. 170
    J R in WV says:

    @Procopius:

    I think we’ve gotta do it before the New Year.

    I think doing it before October, 2020 is way too soon. Last minute before the election opens up if you ask me. That’s why I’m still not upset with Pelosi, she’s got plenty of time.

  171. 171
    Ilefttxwhenannlost says:

    @Amir Khalid: how about gizmo?

  172. 172
    Ilefttxwhenannlost says:

    @Ilefttxwhenannlost: that is gitmo

  173. 173
    SWMBO says:

    I am yet again reminded of the late, great efg (fuck ‘em), that it took 2 years to bring down Nixon. It didn’t happen overnight (although the Saturday Night Massacre certainly clarified things). These things take time. And if we don’t do it “by the book” they will scream “partisan witch hunt” and Fox News will amplify it to the ones who consistently vote.

    For all the questions about Mueller not indicting a sitting president, I want to know what stayed his hand in seeking indictments against Jarvanka and Donnie the Lesser. Eric May be a paste eater but he managed to steer clear of the Russian meeting in Trump Tower and other publicly known Russian contacts. Why weren’t Jared and DJTJ indicted? Did he find enough evidence to indict them on money laundering Russian mob money? Did he hand that off to NYAG? Was this covered in the Mueller report? If it was, why aren’t more people talking about the ones who got away (with it)?

    I wish I didn’t have so many questions.

  174. 174
    Ruckus says:

    @Zelma:
    Straight Medicare for all, as Medicare exists now, would be a disaster.
    1. Current Medicare costs $135/month out of your SS or you have to pay it if you haven’t started collecting SS yet.
    2. Current Medicare pays 80%, there are copays.
    3. On medicare for full time care you can’t have any financials above a certain limit, you gotta sell the house and most end up with not a penny in the bank and die in shitty end of everything care. My parents had nothing left, zero.
    4. Every hear of part D(rugs)?
    Now having said that and having read KH’s Medicare for All plan there are clear differences. She knows the realities of Medicare. Yes, for current seniors, it is far better than the nothing that what 60-70% of the seniors would have if it didn’t exist. So is our broken system, better than nothing. But not much. The ACA improved that a lot, of course refuckingpublicans have managed to “fix” a few things. As it has been and will be for a while, there is too much money/power in the insurance industry to get the kind of control that is required. Part of KH’s plan, the 10 yr rollout would mitigate some of the issues, and allowing anyone who wanted to participate in a Medicare Advantage program would be one answer for that. An HMO like Kaiser does make up for some of the issues of Medicare, I know people who use them and they like it a lot. I know seniors who have had surgery using Kaiser and they have been very happy.

  175. 175
    Mai Naem mobile says:

    I am an Obamabot but Obama did make a mistake not prosecuting the financial assholes who caused the crash and not going after the Bushies. I think he was held back because he was the first black president and I don’t think he honestly realized the GOP were going to be so obstructionist during such a crisis. I am sure having Biden as Veep didnt help. Obama also surrounded himself with too many Wall Streeters. The only Dem leader who had a clue about the GOP was Harry Reid.

  176. 176
    Ruckus says:

    @Brachiator:
    I fall into the school that if a president is convicted of the crimes we think that trump committed then he really wasn’t elected as president, he is, on top of everything else a fraud. What at that point stops him from being jailed? He wouldn’t be a legitimate president, he was elected by a fraudulent election with the assistance of a foreign government. He would have to be jailed for that. And I wouldn’t give a shit if we used his bullshit wall bucks to build him his own prison. I’m thinking an 6×10 room with a concrete bed, concrete commode, walls 20 ft high with a 1 ft sq window just below the celling, that’s always open, has a 20w led bulb which is always on and it’s located either near Death Valley or in northern Alaska. I like the Alaska idea best.

  177. 177
    Ruckus says:

    @Ruckus:
    And if you are building such a federal jail, one could build it large enough to house the entire fucking family, the asshole who owes 7 billion in taxes, and a few other assorted asswipe friends of his.

  178. 178
    AxelFoley says:

    @zhena gogolia:

    By all means, let’s attack Nancy Pelosi. That’s the very best use of our time and energy.
    ETA: Oh, and Obama too! What fun

    Thank you! We can ALWAYS count on the left to attack their own.

    “Obama should have…”

    “Nancy is just protecting Trump!”

    “Dems are weak!”

    SHUT. THE. FUCK. UP.

    I swear, sometimes I hate fuckers on the left as much as I do fuckers on the right.

  179. 179
    lee says:

    This is why I don’t prefer Biden, Sanders or Buttigeg. I see all of them pulling an Obama and ‘We need to look forward and not backwards’ when it comes time to punish this administration.

    I certainly don’t see Harris pulling that shit. I seriously doubt Warren would either.

Comments are closed.