I've just been watching some of the testimony.
What an entirely futile process this is. The voters don't support it, the Republicans don't support it, the Security community don't support it.
Unless something surprising happens they're actually playing into Trumps hands. He will make a great deal of capital out of this.
|
I’m not so sure. It’s certainly a risky move but the revelation that the White House tried to bury evidence of the call looks pretty damming. Trump is definitely rattled despite his usual bluster.
|
|
They will surely get something more damning than this in time, I would have waited for the blockbuster, or some way of amalgamating all the trump misdemeanours, for a better chance of success.
|
>I would have waited..
So would I. I think the danger here is that the continuous sniping might P off some people and strengthen his hand.
|
>> They will surely get something more damning than this in time, I would have waited
>> for the blockbuster, or some way of amalgamating all the trump misdemeanours, for a better
>> chance of success.
Seems that almost whatever the charge a significant proportion of the electorate regard any proceeding against Trump as 'revenge of the establishment'. That, together with their own apparent instincts makes a conviction by 66% of the Senate nigh on impossible.
Impeachment, supposedly the constitutional tool for dealing with serious misconduct in high office, is no longer capable of being utilised and is therefore unfit for purpose.
|
|
It keeps them in the headlines little more. The bar is set so high impeachment is near impossible.
|
>> It keeps them in the headlines little more. The bar is set so high impeachment
>> is near impossible.
Nixon resigned before impeachment was completed. Its thought likely by most commentators it would have gone all the way, his misdemeanours are not dissimilar to those against trump, this latest transcript is similar to the "smoking gun" tape.
Trump won't resign tho. It would have to go all the way, and no impeachment has made it through both houses in the states,
|
|
I don’t think Trump would resign but I do think he may well elect not stand for re-election if things go against him and defeat seems inevitable. Being the narcissist he is the prospect of losing would be intolerable.
|
|
IMO there are significant similarities between BoJo and Trump. not least in the way in which being a bit of a maverick and stuffing one up the "Establishment" seems to add to their popularity rather than diminish it.
|
|
Bojo has modelled himself on Trump.
|
It's a technique that keeps you in the publisher c eye, and any publisher city is good publicity. Not a good technique for building longevity in control. If you disrupt, you get disrupted eventually.
|
.....I suspect there are a couple of things that have changed the democrats' position:
a) the accusation involves dirt-digging about Joe Biden, a potential Democrat nomination (be a bit embarrassing if he was selected and lost, and they hadn't reacted now).
b) the narrative is considerably more simple to follow than any of the complex accusations that have gone before (cf Mueller, etc.). "He asked a foreign power to spy on one of our senior politicians, for purely political reasons".
I'm not at all sure that they will ultimately attempt to press ahead with impeachment (or indeed, that politically they want to). What they do want, however, is Trump as "damaged goods" before the presidential election next year.
|
The Democrats are paying no attention to the reasons why people voted for Trump and the reasons they still support him.
What are they accusing him of? Using powerful tools by telling other world leaders what to do in his attempt to identify corrupt politicians?
What does he say they are doing? Using dishonourable methods to keep their friends the corrupt in power and trying to invent fake news to hurt him in his valiant attempts to make America great again.
That's what his supporters will see, and that will do him no harm.
The Democrats are setting themselves up in the very role that Trump accuses them of holding.
Trump is an awful person, and to some degree or other representative of some awful people who voted for him. They'll stop voting for him when they become disenchanted. It would seem to me that creating sensationalist political storms just stops people paying attention to his actual performance.
They should get involved in some social media manipulation.
|
>> I'm not at all sure that they will ultimately attempt to press ahead with impeachment
>> (or indeed, that politically they want to). What they do want, however, is Trump as
>> "damaged goods" before the presidential election next year.
>>
There's nothing they add in that context, the limit has already been reached with those that appalled by him. They need to concentrate on getting a candidate and policies that will appeal to the right right amount of people in the right districts. They should send their time and effort on that not on wild goose chases.
|
From the Independent, An edited version appeared in the 'I' today.
"No matter the 52 per cent to the electorate who voted for Leave have been co-opted, willingly or not, into an increasingly radicalised army of populist revolt, who are supposed to want (every single one of them) a no-deal Brexit if necessary, even though they have never been explicitly asked that.
They are supposed to believe that they are in a war to save Britain. Hence all the militaristic language. If someone was brave enough to remind Johnson that Jo Cox died at the hands of a man yelling “Britain first” and “keep Britain independent” he would throw the words back in their face as “humbug” or some such."
www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-jo-cox-death-brendan-trump-brexit-culture-war-division-a9121101.html
This is straight from the Trump playbook. As a result we have 100's of thousands, maybe millions, who spew hate supposedly in the name of democracy at people who have the temerity to disagree with them and democratically elected MPs who in their own minds are voting for what is right.
This is a dangerous path. And a Labour party hostage to the extreme left is of little help in providing an appealing alternative for many people.
|
>> There's nothing they add in that context, the limit has already been reached with those
>> that appalled by him. They need to concentrate on getting a candidate and policies that
>> will appeal to the right right amount of people in the right districts. They should
>> send their time and effort on that not on wild goose chases.
I entirely agree.
|
>> There's nothing they add in that context, the limit has already been reached with those
>> that appalled by him. They need to concentrate on getting a candidate and policies that
>> will appeal to the right right amount of people in the right districts. They should
>> send their time and effort on that not on wild goose chases.
>>
....can't say I disagree with the bit in bold, but we'll have to agree to differ on the rest.
They need to keep the spotlight on just how awful Trump is, right up to the time of the election next year. This is a god-given opportunity, much more easy to understand and explain than any they have had so far.
Nancy Pelosi is no political amateur; she has up until now resisted any calls (even from her own party) to progress with impeachment. The recent developments patently now provide clear-cut opportunities that can be exploited with not much diversionary effort from the other imperative (as set out by yourself).
The reality is that, with the current electoral make-up, the Democrats are likely to be in full control of the decision on impeachment, whilst the Republicans would have the upper hand in any resulting trial (should it get that far).
If they play their cards right, the Democrats can keep the impeachment process going for a good few months without any conclusion (and if they decide it's appropriate, almost to the next election). If, however, the case proves overwhelming, and the public agrees*, then they can then decide to impeach even with an expectation of losing, and then throw the brown stuff over the Republican Party for clear political bias (just before the election).
*In a matter of a few days, polls (...I know...) indicate that support for impeachment has increased substantially; if this is followed by voting intentions, the Democrats are already pocketing support.
|
>> ....can't say I disagree with the bit in bold, but we'll have to agree to
>> differ on the rest.
>>
>> They need to keep the spotlight on just how awful Trump is, right up to
>> the time of the election next year.
If they don't think he's awful now, it's unlikely there's any significant number of voters that will suddenly change their minds.
But as you say agree to disagree.
|
Tantrum politics in the US and Westminster just leads to morons doubling down on their own viewpoints (politicians and voters).
Makes Holyrood look like a forum of enlightenment.
Maybe we're seeing the death throes of FPTP?
|
Interesting segment on the Today programme c07:30 this morning interviewing Jake Sullivan who was National Security Adviser to Biden when latter was VP:
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0008x96 - 31 minutes in.
Starts with a pro Trump political ad alleging that Biden tried to get Ukrainian prosecutor sacked for investigating son's affairs. At best it's 'whataboutery'. Sullivan's line is that prosecutor was corrupt and issue wasn't just son's investment but that of a whole tranche of private and government money from west.
New President of Ukraine's election campaign majored on stopping corruption which is apparently BIG in Ukraine.
Sullivan is obviously a partisan witness but he gives a reasonably measured account of Democrat's approach to Impeachment, why Pelosi has been reluctant and what, realistically, might happen next.
Seems Trump's loyal supporters swallow the advert's message hook>line>sinker and that, unless impeachment succeeds (unlikely given need for super majority in senate) he will be Republican candidate next year.
Target audience for Democrats will be floating voters in swing states.
Whole segment on Today was an excellent example of what BBC does well.
|
> Starts with a pro Trump political ad alleging that Biden tried to get Ukrainian prosecutor
>> sacked for investigating son's affairs. At best it's 'whataboutery'. Sullivan's line is that prosecutor was
>> corrupt and issue wasn't just son's investment but that of a whole tranche of private
>> and government money from west.
This is why it's not a slam dunk. Their best candidate is biden, who knows what skeletons might be in biden's closet.
Rather than swing voters i think it'll fire up trumps core supporters.
|
|
And therein lies the problem of why Trump is in power. The lack of a decent popular opposition candidate, Trump is there because of the "Hilary" effect.
|
>> And therein lies the problem of why Trump is in power. The lack of a decent popular opposition candidate,
While Trump is attacking Biden, is Warren going to be the Democrat candidate ( If it is time for a woman president ) ?
www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/27/warren-sanders-are-similar-only-one-seems-know-what-itll-take-win/
|
Item from The New Yorker:
www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/10/07/the-integrity-of-the-trump-impeachment-inquiry
May be pay-walled but IIRC from before I was a subscriber you can read a few articles a week/month FoC.
|
|
Loads of similar articles pre muller report, this is it we've got him etc. Quickly turned into tomorrow's bog roll.
|
>> Loads of similar articles pre muller report, this is it we've got him etc. Quickly
>> turned into tomorrow's bog roll.
The article is interesting as a 'take' on the facts. It's in the New Yorker which is a liberal paper but I think the facts outlined re Ukraine's want of Western money, Hunter Biden's part in that, Ukranian corruption and Manafort's relationship to Yanukovych are accurate.
How it will play v Trump, Fox and need for Impeachment to get a 'super majority' in the Senate are different questions.
|
> How it will play v Trump, Fox and need for Impeachment to get a 'super
>> majority' in the Senate are different questions.
>>
Which are the ones that matter, the rest is just background noise at best.
I just find it hard to believe that people want to beat/bring him down and they keep faffing about on the edges of what actually matters.
|
Trump Impeachment - CGNorwich
