All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Malvolio]

Trump targets 25 ‘RINO’s’ in Congress who admit he lost election

Since Trump considers the Washington Post to be "fake news," they should send him a list of fake names. I can see it now. "I demand an investigation into Congressman Seymour Butts, Congresswoman Amanda Huginkiss, and Senator Adolph Oliver Bush!"

[4saken1]

So Mets is also okay with Congress have no oversight over the Executive branch, good to know where he stands.

Correction - Mets is OK with Congress having no oversight over the Executive branch when we have a Republican President.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

What's in green is reasonably simple, and you are almost to where the actual reality is with what's in blue.

Here's the issue with your point of view in blue...

McConnell did not actually have to do anything once Pelosi decided to refuse that deal. Never mind actually having been put into a position where he would either have to do something bad or actually help John/Jane Public out a little bit.

That is how Pelosi helped McConnell. In an instance where she a actually had a chance to put him into a position where he might have to actually do the bad thing you are bringing up?

Pelosi passed, and made sure that McConnell didn't have to deal with anything.

Bingo. I don’t even know why this is controversial. Trump was desperate and wanted to get a big bill out there. It was easily the biggest deal on the table and much more than what was on the table in congressional negotiations and MUCH bigger than what she’s arguing for now.

All she had to do was say “Americans are desperate, this isn’t perfect but it’s the biggest deal we got right now, I will support it 100% and we will vote for it and continue the fight for more relief”. Then McConnell’s hand would be forced why he wasn’t letting a deal backed by the White House through. Trump would have attacked him for hurting the election and he would have had to die on the hill and face wrath or get it over with.

Instead Pelosi let him off the hook and had a meltdown on television that lost her any goodwill. McConnell just got to sit back because Pelosi raiser her hand to take credit for blocking the deal. Maybe it wouldn’t have passed, but at least put them on the hook for it and take some consequences.

Because now you have a piece of **** garbage deal that you are trying to sell and people are going to blame her for fighting against a better deal for something that does next to nothing.

[Mister Mets]

What is the other action to be taken when a President commits multiple crimes?
And it is highly doubtful McConnellwould have taken up any crime he would have been impeached for.

If a President commits multiple crimes, assuming there's no plea deal, an impeachment makes sense.

I don't think it makes sense for Congress to go with a laundry list of charges, as two findings of Guilty have the same practical results as ten. The charges for Congress to go with should be made based on what can be proven, what is most clearly serious, and what is the center of their argument against him.

For example, if the President had his mistress killed, murder should certainly be one of the charges.

Subornation of perjury falls under the heading of obstruction.

The contempt of Congress charge exists with good reason and up to this point has not been notably abused. I'd argue that since the charge would be leveled after lengthy debate inside Congressional circles rather than as an order by an individual it's less likely to be abused. Regarding slippery slopes, I think an erosion of Congressional authority over the Executive branch outweighs the unlikely possibility of abuse.

Not Charging Trump with contempt/obstruction would do more to damage their reputation among Democrats than letting it go resulting in the adverse effect of tacitly encouraging Trumps' administration to defy Congressional oversight.
If you're thinking of Congresses reputation among Republicans I think that ship sailed long ago.

While subornation of perjury follows under the umbrella of Obstruction of Congress, it's a charge that easier to explain to ordinary people, so it's a better argument to make.

There have been a few Contempt of Congress charges. Before Trump's impeachment, Barr and Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross were both charged. Nothing happened.

Previously Attorney General Eric Holder, Former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten were charged with it, and nothing really happened to them. Bolten became a co-chair of the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund, demonstrating that he had maintained his good standing in Washington circles enough to be included in serious bipartisan projects.

[Amadeus Arkham]

This is about as surprising as finding out a chain smoker has lung cancer....

[worstblogever]

He asked a foreign leader to interfere with our elections in exchange for aid. That is why he was impeached, how Mets is okay with him doing this and saying it was no big deal is not surprising.

But, but... Mets repeatedly assures us he doesn't support Donald Trump! Just like Republicans in Congress pretend to not notice or comment on how much of a stupid, incompetent racist monster he is.

Surely, this doesn't belie what he's told us?

[The Cool Thatguy]

This is about as surprising as finding out a chain smoker has lung cancer....

Can anyone find a damn to give? I seem to have misplaced mine

[Robotman]

This is about as surprising as finding out a chain smoker has lung cancer....

As a grotesque bat-like creature I figured he was patient zero.

[Jack Dracula]

As a grotesque bat-like creature I figured he was patient zero.

Apparently, COVID-19 continues to jump species. Goats, humans, felines, and now whatever Rudy is.

[Mister Mets]

But, but... Mets repeatedly assures us he doesn't support Donald Trump! Just like Republicans in Congress pretend to not notice or comment on how much of a stupid, incompetent racist monster he is.

Surely, this doesn't belie what he's told us?

You seem to be responding to points I haven't made. I do not recall saying that what Trump did is okay, or no big deal. My main argument is that House Democrats didn't do a great job with the impeachment process.

[Kirby101]

You seem to be responding to points I haven't made. I do not recall saying that what Trump did is okay, or no big deal. My main argument is that House Democrats didn't do a great job with the impeachment process.

Is there anything they could have impeached him on that McConnell would have allowed any sort of real Senate trial for?

Why do you let the GOP off the hook here? Why do you ignore the obvious problem with Trump being held unaccountable.?

[The Cool Thatguy]

Is there anything they could have impeached him on that McConnell would have allowed any sort of real Senate trial for?

Why do you let the GOP off the hook here? Why do you ignore the obvious problem with Trump being held unaccountable.?

Something something Clinton, of course

[Joker]

As a grotesque bat-like creature I figured he was patient zero.

We really gotta stop disparaging the good name of bats by comparing Giuliani to them.

[Mister Mets]

Is there anything they could have impeached him on that McConnell would have allowed any sort of real Senate trial for?

Why do you let the GOP off the hook here? Why do you ignore the obvious problem with Trump being held unaccountable.?

Impeachment is a relatively rare politically process, used two other times in the 21st Century, so there's a small sample set to deternube precedent. This has a major weakness when the houses of Congress are controlled by different parties, and a case has inherently partisan implications, as when a Republican President is accused of abusing the power of his office to get information about the family of a potential Democratic candidate.

In the law, one agency is typically involved with bringing charges and proving the charges. You don't really have a situation in which one group makes another investigate something. The same prosecutorial office (DA, state Attorney General, US Attorney, etc.) will bring his case to a grand jury and then to a jury. It's rare to make another agency take a trial seriously, so the argument that House Democrats could push Senate Republicans to follow their lead on a party-line vote doesn't seem sound.

The process was essentially framed as the House Democrats being the prosecution, and the Senate Republicans being the defense, which was all quite predictable. So the House Democrats should have seen that coming, and done a better case introducing the charges, without relying on Mitch McConnell to help them in any way. They should also have focused more on the court of public opinion, to demonstrate that what Trump did was wrong, that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and that anyone who suggests otherwise should lose reelection.

Something something Clinton, of course

If Senate Democrats don't think perjury merits impeachment...

[Castle]

Trump targets 25 ‘RINO’s’ in Congress who admit he lost election

It greatly disturbs me when people are called RINOS for trying to do the right thing.