Impeached

[noddy]

was Clinton getting impeached for a gobbie, political ?

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

was Clinton getting impeached for a gobbie, political ?

Bill Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, something he lost his law license over.

All impeachments are political but they are usually attached to a crime. Or at least a crime which can be articulated and isn't merely the subjective judgement of this politician or that politician.


------------------

Andrew Johnson was impeached on 11 charges, the main one being his firing of the Secretary of War and allegedly violating the Tenure of Office act which that congress had passed to prevent the President from removing Stanton.

That was a highly political impeachment but one also connected to the high passions&disarray of the Civil War. [And of course, a very sore point. What one thinks of Johnson, Reconstruction, Johnson's Confederate sympathies and the Radical Republican effects the view of the impeachment against Johnson.

But overall, the impeachment itself is a very low-point in American governance.]

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Clinton's obstruction of justice charge is of a different kind from the one leveled against Trump...though if I'm remembering correctly, it had political theater and temporizing attached to it.

The Democratic Party and media were very successful in making it all about sex and not perjury; and considering it was framed as a series of infelicities instead of felonies, it obviously opened the floor to digging into anyone's conduct as potential newpaper fodder....

So, a number of politicians became very cool to impeachment. But there was a stupid idea (at least how I remember it) that obstruction would be the more politically expedient and palatable charge that Senators could use without opening themselves up to their bedroom habits.

And I think that worked- the perjury charge didn't garner a majority but half the Senate voted for obstruction....of course, both fell way short of the 2/3rds needed.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

The injustice in the Clinton case- besides having a very friendly media handwave a lot of shady stories involving Mrs.Clinton-

is that he was pursued by Kenneth Starr under the independent counsel law and that what started out on one subject, years later, ended up another....

the Indepdent Counsel was a terribly unconstitutional and wasteful mechanism to begin with and expired after 1999.

[noddy]

Yeh, thats all fair enough, I was just musing on the Trump impeachment being a new, scary development in American politics verus an incremental escalation of established patterns.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Yeh, thats all fair enough, I was just musing on the Trump impeachment being a new, scary development in American politics verus an incremental escalation of established patterns.

No, I get that....but even in increments- it's a point where the car crashes into a guardrail.

We can talk about each step which led to the crash but the impact happens and the car is in a totally different shape than it was a moment ago.

[noddy]

Definitely one of those things that the local flavours make it hard for an outsider to read - in my country politicians having affairs and lying about them is purely an internal matter for the party if they think it will cost them votes.

The split between the nationalist viewpoint and the globalist one has to come to a head at some stage and its going to be interesting.

we have a simmilar dynamic but the scale is much smaller, as always, and its the right wing which is pro globalist more than the left, which is why I misread things I think.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Well, there are plenty of Republicans in the globalist camp....right now these things are not so cut and dry.

[Simple Minded]

Well, there are plenty of Republicans in the globalist camp....right now these things are not so cut and dry.

Yep. If Mr. Perfect were still alive, he'd be screaming the T word at you right now.

Rumor has it he bought some orange bedsheets and had some kind of accident.....

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

I don't see why.

The fact of the matter is that the biggest faction of the Republican Party [in terms of loyalty/lobbyists in D.C.] remain the chamber of commerce types who are all about globalized everything. It's an involved topic and more nuanced than that but pointing that out isn't temporizing.

A lot of that has to do with class position, obviously.

But what's suddenly changed, around 2012-2013, was elite opinion conflated immigration issues with a host of moral imperatives to a fanatical extent. It was an overnight sea change where it was supposed to be everyone's duty to dissolve the borders or else one is all sorts of names. That fanaticism hasn't pierced through the Republican Party so thoroughly, even if there remains plenty of politicians around who are more amenable to lax migrant policies, for the cheaper labor; and more globalized manufacturing.

So they too, suddenly, find themselves cast out of polite society.

[noddy]

well, this is the bit I get confused by.

in my country - the difference between lefty progressives and right wing globalists is all in the "why", the "whats" are almost the same, hence all the big corporations playing the "woke" game, it is in their interest to have that perception spin.

the nationalist, pro local politics, is very much the rust belt types, the unionist old left - these folks are socialists, not capitalists, but the new left of uni students and greenies hates them.

the right wing nationalists are few and far between - restricted to the fringes.

Trumps base (for me) doesnt come from a very right wing base, if this was Australia, it comes from the base that the lefties have abandoned.

which is why I cant see any deep state or whatever, its obvious from the setup that he is fighting half his own party plus the entire of the rest of politics no conspiracies are required - the game was always going to be played on those levels.
----
America has the flyover state density which my country does not have, this is always the maths I get wrong aswell.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

I'd add that I'm pretty confident that nationalists (pro-local...or even extreme blood-and-soil) type of thinking isn't really a good translation to the broader population, and mostly a plaything for pundits.

Those rust belt voters who put him over the top in those states are mostly socially catholic trade unionist types-- not so much socialist leaning as dreaming of capitalism with checks and balances...most assuredly abandoned by the Democratic Party where it used to be a base demo.

which is why I cant see any deep state or whatever, its obvious from the setup that he is fighting half his own party plus the entire of the rest of politics no conspiracies are required - the game was always going to be played on those levels.

This reads like a non sequitur to me....why would fighting half his own party plus politically invalidate sabotage from a permanent bureaucracy?

The two would seemingly go hand-in-glove....especially considering the increasing overlap of the two (three, with the lobbying racket)

[noddy]

cause im very germanic with my morality

if you walk into a fight, knowing what the fight is, then their are no conspiracies, nor sabotage, those words would require the conditions to be pretending to be different to that, and you being taken by surprise.

you win, or you whine, if your whining you are doing the wrong thing.

its probably a use of language thing, I do struggle a lot with political hyperbole, particularly as its done by America pundits, its like the worst bowels of facebook ranting.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

cause im very germanic with my morality

if you walk into a fight, knowing what the fight is, then their are no conspiracies, nor sabotage, those words would require the conditions to be pretending to be different to that, and you being taken by surprise.

you win, or you whine, if your whining you are doing the wrong thing.

its probably a use of language thing, I do struggle a lot with political hyperbole, particularly as its done by America pundits, its like the worst bowels of facebook ranting.

That is a point of view I can see.

Yes...talkin' bout it also takes on all the hyperbole....and the President is a self-acknowledged whiner...

but there is surprise to just how bad of a human capital problem we are suffering at the highest ranks. The fight politically was most certainly a given...that the heads of our intelligence communities decided it was okay to brazenly join in too and throw out all sorts of procedural precedence because "orange man bad" for just existing is a sign of some serious, serious rot.

It has not always been like this...even when taken into account the skullduggery of men like Hoover, who had the good taste to be much more subtle about his maneuvering.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

well, this is the bit I get confused by.

in my country - the difference between lefty progressives and right wing globalists is all in the "why", the "whats" are almost the same, hence all the big corporations playing the "woke" game, it is in their interest to have that perception spin.

the nationalist, pro local politics, is very much the rust belt types, the unionist old left - these folks are socialists, not capitalists, but the new left of uni students and greenies hates them.

the right wing nationalists are few and far between - restricted to the fringes.

Trumps base (for me) doesnt come from a very right wing base, if this was Australia, it comes from the base that the lefties have abandoned.

which is why I cant see any deep state or whatever, its obvious from the setup that he is fighting half his own party plus the entire of the rest of politics no conspiracies are required - the game was always going to be played on those levels.
----
America has the flyover state density which my country does not have, this is always the maths I get wrong aswell.

This is a very old debate in American politics that crosses some interesting streams...the pejorative 'Know Nothing Party' [The America Party] with its nativism was otherwise pretty progressive and the barrier between them and the radical republicans in the north was a thin one...because of abolitionism, women's rights, free labour/free soil movement connections....

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party of the 1856 election read into its platform a monograph which argued that the primary principle of America's founding was open borders for mass migration with very liberal naturalization laws. That restrictions to immigration and the abolition of slavery was the exact tyranny the colonies rebelled against King George over, and to impose such a system would reduce everyone to serfdom, and not just the people who deserve it. I'm gonna find some sources for this point 'cause I remember them being very interesting, but post it in the immigration thread 'cause it better fits there.

But my point is that these sort of contradictory divisions may have some very deep roots here....

[noddy]

I'd add that I'm pretty confident that nationalists (pro-local...or even extreme blood-and-soil) type of thinking isn't really a good translation to the broader population, and mostly a plaything for pundits.

to be clear Im dont consider the pro-local politics to be nationalist in the crude racist/hitler sense, but more in terms of disinterested in foreign politics, anti free market, pays taxes to get local services, pro protectionism, pro government subsidies etc.

the kind of politics mainland europe has, which makes a mess of the left/right splits prominant in the american discussion.

[Simple Minded]

I don't see why.

The fact of the matter is that the biggest faction of the Republican Party [in terms of loyalty/lobbyists in D.C.] remain the chamber of commerce types who are all about globalized everything. It's an involved topic and more nuanced than that but pointing that out isn't temporizing.

A lot of that has to do with class position, obviously.

But what's suddenly changed, around 2012-2013, was elite opinion conflated immigration issues with a host of moral imperatives to a fanatical extent. It was an overnight sea change where it was supposed to be everyone's duty to dissolve the borders or else one is all sorts of names. That fanaticism hasn't pierced through the Republican Party so thoroughly, even if there remains plenty of politicians around who are more amenable to lax migrant policies, for the cheaper labor; and more globalized manufacturing.

So they too, suddenly, find themselves cast out of polite society.

I was referring to Mr. P's binoid fanaticism. Facts?

Your ability to discern beyond republican good, democrat bad, makes you a threat to the existing order or rather status quo.

Damn shame, "we" coulda used someone like you on "our" team.

[Doc]

I don't see why.

The fact of the matter is that the biggest faction of the Republican Party [in terms of loyalty/lobbyists in D.C.] remain the chamber of commerce types who are all about globalized everything. It's an involved topic and more nuanced than that but pointing that out isn't temporizing.

A lot of that has to do with class position, obviously.

But what's suddenly changed, around 2012-2013, was elite opinion conflated immigration issues with a host of moral imperatives to a fanatical extent. It was an overnight sea change where it was supposed to be everyone's duty to dissolve the borders or else one is all sorts of names. That fanaticism hasn't pierced through the Republican Party so thoroughly, even if there remains plenty of politicians around who are more amenable to lax migrant policies, for the cheaper labor; and more globalized manufacturing.

So they too, suddenly, find themselves cast out of polite society.

I was referring to Mr. P's binoid fanaticism. Facts?

Your ability to discern beyond republican good, democrat bad, makes you a threat to the existing order or rather status quo.

Damn shame, "we" coulda used someone like you on "our" team.

Personally I think when Mr. P. does his right side satire of the left he is pretty damn funny. Though I haven't seen much of that satire from him for a while.

[Simple Minded]

Personally I think when Mr. P. does his right side satire of the left he is pretty damn funny. Though I haven't seen much of that satire from him for a while.

I love it too. He reminds me of many of the curmudgeons from my youth. They are a dying breed. I miss them.
Damn shame the wind has gone out of his sails lately. Hopefully, the 2020 election results will re-energize him.

As the ORZ saying goes: "Two's company, three's a crowd."

My party is red.
The other party blue.
to orange or other color parties,
we say: "F**k you!"

[crashtech66]

Looks like the inveterate neocon Bolton has weighed in on the side of the Deep State:

News of Bolton book sends jolt through impeachment trial

My guess is that the Trump haters won't realize until later what side they are ending up on here.

[Doc]

Looks like the inveterate neocon Bolton has weighed in on the side of the Deep State:

News of Bolton book sends jolt through impeachment trial

My guess is that the Trump haters won't realize until later what side they are ending up on here.

For those not following the impeachment closely the title of this article could just as easily be

"Guess who committed a felony by leaking a draft of Bolton's book while sitting on the national security council?"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/gue ... d-book-nsc

Guess Who Was In Charge Of Reviewing Bolton's Leaked Book At The NSC?

by Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/27/2020 - 13:39
40
SHARES

The identical twin brother of Democratic impeachment witness Alexander Vindman, Yevgeny Vindman, is reportedly in charge of reviewing all publications by current and former officials at the National Security Council (NSC), according to Breitbart News, which would include the recently leaked manuscript of former National Security adviser John Bolton.

The report describes the reviews as a "standard process that allows the NSC to review book manuscripts, op-eds, or any other material for any classified material to be eliminated before publication."

The New York Times reported Sunday evening that Bolton’s draft book manuscript, which had been submitted to the NSC for prepublication review on Dec. 30, alleged that President Trump told Bolton in August 2019 that he wanted to withhold security assistance to Ukraine until it agreed to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, among others.

It was not clear if the Times had seen the Bolton manuscript; its sources were “multiple people” who “described Mr. Bolton’s account of the Ukraine affair.”

Bolton’s lawyer, Chuck Cooper, issued a statement in which he said: “It is clear, regrettably, from The New York Times article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted.” He did not confirm or deny the Times‘ reporting on the content of the manuscript. -Breitbart News

[Simple Minded]

I heard yesterday the CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN did not cover any of Pam Bondi's or Alan Dershowitz testimony. But covered all of the House Impeachment manager's testimonies.


https://floridianpress.com/2020/01/pam- ... -networks/

[Doc]

I heard yesterday the CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN did not cover any of Pam Bondi's or Alan Dershowitz testimony. But covered all of the House Impeachment manager's testimonies.


https://floridianpress.com/2020/01/pam- ... -networks/

353,693 views
•Jan 27, 2020

Its going viral !!!

This is spreading faster than the Coronavirus !!

The MSM needs to take immediate action to stop it !!

Perhaps flights into and out of Ukraine should be stopped before it is too late.

[Parodite]

Smart move. "It's not about who is the whistle blower, but about two guys plotting to remove Trump"

I watched the Dershowitz speech. Makes all sense. So even if these two articles of impeachment are true it doesn't matter. Case closed.

uqmhfyH09jM

Interesting, sad, comical to see how the Democrats, their affiliates in the media and social media mobs will sink deeper and deeper into their own home-made swamp feeding on their own faeces. And all they needed to do to defeat Trump is act reasonable, fair and remain centrist. Now they might end up with Bernie Sanders winning the nomination. Who sells wonderful dreams for which there is no money, with not enough public support to pay for them. Who doesn't distance himself from his communist field operators who like gulags and prisons and bullets for political opponents. Who in the past endorsed Pillory Clinton who fist f'd him in the ass. Maybe he liked that. Who, in short, is not able to operate in reality. But he does love capitalism so there is hope!

[Simple Minded]

Smart move. "It's not about who is the whistle blower, but about two guys plotting to remove Trump"

I watched the Dershowitz speech. Makes all sense. So even if these two articles of impeachment are true it doesn't matter. Case closed.

uqmhfyH09jM

Interesting, sad, comical to see how the Democrats, their affiliates in the media and social media mobs will sink deeper and deeper into their own home-made swamp feeding on their own faeces. And all they needed to do to defeat Trump is act reasonable, fair and remain centrist. Now they might end up with Bernie Sanders winning the nomination. Who sells wonderful dreams for which there is no money, with not enough public support to pay for them. Who doesn't distance himself from his communist field operators who like gulags and prisons and bullets for political opponents. Who in the past endorsed Pillory Clinton who fist f'd him in the ass. Maybe he liked that. Who, in short, is not able to operate in reality. But he does love capitalism so there is hope!

Kudos to Rand Paul for asking about Deep State machinations and a multi-year plan to repair their broken machine.

Every now and then, one encounters a poetic phrase that is accurate, reveals deep (no pun intended) insight, and provides a stunning visual. Parodite rocks!

As Mark Steyn noted on Tucker Carlson's show, this is playing out so well for the Dems, that the Repubs should drag this out for another couple months, lots and lots of witnesses, shine some light in lots of places where neither party wants the light shown.

As Tom Fitton says at 10:00, "An extraordinary example of the Deep State protecting itself."

E6cZllL_uQo

As I noted earlier, Dershowitz argument was not covered by ABC, NBC,CBS, ro CNN. Beware the govt/MSM complex.