HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » ck4829 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 23 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Sat Mar 20, 2004, 10:37 AM
Number of posts: 26,402

About Me

The Burn Notice - http://burnoatus.freeforums.net Right Wing Infopedia - http://rw-infopedia.pbworks.com LIVKI Ops - https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/livkiops/info

Journal Archives

Maybe there should be a "Trump Bar" when it comes to impeachment of future presidents?

One of the things I am advocating is the wholesale removal of "impeachment" from the political landscape. Not having impeachment for the POTUS would have several benefits, it would increase the value of every vote (As in if we're stuck with that potus, then maybe we collectively won't vote for the joke candidate or for the candidate who won't disclose everything. And in the case of Trump, then it's both. Your vote will not be something to throw away now) and I am also a Democrat... I know that when a Democrat is potus, impeachment won't become this last-resort option that we should never actually use, but there will be people who are OK with using impeachment as a way to "cleanse" the office rather than removing a president for "high crimes and misdemeanors", I don't like double standards, maybe we should remove the standard.

In my studies of doing this, I have found out that there is 'hard removal' and 'soft removal'.

Hard removal - Actually amending the Constitution to remove impeachment from it

Soft removal - Make the bar as a whole harder to reach

I am OK with both ways of hard removal and soft removal of impeachment, a way of soft removal is maybe there should be a "Trump Bar" for impeachment of a future potus.

As in... "Do the actions of this president exceed the Trump Bar?"

If the answer is "No", then impeachment is not on the table. Discussion ends there.

This has a couple of benefits:

1. We raise the bar for impeachment, this is one of many potential ways of getting soft removal and I've got people who don't want impeachment removed but yet agreeing with me that impeachment is broken. This is how we can do it.

2. We protect a future Democratic president from impeachment, it is no longer something that can be wielded as a petty weapon against a 'radical' potus that a future right wing House and Senate would not like.

3. This uses Trump as a standard for corruption, Trump becomes the line where corruption becomes too much. This would be an unwanted version of Trump's face on Mt. Rushmore or on the dollar bill. If you don't like the cult of personality associated with Trump, then this is a good counterattack against that cult.

Hard removal and soft removal... Both of these things need to happen to protect the party and to patch a hole in the rule of law.

It starts here, it starts today. Let's repair the political landscape.

It's time to begin discussion of amending the Constitution - To remove impeachment from it

I don't think the framers of the Constitution envisioned the partisan risk that could come with wielding impeachment as a weapon.

To see that the bar of "high crimes and misdemeanors" change simply because of the parties in Congress and who is in the White House change, I don't think that is what the serious charge of impeachment is supposed to be about.

Nothing will get Trump impeached today, what if years from now, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is president, what will be the bar? Will it be in the words of Senator Lindsey Graham in 1999, in his own words that "impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office", do you want to wait for President Ocasio-Cortez's mere presence in the White House to be enough to become worthy of impeachment, to "cleanse" her from the office?

The law should not be a partisan game, remove impeachment from the Constitution if we're not going to use it for Trump and have lawmakers who will be more than willing to use it for a president who will do much less than he has already done.

"And Roger Stone", that's one redacted line of the Mueller Report revealed!

Look for quotes and context!

Page 128, where Trump says it was brave that Manafort did not flip.

“But I had three people: Manafort, Corsi — I don’t know Corsi, but he refuses to say what they demanded. Manafort, Corsi and Roger Stone.”

- That's the full quote in the media, the bold part is redacted in the Mueller report.

I wonder if we can do this elsewhere?

For all them saying "Omar minimized 9/11", Trumpies REALLY don't like talking about Trump-Alex Jones

I've tried it with several angles...

"You know, Donald Trump is chummy with a man who says 9/11 was an "inside job", how is that better than what Omar said?"

-I've been blocked
-I've been called "IDIOT!" and they don't talk to me anymore (Which is a little rude since I never call them idiot)
-I've been met with silence... by people who were more than willing to go on and on about Ilhan Omar

Literally everything BUT answering my questions about why did Trump go on this man's show, why Roger Stone is friends with this man, why his administration gives him friendly coverage, or what he thinks about this man's conspiracy theories.

Kind of makes me wonder if there's something else going on when they are attacking Rep. Ilhan Omar, hmm, I wonder white it is?

If you're on Twitter, let's get #TrumpJones911 trending

Trump wants stochastic terror against Rep. Ilhan Omar with a spliced video, but he, his administration, his family, and his fans associate with and love Alex Jones... a man who has repeatedly claimed that the 9/11 attacks were an "inside job".

How's that for "some people did something"?

This isn't just a double standard, this is a gross injustice.

Let's make it known, let's get it out there.


What if it's less Russia colluded with Trump, and more the American ultra right used Russian power?

Not saying Trump-Russian collusion didn't happen, but I'm starting to think that as bad as Putin is, as bad as his regime is, it's just another pawn.

I'm talking about the group that saw the "upcoming war on Iraq" as part of the end times
I'm talking about the group that sees surviving school shootings as "socialism"
I'm talking about the group that ran Iran-Contra and destroyed Inslaw
I'm talking about the group that heckled with "Yeah!" when the question was about letting someone without health insurance die long before Russians propped up Trump
I'm talking about that Reagan admin fixer Oliver North who is now leading the NRA
I'm talking about that Reagan admin fixer Elliott Abrams who is now in the Trump White House leading Venezuelan policy
I'm talking about that 33%.

We like to talk about Russian bots, Russian manipulation, Russian influence, and so on. But what if it was mutual? What if there was some influence on Russia as much as it influenced the rest of the world?

The name of the game is nationalism; we're seeing it in the US, in Russia, in Brazil, in Hungary, in Israel. Israel has occupied the West Bank and the Golan Heights, with the latter the Trump admin plans to recognize as Israeli and with the former Netanyahu himself has said he plans to annex.

Now go over to Russia which has claimed areas in Georgia and Ukraine with military force (It's an occupation) and is deploying soldiers in Venezuela... which of course the US here does not recognize.

I think we're going to reach a flash point sooner rather than later with these two permanent UN security council members each backing and involving themselves in separate causes that have similar backgrounds. There's going to be a winner and a loser here and it's going to put a very dark mark on that security council of the UN... which just happens to be a very big bugaboo for that ultra right which hates multiculturalism and transnational entities like the UN.

Our ultra right.


"QAnon" revealed to be a stalker with erotomania?

Months of attacking some sort of "deep state conspiracy of satanist pedophiles", creating a cult-like army of followers, making grandiose promises of Trump making mass arrests of Democrats, and getting people to, I guess go into a suicide oath with "where we go one, we go all", already whipping up some fanatics to violence, the "storm" has arrived with QAnon attacking...

A random woman?

When anonymous conspiracy avatar QAnon blew another prediction, this time one that promised unspecified “PAIN” at the end of a 21-day countdown, the poster’s followers did what they always do: take it in stride.

But disturbingly, the QAnon poster refocused the subject of their cryptic posts away from the deep state and the ever-approaching Great Awakening and onto individual people. First came a series of portraits of Obama-era officials that followed posts referencing words like “kill” and “ammunition.” This came just days after the 8chan-driven massacre in Christchurch, New Zealand—and the posts were seen by many as a kind of hit list.

But after that, Q became hyperfocused on one particular person, and it’s someone that has no political footprint whatsoever: a photographer and casting director named Rachel Chandler, a member of the newspaper-dynasty Chandler family.


It's quite clear that "QAnon" is stalking this woman, and take a look at this...


Red flags everywhere. Enlisting others, impersonating an authority figure, implied and literal threats, a fascination with violence, upcoming dates, talking about "suicide watch", etc. Now all pointed at her.

This QAnon person is a stalker and the target is this woman, she interacted with this QAnon person in some minor way that for everyone else would just be an interaction with someone on the street that we forget about, maybe she hired him to do something for him and gestures we see as normal, QAnon is fixated on now, seeing as signs of something else.

We need to call this out, this isn't right. It's bad enough when the far right makes conspiracy theories about "the libs" and everything being "socialist", but now to involve some non-political woman? It's crazy, we need to reject this, this should not be the new normal.

Rep. Ilhan Omar tells California audience that Trump's anti-Islam remarks inspire attacks like NZ

Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, one of the first two Muslim women in Congress, accused President Trump on Saturday of inciting hatred of Islam and inspiring attacks like the killing of 50 people last weekend in a mass shooting at mosques in New Zealand.

In a speech to a packed hotel ballroom at a Muslim civil-rights banquet in Woodland Hills, the newly elected Democratic congresswoman said the New Zealand attack by a white supremacist fit a pattern of threats and assaults at American mosques and schools.

“We all kind of knew that this was happening,” she said. “But the reason I think that many of us knew that this was going to get worse is that we finally had a leader in the White House who publicly says Islam hates us, who fuels hate against Muslims, who thinks it is OK to speak about a faith and a whole community in a way that is dehumanizing, vilifying.”

Trump, she told the crowd, “doesn’t understand, or at least makes us want to think that he doesn’t understand, the consequence that his words might have. Some people like me know that he understands the consequences. He knows that there are people that he can influence to threaten our lives, to diminish our presence.”


There was also a protest of her that she addressed in her remarks, she said “There are thoroughly fascinating people outside who for so many years have spoken about an Islam that is oppressive, an Islam that lessens and isolates its women, and today they gather outside to protest a Muslim woman who is in Congress,” she said. “The irony in that is very entertaining to me."

Very entertaining indeed.

A.C. Thompson wins Walter Cronkite Award for exposing White Nationalist Terrorism

The USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism announced this week that ProPublica reporter A.C. Thompson is the winner of the Walter Cronkite Award for Excellence in Television Political Journalism in the category of Individual Achievement by a National Journalist. Thompson was recognized for “Documenting Hate,” a two-part documentary made in partnership with Frontline.

The documentary outed some of the most violent figures within America’s resurgent white supremacist movement, as well as the movement’s links to the U.S. military and governmental failures to curb the criminal activities of dangerous white power groups. The investigation identified former and active-duty members of the military as members of Atomwaffen Division, a neo-Nazi group.

Within weeks of the report, the Marine Corps announced that it had opened a criminal investigation into the activities of Lance Cpl. Vasillios Pistolis, whom the documentary identified as an Atomwaffen member who took part in the Charlottesville, Virginia, demonstration in August 2017. Pistolis was later convicted at a court-martial on charges of disobeying orders and making false statements, and he was dismissed from the Marines.

ProPublica and Frontline also reported on the Rise Above Movement, a white power gang. As a result, Michael Miselis, an aerospace engineer with a government security clearance identified as a member of RAM, was out of his job at defense contractor Northrop Grumman. Federal authorities eventually arrested Miselis and seven other members or associates of RAM on rioting charges, citing the reporting of ProPublica and Frontline.


Congratulations... and let's all stay safe out there.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 23 Next »