The Tyrannical Minority

[_honorentheos]

...what I think you are missing is that this is secondary to Congress having and exercising investigatory oversight to uncover and share improper actions by the President that have not been committed yet.

We talked about this. See the part about Obama ordering the killing of American citizens with knowledge he was doing so without due process. That perfect universe, this universe discussion? That was about what you are saying above.

Knowing that the approach you advocate for will not only not work but will be more likely to turn even more people off to the legitimate concerns regarding Trump because it all starts to sounds like partisan noise to people not at the poles, what good argument could you really make that isn't idealistic rather than pragmatic? And if you don't think pragmatism (in the more pedestrian sense, not philosophical sense) is what politics is about, and we should pursue ideological outcomes because to fail to pursue all violations by the executive erodes democracy and set dangerous precedents, why are you ok with pragmatism when it comes to Obama?

Why demand Al Capone be tried for murder knowing it won't work, tax evasion has a real chance of working, and the stakes are really about successfully get the dangerous person out of the position they occupy allowing them to wreck havoc?

[_subgenius]

A prima facie case

clearly you don't know what this means or you would recognize that there is not one "made" before you.

[_subgenius]

Apparently you don’t get out much, as your recap of events and the people related to them is pretty much completely incorrect.

sez you, but Schiff's first 3 public witnesses disagree with you...only from a factual position, but you still have high ground from an imagination point.

But there’s no Biden crime for you to point at ...

Interesting point, whoever conjured up that mystery?

You can go, now.

irony indeed, I've left long ago, its you that can't seem to move on....from Nov 2016.
#TDS

[_canpakes]

Apparently you don’t get out much, as your recap of events and the people related to them is pretty much completely incorrect.

sez you, but Schiff's first 3 public witnesses disagree with you...only from a factual position, but you still have high ground from an imagination point.

But there’s no Biden crime for you to point at ...

Interesting point, whoever conjured up that mystery?

You can go, now.

irony indeed, I've left long ago, its you that can't seem to move on....from Nov 2016.
#TDS

OK then. You got nothin’, as usual. : D

[_EAllusion]

Knowing that the approach you advocate for will not only not work but will be more likely to turn even more people off to the legitimate concerns regarding Trump because it all starts to sounds like partisan noise to people not at the poles,

What are you saying won't work? Investigatory oversight? On what basis do you think that won't work? Impeachment proceedings give Congress the broadest possible legal authority to demand witness testimony and find people in contempt. Pursuing this gives them the best possible chance to uncover corrupt behavior from documentary and witness testimony that would not otherwise come forward as demonstrated by the Ukraine hearings. The capacity to find that behavior can further act as a deterrent to it as evidenced by the fact that military aid was released to Ukraine almost immediately after Congress got wind of the whistleblower. Throwing that power away is foolish when the President has been rather open about his willingness and intent to undermine elections.

Trump is about 20 points underwater from where fundamentals models predict he would be in favorability ratings for most of his presidency. I propose to you this is in significant part because of being surrounded by a cloud of scandal. That's suppressing his popularity. I further reason that this would worsen, not improve, if that cloud got worse. Your position is the opposite, and the only sustained case I've really seen you make for it is a CNN article that gets recent history very wrong then creates a false analogy to it.

Why demand Al Capone be tried for murder knowing it won't work, tax evasion has a real chance of working, and the stakes are really about successfully get the dangerous person out of the position they occupy allowing them to wreck havoc?

You think Trump has a "real chance" of being removed? That's the basket you want to put all your eggs in? McConnell et al's sense of patriotic duty over party?

Cool. Solid bet.

Or is this just more of you arguing that this will make him less popular in an election? Probably not, but if so, you need to grapple with the fact that this concerns what can be done to have a fair election in the first place.

[_honorentheos]

Look, you and I aren't going to agree that public opinion is the central metric of success. in my opinion, getting enough people to recognize that this isn't just Democrats v. Republicans, Conservatives v. Liberals but an actual issue of wrong-doing on the part of the President matters most. And as I said earlier, you only get so much capital to spend on public opinion and then it's gone. Turning the impeachment proceeding into a fishing trip for more yet-to-be-uncovered wrong doing could pay off, bigly as a stable genius might say. Or it may turn most people off.

Revisiting all of the past accusations against Trump is almost certainly a losing strategy. People have their opinions set there and it would play into narratives about the Democrats looking for any potential means to overturn the results of the election of 2016.

The Ukraine scandal can rise above that. It's the right case and the right strategy. I don't have much else to try and litigate on the matter, either. People will disagree, consider and wait to see, or give no finnudles. I don't really care.

[_EAllusion]

Look, you and I aren't going to agree that public opinion is the central metric of success. in my opinion, getting enough people to recognize that this isn't just Democrats v. Republicans, Conservatives v. Liberals but an actual issue of wrong-doing on the part of the President matters most.

This doesn't answer what you think should be done about giving Trump a clear path to disrupt a free and fair election. Reading inbetween the lines, it appears your position is to just hope he doesn't do that even though we have multiple examples of him already attempting to do that. I think your risk/benefit analysis is broken on that level before I even start to disagree with what you think moves public opinion.

[_honorentheos]

Conservative election manipulation is a bigger issue than Trump or foreign influence. Trump using the Presidency to try and undermine a political opponent is the jump off for what we are discussing but it isn't what makes the Ukraine scandal the best case for successfully reining in Trump's authoritarian take over of the executive. That he did so in a way that left an important ally exposed to an aggressive Russia that people on both sides of the political isle can agree was abuse of the office makes it the better case.

So what's to be done about Trump? That's hardly been unaddressed. What's to be done about widespread attacks on elections? That's a far bigger subject, and a diversion from what makes this the best case for pursuing impeachment.

[_EAllusion]

Conservative election manipulation is a bigger issue than Trump or foreign influence.

Sure, there multiple ways in which conservatives are attempting to illicitly manipulate the outcome of elections. Pointing this out in a reply to me here is a red herring, though. It feels like a smoker responding to someone suggesting they quit by pointing out all the other ways people die.

Trump using the Presidency to try and undermine a political opponent is the jump off for what we are discussing but it isn't what makes the Ukraine scandal the best case for successfully reining in Trump's authoritarian take over of the executive.

You're not connecting the dots. I am arguing that a longer impeachment inquiry that fully investigates evidence of Trump's wrongdoing has the benefit of giving Congress the best possible investigatory tools to expose and deter attempts at 2020 election interference from Trump or his allies. It's not perfect, but I am arguing it is much better than the alternative. I say this is a strong point in favor of it. When I ask you what you what you recommend given that you are rejecting this, you seem to offer nothing beyond shoegazing.

Though you haven't explicitly said it, it seems that you think it's less risky to try and impeach Trump (and remove his accomplices in the White House which includes Mike Pence) and see if you can pull it off. That borders on delusional if that's what you think, but it's hard to know.

So what's to be done about Trump? That's hardly been unaddressed. What's to be done about widespread attacks on elections? That's a far bigger subject, and a diversion from what makes this the best case for pursuing impeachment.

Aside from the fact that you're probably wrong about what moves public opinion, I also wonder about your risk benefit analysis here. Let's say a narrow, short Ukraine-focused impeachment is what best moves public opinion. How much do you think it is moving public opinion against the alternative in November of 2020? 2 points? 3?

How do you think that compares to the electoral benefit of, I don't know, Bill Barr announcing a criminal investigation into a Democratic opponent 2 weeks before the election with manufactured evidence of their guilt at the ready? Or widespread shutdowns of voting machines in Democratic heavy areas? 2 points? 3? More?

[_EAllusion]

It looks like GOP leaders are starting to back off the ledge of considering having the KY legislature overthrow the democratically elected Democratic governor. That's good, I guess. Score one for barely keeping the tyrannical minority in check, if only for a little while.

In other news, the Republican legislature in Texas is pushing legislation that would give the GOP governor control of judicial appointments only when those judges are in counties where there are more than 500k people. i.e. Where Democrats recently won a bunch of judicial seats in Texas.

https://www.facingsouth.org/2019/11/tex ... ain-ground