Octopus Overlords

Posted: **Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:07 pm**

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:58 am Trump was at those parties. Dershowittz doesn't bring any additional taint to the festival.

Dershowitz's taint is really a question of whether he keeps his undies on.

Posted: **Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:16 pm**

There's an old story. It's about guns, but I'll translate it to board games.

When you get into the board game hobby, you are faced with the question of how to add new games to your collection without your spouse getting mad. The secret is to play along with her and justify the first few purchases.

"You already have a board game."
"Yes, but that one is a party game. This one is for playing with one friend for when Frank comes over."

Later.

"You already have those two games!"
"Yes, but this one is a lighter family game we can play with the kids."

You'll get nasty looks and the cold shoulder, but bear with it until you hear the phrase, "You already have all those games!" At this point, you're off the hook. The games are a collection. A collective. They don't have a number anymore. You can sneak games in and add them to the shelf, and she'll never notice. It's still "All those games." You won't be in trouble until you have to justify another shelf.

What's the point?

We're at "All those scandals."

Posted: **Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:29 pm**

We are on the fifth shelf at least.

Posted: **Fri Jan 17, 2020 5:01 pm**

Holman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:07 pm
LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:58 am Trump was at those parties. Dershowittz doesn't bring any additional taint to the festival.
Dershowitz's taint is really a question of whether he keeps his undies on.

(Too subtle?)

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:08 am**

Trump's response to the Senate trial is batshit. Reading it has me rating it as a 'May God Save Your Soul' on the Billy Madison quiz scale.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:19 pm**

malchior wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:08 am Trump's response to the Senate trial is batshit. Reading it has me rating it as a 'May God Save Your Soul' on the Billy Madison quiz scale.

I hadn't read this before now. (Fortunately it's easy--it's less than 5 pages long, compared to the House's 110).

Man, just about every sentence is not just a lie but a howlingly bad one. I don't know why Trump needs lawyers at all if his case is nothing but a Sean Hannity editorial.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:56 pm**

Not nearly as crazy as I had feared. Fundamentally wrong - and in dire need of some editing - but more coherent and less inflammatory than I had expected.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:01 pm**

Fundamentally wrong and in need of editing.

And this is about as best one can say for what should be the most serious moment of this presidency

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:03 pm**

Trump hired celebrity lawyers to turn this into a reality show. He's good at controlling those. Contrary to Moscow Mitch's preferred strategy of making it go away quickly and quietly, Trump intends to turn it to his advantage. Since cameras are barred from the actual proceedings, the "real" trial will take place on talk shows and news programs, where his superstar lawyers can outshine the boring, plodding Democrats and change the subject to Hunter Biden's imagined corruption. If the Democrats try to treat the Senate's show trial as an actual legal proceeding, they'll end up on the defensive and get demolished in public opinion.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:24 pm**

Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:56 pm Not nearly as crazy as I had feared. Fundamentally wrong - and in dire need of some editing - but more coherent and less inflammatory than I had expected.

I agree.

I'm also not sure what else I expected. I believe he truly doesn't know what he did wrong, so of course it looks like a conspiracy to him.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:30 pm**

stessier wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 2:24 pm
Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:56 pm Not nearly as crazy as I had feared. Fundamentally wrong - and in dire need of some editing - but more coherent and less inflammatory than I had expected.
I agree.

I'm also not sure what else I expected. I believe he truly doesn't know what he did wrong, so of course it looks like a conspiracy to him.

He knows what he did wrong. He just thinks power gives him the right to get away with it. "Wrong" is for losers.

The statement sounds as unTrumpian as it does because Trump didn't write it. Sekulow et al know their job is to give reasonable-sounding cover to Trump's core belief that he is above the law because he's the boss of the law.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:45 pm**

Here we are. Dershowitz is arguing that abuse of power is not a crime. He then goes into an utterly ahistorical claim that the Founders hated the idea that Congress could hold the President accountable.

This is ridiculous and toxic. The claim here (that abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are somehow not within the Constitution's sense of "high crimes and misdemeanors") is just nuts.

His lawyerly argument seems to be that abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are not actual crimes, so they cannot be grounds for impeachment. He has the gall to pretend (completely ignoring everything said about impeachment/removal in the Constitution) that a President can abuse power as much as he wants until the calendar gives voters a chance to stop him

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:56 pm**

Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:56 pm Not nearly as crazy as I had feared. Fundamentally wrong - and in dire need of some editing - but more coherent and less inflammatory than I had expected.

Trump is arguing that impeachment itself is unconstitutional throughout. It builds to a crazy projection-y end. It is sort of sad that we expect worse than this. This is restraint. It is really depressing.

In order to preserve our constitutional structure of government, to reject the poisonous partisanship that the Framers warned against, to ensure one-party political impeachment vendettas do not become the "new normal", and to vindicate the will of the American people, the Senate must reject both Articles of Impeachment. In the end, this entire process is nothing more than a dangerous attack on the American people themselves and their fundamental right to vote.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:08 pm**

Holman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:45 pmHis lawyerly argument seems to be that abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are not actual crimes, so they cannot be grounds for impeachment. He has the gall to pretend (completely ignoring everything said about impeachment/removal in the Constitution) that a President can abuse power as much as he wants until the calendar gives voters a chance to stop him

It doesn't hurt to mention that this piece of shit is accused of abusing children. He and Starr were literally Epstein's legal team. They are abhorrent garbage people and the media shouldn't put them on without mentioning it EVERY FUCKING TIME. Instead, we let these termites eat away at our democracy and treat them like they are serious people. They aren't. Why is this relevant? It's not shocking that they are pushing this crazy theory on the American people since it is essentially the model for the complete lack of accountability that powerful people in our country enjoy all the time already. Why not expand it out to how we run ourselves? It is part of the same death spiral of ethics that our society is facing.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:15 pm**

I actually used to like Dershowitz. Now he has devolved into the biggest douchebag that money can buy. Wait, but Trump doesn't pay anybody. So he's just an attention whore douchebag.

Posted: **Sun Jan 19, 2020 11:17 pm**

Holman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:45 pm His lawyerly argument seems to be that abuse of power and obstruction of Congress are not actual crimes, so they cannot be grounds for impeachment. He has the gall to pretend (completely ignoring everything said about impeachment/removal in the Constitution) that a President can abuse power as much as he wants until the calendar gives voters a chance to stop him

They have no case against the charges that were brought, so they have to go for the meta argument. That wouldn't go over in a real court of law, but this isn't that. This is a battle for public opinion.

Jaymann wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:15 pm I actually used to like Dershowitz. Now he has devolved into the biggest douchebag that money can buy. Wait, but Trump doesn't pay anybody. So he's just an attention whore douchebag.

Many years ago (mid 1980s), when I managed a bookstore in Albany, a flamboyant customer wearing a cape and carrying a fancy cane cut into the checkout line to buy a magazine. When I pointed out the end of the line to him, he sputtered "Do you even know who I AM?" I said "I don't care. This is my store, and here you wait in line like anybody else." After he slammed his magazine on the counter and flounced out, somebody in line said that that was Alan Dershowitz. I didn't know who that was until Wife filled me in and showed me his picture. Self-important little douchebag.

Posted: **Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:31 am**

Saw a news headline....."Graham warns Dems, no witnesses!"

If you dont already know the Senate will do nothing to Trump but let him off free I dont know if theres help for you. The GOP just flaunts it all the time . Conspiring with Trump every day on his own impeachment. Not allowing witnesses. And half the country goes along with it. Why if they allowed witnesses some truth might slip out..ohhh no.

Posted: **Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:57 am**

malchior wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:56 pm
Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:56 pm Not nearly as crazy as I had feared. Fundamentally wrong - and in dire need of some editing - but more coherent and less inflammatory than I had expected.
Trump is arguing that impeachment itself is unconstitutional throughout. It builds to a crazy projection-y end. It is sort of sad that we expect worse than this. This is restraint. It is really depressing.

In order to preserve our constitutional structure of government, to reject the poisonous partisanship that the Framers warned against, to ensure one-party political impeachment vendettas do not become the "new normal", and to vindicate the will of the American people, the Senate must reject both Articles of Impeachment. In the end, this entire process is nothing more than a dangerous attack on the American people themselves and their fundamental right to vote.

I don’t think the argument is crazy at all. It’s not that impeachment is unconstitutional itself but rather that this impeachment is because it is purely partisan and has been the goal of the party that lost the last election since the day after they lost that election. Framed like that, it is the ultimate disenfranchisement.

Of course, all that completely ignores all the shit Trump has done to merit impeachment, shit that is blatantly and dangerously unconstitutional. But I don’t know how anyone can look at the present situation and not be concerned about one-party political impeachment vendettas becoming the new norm. Again, not a reason not to impeach, but not a crazy argument.

Posted: **Mon Jan 20, 2020 6:46 am**

Kurth wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:57 am
malchior wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:56 pm
Kurth wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:56 pm Not nearly as crazy as I had feared. Fundamentally wrong - and in dire need of some editing - but more coherent and less inflammatory than I had expected.
Trump is arguing that impeachment itself is unconstitutional throughout. It builds to a crazy projection-y end. It is sort of sad that we expect worse than this. This is restraint. It is really depressing.

In order to preserve our constitutional structure of government, to reject the poisonous partisanship that the Framers warned against, to ensure one-party political impeachment vendettas do not become the "new normal", and to vindicate the will of the American people, the Senate must reject both Articles of Impeachment. In the end, this entire process is nothing more than a dangerous attack on the American people themselves and their fundamental right to vote.

I don’t think the argument is crazy at all. It’s not that impeachment is unconstitutional itself but rather that this impeachment is because it is purely partisan and has been the goal of the party that lost the last election since the day after they lost that election. Framed like that, it is the ultimate disenfranchisement.

Of course, all that completely ignores all the shit Trump has done to merit impeachment, shit that is blatantly and dangerously unconstitutional.

First off the arguments are broad enough that they effectively mean any impeachment. Second, that last bit is what makes it insane IMO. The argument only works from the #witchhunt angle. Accepting that framing gives credit to that viewpoint.

But I don’t know how anyone can look at the present situation and not be concerned about one-party political impeachment vendettas becoming the new norm. Again, not a reason not to impeach, but not a crazy argument.

Again you have to buy into the worldview that this impeachment is a vendetta. If it is on the merits then why is this a concern? By buying into the premise it allows them to set the normal range.

IMO this is intentional posturing so they (meaning the GOP) can justify it when they actually inevitably launch an actual vendetta based impeachment. It is the playbook they run over and over. They take something the Dems did once in good faith and do it over and over in bad faith while they shout 'they started it'. We shouldn't fall for it.

Posted: **Mon Jan 20, 2020 9:16 am**

Impeachment, by definition, is a political process. So arguing that this impeachment isn't justified because Democrats initiated it is pure BS. Are we saying the Clinton impeachment *wasn't* partisan?

There is absolutely nothing about this impeachment that is unconstitutional - quite the opposite. This is the very abuse of power that the founders invented impeachment for in the first place. What they *didn't* anticipate is a party so corrupt and so loyal to the President that they would allow him to get away with "high crimes and misdemeanors" in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Posted: **Mon Jan 20, 2020 11:11 am**

malchior wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:08 pm It's not shocking that they are pushing this crazy theory on the American people since it is essentially the model for the complete lack of accountability that powerful people in our country enjoy all the time already. Why not expand it out to how we run ourselves? It is part of the same death spiral of ethics that our society is facing.

My observation as well.

Posted: **Mon Jan 20, 2020 11:45 am**

If using government to investigate your political opponents for “corruption” is permitted, Republicans need to be warned that Trump will not be President forever and the next Democratic President will be able to thoroughly investigate Trump, Pence, Nunes, Giuliani, McConnell, Pompeo, Barr and the rest for political purposes.

To show Impeachment wasn’t only political, the Democrats could agree to let Trump run again after impeachment.

Posted: **Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:00 pm**

Zarathud wrote:Republicans need to be warned that Trump will not be President forever and the next Democratic President will be able to thoroughly investigate Trump, Pence, Nunes, Giuliani, McConnell, Pompeo, Barr and the rest for political purposes.

Not without the GOP impeaching him/her, they won't. Because investigating political opponents is an obvious abuse of power. And so the wheel of hypocrisy will keep spinnin'.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 2:13 am**

If impeachment is “partisan“, then why isn’t the defense against it “partisan”. Who gets to say which side is being partissn?

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:44 am**

Grifman wrote:If impeachment is “partisan“, then why isn’t the defense against it “partisan”. Who gets to say which side is being partissn?

As always, the GOP gets to say.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:27 am**

Kurth wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 2:57 am Of course, all that completely ignores all the shit Trump has done to merit impeachment, shit that is blatantly and dangerously unconstitutional. But I don’t know how anyone can look at the present situation and not be concerned about one-party political impeachment vendettas becoming the new norm. Again, not a reason not to impeach, but not a crazy argument.

That's the thing. It isn't (in my opinion) a vendetta and it shouldn't be one party. The executive has to be accountable for their actions. If the checkers don't check... well, it's over.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:27 pm**

So far this trial has gone swimmingly. The President's lawyer is flat out lying and talking about a conspiracy theory from the get go. On brand.

Edit: Both these guys haven't talked about anything of substance. It is a complete whine fest. It is at a high school debate level argumentation...at best.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:43 pm**

I just love how one party pleads with the other party to be bipartisan AFTER that party has already shown how partisan they themselves are.
How all these fucks can talk the shit they talk with straight faces in beyond insulting.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:52 pm**

stimpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:43 pm I just love how one party pleads with the other party to be bipartisan AFTER that party has already shown how partisan they themselves are.
How all these fucks can talk the shit they talk with straight faces in beyond insulting.

As crafted this is an evergreen comment.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:57 pm**

stimpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:43 pm I just love how one party pleads with the other party to be bipartisan AFTER that party has already shown how partisan they themselves are.
How all these fucks can talk the shit they talk with straight faces in beyond insulting.

Totally agree.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:05 pm**

stimpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:43 pm I just love how one party pleads with the other party to be bipartisan AFTER that party has already shown how partisan they themselves are.
How all these fucks can talk the shit they talk with straight faces in beyond insulting.

I will opine that one side is worse than the other (the other rarely ever being able to show a unified front even when they ought to), but yeah.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:14 pm**

I'm pretty sure the nation's tombstone will be a cardboard arch scrawled on in crayon with the words 'BUT BOTH SIDES! (subtext) BUT HER EMAILS!' or something as vapid as the nonsense above.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:26 pm**

Today is a good day to call your senators, and maybe a few others.

It's very easy: (202) 224-3121 gets you to an automated menu and then to their voicemail. You can do it in under a minute.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:14 pm**

Interesting choice by the White House to have George McFly represent them.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:34 pm**

Adam Schiff has been in top form so far today. Republican senators are said to have been visibly uncomfortable during his statement of the case.

Trump's lawyers went with easily disprovable lies, including the claim that Schiff allowed no Republicans into the secure committee hearings. (All Republicans on the relevant committees--pretty close to half the committee members--were there.)

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:05 pm**

100% party-line vote against subpoenas for WH documents or evidence.

All those Republicans you thought might somehow prove courageous just completely caved. The GOP is all-in on the cover-up.

After McConnell railroads this exoneration through, I want the House to keep up investigations constantly. I want new Articles of Impeachment filed every week. It's not like there's any lack of evidence.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:31 pm**

Holman wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:05 pm 100% party-line vote against subpoenas for WH documents or evidence.

All those Republicans you thought might somehow prove courageous just completely caved. The GOP is all-in on the cover-up.

After McConnell railroads this exoneration through, I want the House to keep up investigations constantly. I want new Articles of Impeachment filed every week. It's not like there's any lack of evidence.

I bet Susan Collins was just SUPER concerned about the issue, though. She probably even furrowed her brow.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:32 pm**

Technically they just agreed to table the amendment, which was McConnell's way to give GOP fence-sitters a way to save face. There's still hope that witnesses and docs could come forward later.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:39 pm**

El Guapo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:31 pm
Holman wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:05 pm 100% party-line vote against subpoenas for WH documents or evidence.

All those Republicans you thought might somehow prove courageous just completely caved. The GOP is all-in on the cover-up.

After McConnell railroads this exoneration through, I want the House to keep up investigations constantly. I want new Articles of Impeachment filed every week. It's not like there's any lack of evidence.
I bet Susan Collins was just SUPER concerned about the issue, though. She probably even furrowed her brow.

She surpassed McConnell as the most unpopular senator in the US last week, so I had hoped she'd go with her conscience since she's almost certain to lose her seat either way. Maybe she doesn't have a conscience, or maybe she got cold feet when nobody would go with her, or maybe she thinks she has more of a future as a Trumpster to the end. Disappointing, anyway.

Posted: **Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:40 pm**

Holman wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:34 pm Adam Schiff has been in top form so far today. Republican senators are said to have been visibly uncomfortable during his statement of the case.

Trump's lawyers went with easily disprovable lies, including the claim that Schiff allowed no Republicans into the secure committee hearings. (All Republicans on the relevant committees--pretty close to half the committee members--were there.)

It was savvy of the Dems to start making the case against Drumpf in their remarks today, even though they were ostensibly debating calling witnesses. They should use their time to keep pounding the same easily understandable facts over and over and then summarize them before the nightly newscasts.

If the Republicans are going to hold a sham trial, the Dems should take every chance afforded to them to use the media to make their case directly to voters.

Octopus Overlords

The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread

Re: The Trump Impeachment Thread