The process to impeach President Trump begins 2

131 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I think he is right that it is collapsing and I don't believe that there is anything redeemable about this sadistic militaristic system that was built on slavery and theft of indigenous land and the myth of the American Dream and American Exceptionalism. The sooner it implodes and disappears the better it will be for the global community.

The concern I have here is that the wealthy capital that props it up are not going to be the most hurt when it crashes down. This does not mean I think continuing it is a good thing though. It is essential for any progress in the world that the delusions are broken. 

kropotkin1951

When I look at the overcrowded for profit prisons and the detention centers at the border and the perpetual wars both live fire and trade I really don't see how its collapse could harm more people. It might harm more Americans than normal but might will likely reduce the numbers murdered in other parts of the globe.

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

When I look at the overcrowded for profit prisons and the detention centers at the border and the perpetual wars both live fire and trade I really don't see how its collapse could harm more people. It might harm more Americans than normal but might will likely reduce the numbers murdered in other parts of the globe.

More people? Where did I say more people? 

As usual I suggest that the people who will be harmed most are not going to be the ones who created and most benefitted from it. By this I mean more will suffer who did not create and prop it up than those who did prop it up. I did not compare the number of people harmed historically by this regime.

I disagree that those harmed will only be residents of the US as well. The kind of damage to the world financial system -- which is part of the American one, will be severe and the poorest in the world will suffer as they always do when big changes happen.

I did not argue that it should not happen or that this could be prevented -- I just noted that the people who suffered during its run will be some of the same who will suffer in its collapse.

 

NDPP

The northern vassal's self-delusions of moral and ethical superiority even as its representatives grovel, lickspittle and collaborate intimately with the hegemon in its most evil plans and endeavours is  to me as loathsome and disgusting as Anschluss Austria was with the German Reich. 'Stewed in the rank corruption of an enseamed bed.' With Obama it was easier to pretend it was something other. Perhaps that's why Trump is so hated, the hideousness of our national servility to the monster america becomes too obvious to face. But apparently not to endure.

kropotkin1951

Sean I posted a general comment about an issue to this board. I was not specifically debating you and certainly did not intend to engage you on the various points that you raised.

"More people? Where did I say more people?"

I agree you did not say it would harm more people, I said it would harm more people in the US. Neither you nor I compared the number of people harmed historically by this regime.

"I disagree that those harmed will only be residents of the US as well."

I did not say that the only people that would be harmed would be Americans. I was attempting to do a plus minus calculations. The initial collapse of the evil empire will be extremely chaotic. It is my belief that mutual aid is the only way forward but that is for the people affected to decide for themselves.

I did not argue that it should not happen or that this could be prevented -- I just noted that the people who suffered during its run will be some of the same who will suffer in its collapse.

I wasn't arguing or debating with you so how would you know that I believe that the people who suffered during its run will be some of the same who will suffer in its collapse.

I hope that clears up any misconceptions that arose from my post, that was not intended to be a direct response to you but rather a general comment in a thread on an article I found interesting.

 

NDPP

CNN Breaking: The Senate Has Acquitted President Donald Trump on Both Articles of Impeachment...

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1225177447500599297

"The most urgent question facing our imperilled republic now: How do we ensure that the priorities of Adam 'I've seen secret evidence of collusion/We fight the Russians over there so we don't have to fight them here,' Schiff continue to consume national attention?"

josh
Aristotleded24
NDPP

Trump Statement After Impeachment Acquittal

https://youtu.be/Sz5fK68rTF4

"It was evil, it was corrupt, it was dirty cops, it was leakers and liars. It was a disgrace...It was all bullshit."

JKR

Why has Russia supported Trump?

NDPP

For one reason only. Because you wish it so...

https://rabble.ca/comment/5668158#comment-5668158

bekayne

JKR wrote:

Why has Russia supported Trump?

Why do some here support Trump?

Sean in Ottawa

bekayne wrote:

JKR wrote:

Why has Russia supported Trump?

Why do some here support Trump?

Now that is the good question.

josh

Yes, a very good question.  Could be a relic of the "after Hitler, us" outlook.

Mobo2000

No one on this thread supports Trump.   We're hoping the Democrats save themselves from themselves, and in doing so, save us all.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Bob the Angry Flower:

contrarianna

"Supporting Trump" has become a near meaningless slur under a narrowly partisan banner.

See also:
25 Times Trump Has Been Dangerously Hawkish On Russia    https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/11/18/25-times-trump-has-been-dangerou...

Perhaps some people would also imagine this is defence of Trump because they see Trump's warmongering, acts of imperial aggression and brinkmanship as GOOD things, and imagine therefore one must be praising him by pointing these facts out.

It does not mean "supporting Trump" not to go along with the contrived narratives of DNC elite; the largely contrived failed McCarthyesque Russiagate (with its boost for Trump); nor to have endorsed the narrowly-based impeachment, clearly doomed from the start with a Republican Senate--resulting in an enormous boost to Trump.

To see real "Trump supporters" in action watch the enthusiastic standing applause by Pelosi and Democrats at Trump's Union speech as he introduces the CIA-primed Venezuelan coup poster boy, Guaidó:

Roberto Lovato: Dems & GOP Share Same Playbook on Immigration, Foreign Policy & Corporate Domination

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And the president then pointed to Juan Guaidó, who was in the gallery and stood up and got applause from both Democrats and — I mean, not only Republicans, but, from what I can see, from most Democrats, as well.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s right. There’s Nancy Pelosi on the podium right behind Trump, who, within minutes, would be ripping up his speech, standing up and applauding.

https://www.democracynow.org/2020/2/5/roberto_lovato_state_of_the_union

Point out any here who also applaud Trump's coup making and foreign aggression and they are indeed supporters of Trump, just like those "opposition" Democrats who swim in the same cesspool.

kropotkin1951

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Bob the Angry Flower:

A shout out to one of my favourite movies. Feed me Seymor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTBCHFIwy1g

bekayne

contrarianna wrote:

It does not mean "supporting Trump" not to go along with the contrived narratives of DNC elite; the largely contrived failed McCarthyesque Russiagate (with its boost for Trump); nor to have endorsed the narrowly-based impeachment, clearly doomed from the start with a Republican Senate--resulting in an enormous boost to Trump.

According to 538's average of polls, Trump is up 0.7% since the start of October. According to Real Clear Politics, he's up 0.2%. This "enormous boost" is the narrative created by a single (Gallup) poll.

contrarianna

bekayne wrote:

contrarianna wrote:

It does not mean "supporting Trump" not to go along with the contrived narratives of DNC elite; the largely contrived failed McCarthyesque Russiagate (with its boost for Trump); nor to have endorsed the narrowly-based impeachment, clearly doomed from the start with a Republican Senate--resulting in an enormous boost to Trump.

According to 538's average of polls, Trump is up 0.7% since the start of October. According to Real Clear Politics, he's up 0.2%. This "enormous boost" is the narrative created by a single (Gallup) poll.

I didn't mention polls deliberately because they are more ephemeral than the cumulative effect of failed strategies that will impact the election. Trump will be very difficult to beat by any candidate nominated to oppose him. Clinton won the popular vote by nearly 2% and the same failed electoral system will be used with its Republican-biased gerrymandering, and now even greater voter suppression than in the last election. https://truthout.org/articles/voter-suppression-could-reach-new-heights-...

The Democratic Party has squandered three years+ primarily focused on the failed strategies of partisan impeachment and Russiagate-- Three years that could have been concentrating on the very real and exceptionally destructive policies and actions of Trump: planet destroying rapacious environmental destruction, criminal imperial foreign policy, racism, general corruption, extreme neoliberal corporatist control to the greater concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few.

One reason that these more substantive issues have taken a backseat the Democratic attacks is the obvious Democratic continuity with many of the same malevolent elements. If anyone interprets this as me saying there is no difference who heads the US, they would be mistaken.
There is a benefit of the "lesser of evils" which in this case would be virtually any nominee vs Trump in the absence of a positive choice. Chomsky, who would have voted for Clinton in swing states, makes the case here:

....a broader conversation on the topic of “lesser evilism,” especially as applied to U.S. politics as voters face a presidential election in 2020 which could lead to President Donald Trump’s reelection.

“We’ve been living all these years,” Scheer argues, “with the illusion that there’s this lesser evil that somehow will make it better. […] I’m frightened out of my mind that it’s four more years of Trump; yes. However, do we really think that the Democrats are going to propose a serious alternative?”

“There’s another word for lesser evilism,” Chomsky replies. “It’s called rationality. Lesser evilism is not an illusion, it’s a rational position. But you don’t stop with lesser evilism. You begin with it, to prevent the worst, and then you go on to deal with the fundamental roots of what’s wrong, even with the lesser evils.”

While Scheer agrees with Chomsky about the imminent danger Trump poses, not just to Americans, but to humanity as a whole due to his suicidal approach to the climate crisis, the Truthdig editor in chief insists that it is precisely having read Chomsky’s works that instilled in him a profound fear “of what neoliberalism and what that opportunism breeds,” concluding that “it breeds a Trump.”

Chomsky, on the other hand traces the hard-earned progress that has been made by organized movements throughout the history of the U.S., using the examples of Presidents Richard Nixon and Franklin D. Roosevelt as leaders who were forced to amend their policies and actions by political activists.

“So even if there’s core, deep problems with the institutions, there still are choices between alternatives, which matter a lot,” says the MIT professor. “Small differences in a system with enormous power translate into huge effects. Meanwhile, you don’t stop with a lesser evilism; you continue to try to organize and develop the mass popular movements, which will block the worst and change the institutions. All of these things can go on at once. But the simple question of what button do you push on a particular day? That is a decision, and that matters....

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/noam-chomsky-makes-the-case-for-the-le...

Sean in Ottawa

I seriously do not know if Trump will win. But if he does it is not something that can be properly blamed on the Democrats.

They are not as good as they can and should be most of the time. They may or may not elect a great candidate.

But...

The US is aware of Trump. The stuff Trump has done and what he says daily excludes him from the vote of a rational person. The GOP represents the craven selfish interests of the most wealthy. If the Republicans win after the last 4 years, then it is not becuase Trump lied or people were decieved or becuase they did not have a better alternative. Any conceivable alternative is better.

The information is available. It will be due to the character of the US if Trump wins again. It will be due to a choice made by the US to have this. This election is a test of the US people. The Democrats do not have to do anything more to prove they are better than Trump. Trump is so extreme that almost anything is better. 

This is not an election of unknowns. If Trump is re-elected it means that US voters either want autocratic rule for and by wealthy kleptocrats, they do not care or they are so out of it that they are beyond any redemtion. The fact that the election appears close should be a scandal, a national shame. If Trump wins the US should be written off completely as a place where a fair election can produce a rational result. The rest of the world should understand fully what that country is and what  it means to engage with it. 

For Canada, it is very clear. We need to stop pretending that the national character of the country we claim to be so close to is sickening -- or that our own is the same. Canada needs to make other plans for living in a world where the US makes such a decision. One thing Trump does is make denial more ridiculous and less believable.

Mobo2000

RE: Lesser evilism and Chomsky, here is an open letter he signed, with others, and sent to the Greens in the US:

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/an-open-letter-to-the-green-party-for-2020/

I like this letter, and I like how many questions they ask in it.   But I'm not sure how much I agree with it.

Sean, your post above feels off to me -- "The US is aware of Trump. The stuff Trump has done and what he says daily excludes him from the vote of a rational person. The GOP represents the craven selfish interests of the most wealthy. If the Republicans win after the last 4 years, then it is not becuase Trump lied or people were decieved or becuase they did not have a better alternative. Any conceivable alternative is better."

I don't believe it is productive or fair to reduce Trump voters to nonrational entities acting out of malice.   Voters can smell the moral judgement and condescension a mile away.    And I think you are making something of a category error by assigning a moral quality or value to the "national character" of a country, or segments of their population.   

Do you (and other babblers) think it is obvious that Bloomberg will be "better" for US citizens or the world as president than Trump?   

I am not sure what I would do if I were an American voter and the Democratic candidate was Biden or Bloomberg.   I think Bloomberg is as bad as Trump, and may possibly be worse if he actually gained power, as he is likely to be more competant, with an equally repellant worldview.

Here's Matt Taibbi arguing against a Bloomberg presidency:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/mike-bloomberg-debate-disaster-955791/

"Bloomberg’s entire argument for office is that he’s better than Trump, but where exactly is he better? The biggest argument against a Trump presidency involves his racial attitudes. Bloomberg’s record is worse.

His defense Wednesday of stop-and-frisk — that it was a widely used policy that got “out of control” because “too many” African Americans were stopped — showed that even after all this time, he still doesn’t get the problem, i.e., that the mass-profiling policy was fundamentally discriminatory. Trump is a crude circus nationalist, but Bloomberg’s policing policies were profoundly, intellectually racist, and he proved in Nevada that his only growth has been to recognize their political inexpediency.

Trump is worse on the environment and on guns. Bloomberg supported George Bush at the height of the Iraq War effort, and says he still doesn’t regret supporting that invasion. Bloomberg also has an awful record when it comes to Wall Street....   

It would be impossible to find someone less believable as a reformer of Wall Street and an opponent of wealth inequality. Even Hillary Clinton was less of a guaranteed disaster on this issue. A vote for Bloomberg — a billionaire ex-Republican media executive, for God’s sake — would mean conceding the populist argument to Republicans again.

...Trump has clear authoritarian tendencies and has wrapped his hands around autocrats, but for all the fretting about him perhaps not leaving office in 2020 if voted out, it’s Bloomberg who has already tossed term limits aside, and it’s Bloomberg who is openly trying to buy an election. There is zero evidence he will be any less of a threat to democracy or an agent for rapacious corporate interests than Trump.

Even assuming one could cross into believing that Bloomberg is somehow less revolting or dangerous than the current president — I don’t, but let’s say — Wednesday exploded the idea that he would have a superior chance at beating him than Sanders or a conventional, non-plutocrat politician like Warren or Pete Buttigieg. Bloomberg was a total zero charisma-wise, had trouble thinking on his feet, and failed to find even one issue where he sounded confident and convincing. His only distinguishing characteristic is his money, and fuck his money."

Sean in Ottawa

The problem is not entirely about whether we think the next one would be as bad as Trump. It is the fact that Trump has been this bad. In other words even if we think the next politicians may do the same or worse, ther eis a social cost to seeing it happen and then not punishing it once it has happened.

I have spoken and engaged with a large number of Trump supporters. I defend arguing that this is not rational. Their willingness to overlook proven serious actions of Trump -- things that have never been done so openly -- are contortions of logic. The GOP behaviour in the Senate is the same. 

The defence of Trump is based on a willing suspension of logic.

I did not say malice but I won't quibble too much. I say they are acting out of selfishness. In some cases this is economic selfishness where they defend in a nonrational manner what Trump has done that they would never forgive the other side of doing in order to get percieved economic benefits (some cases it is tax cuts, in others it is holding positions and advantages in society due to white privelege). In other cases it is the holding of ideas that they won't let go of -- ideologies, perceptions that have been discredited but are invested in too much to give up so this irrational defence of Trump is designed to leave these unscathed.

My argument above is that Trump has provably done what would condemn any normal politician to be unelectable and yet his defenders just scream la-la-la at the facts. This is no longer about ignrance. They cannot not know. When you engage with them and see the twists they do to defend Trump, the obvious intentional distortion they not only repeat bu make up on the spot to protect an indefensible position. They are not all stupid. They know what theya re saying is hypocritical, dishonest and a fantasy. They want Trump and have pitched out any standard that the US has ever claimed to have for a President. No voter for Trump, who lcaims to have watched the hearings in the House can be truthful in believing that Trump did not do something wrong. Many try to pretend that he did but it is not worthy of removal. Most engage in artful what-aboutism that while is distracting and effective, proves their knowledge that they are lying. 

The US Trump supporters are collectively engaged in a shell game where it can be proven that they know. They know like it was known in Hiler's Germany. They know very well what they are doing. They know Trump is inhumane and have decided to support him anyway.

I will grant that some suspported Trump in 2016 out of true ignorance. Now I cannot accept this claim. They know. Their ignorance is so willful as to no longer be credible.

The fact that this represents the numbers it does definitly speaks to the character of the country. I think this is the poisonous plant that grew from American idologies of radical individualism, American exceptionalism, American Greed, American prejudice. Yes, I will defend my contention that the US is morally sick more than it is ignorant of what is happening. I will not get into absolutes and certainties about the source for the illness. However, I will defend the contention that the US has largely become a-moral in response to Trump. Even the opposition is unwilling to go as far as the truth demands they should. They are tolerating -- whether or not they support Trump -- a fundamental dishonesty in order to preserve notions of American exceptionalism.

This is the same plant that blossomed in the year 2000 when Al Gore admitted the election had been stolen but decided that the cost of fighting for the truth would do too much damage to the myth of American democracy, that defending notions of electoral fair play were not worth the cost and so he dropped his legal suit to actually count ballots.

The US is morally bankrupt. This is not an indictment of all Americans. It is a recognition that morality in the political process is not strong enough there to provide a critical mass that can sustain a democracy -- even a shitty one.

Sean in Ottawa

Followup from my last post:

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2020/02/21/five-gop-led-states-seek-to-block-equal-rights-amendment/#.XlA-H2hKiUk

This is what the US is: a country that in 2020 still cannot endorse the equality of men and women. Voting for the party that opposes it is something that the US is doing knowingly and willingly. It remains a national stain that the Us could have close elections with the Republicans with them winning any of them.

Sean in Ottawa
Sean in Ottawa
Sean in Ottawa

Donald Trump’s legal troubles have had an unexpected result – the proclamation of a view of the Presidency, in which Trump is legally untouchable and newly all-powerful. The head of the party of limited government has proposed a theory of American democracy, the unlimited Presidency, and the rest of his party has fallen into line.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/02/republicans-who-screamed-about-dictator-obama-nervously-stand-by-as-trump-declares-himself-above-all-law/?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=3790&recip_id=160969&list_id=1

Let us not pretend that this is not knowingly supported  -- it is also not a position that Trump supporters are consistent about. They support one set of rules for a Republican and another for a Democrat. This is not a difference of legal opinion it is a moral issue when it is this shamelessly hypocritical.

NDPP

Kunstler: Keep Throwing Spaghetti at that Wall

https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/keep-throwing-spaghetti-at-that-...

"...We're reminded this morning by the New York Times, America's official psychotic fantasy generator, that the Russians are coming (again!)  as an ad hoc arm of the committee to re-elect Mr Trump...Wow, that's pretty scary! Except when you consider that Americans have done a cracker-jack job of mind-fucking themselves on the disinformation of the past several years, coincidentally via this very The New York Times, a figment machine so demented that it has come to resemble the proverbial crazy aunt locked in the attic.

The true wonder is the Times' poverty of imagination, reviving a tattered cockamamie story that bombed abjectly the first time around. I suppose, in a culture addicted to stupid sequels, they expect Robert Mueller will be called back on-duty to sort this one out like he did so nicely before..."

NDPP

Tulsi Gabbard: How Democrats' Impeachment Campaign Helped Trump

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1230925592356360192

"Leaders need foresight. As I warned, those who demanded impeachment to advance their own political interests have put the country at risk by carelessly helping Trump, whose approval rating is the highest since he took office."

josh

NDPP wrote:

Tulsi Gabbard: How Democrats' Impeachment Campaign Helped Trump

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1230925592356360192

"Leaders need foresight. As I warned, those who demanded impeachment to advance their own political interests have put the country at risk by carelessly helping Trump, whose approval rating is the highest since he took office."

Trump's approvals in polls released the last day or two:

43/56

http://www.apnorc.org/Pages/The-State-of-the-Democratic-Primary-Process--.aspx

36/60

https://americanresearchgroup.com/economy/

42/56

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/85jz545ijm/tabs_Trump_Tweets_20200219.pdf

 

Pages