The Donald Trump Impeachment Thread

[Inertiaman]

Who andy or Trump? Or both?

[andy]

[andy]

Take him within the context of who he is - this is a man who mocked a reporter's disabilities at a rally. The fact that he referred to a collection of poor countries as shitholes in a 'private' meeting should be entirely unsurprising. No one voted in Obama this time - expecting Trump to mature in office, or otherwise express "Presidential behaviour", was always naive.

[Goody]

See i take it as the opposite - if you have someone who doesnt have a history of being a sack of shite id probably let them away with a slip or two. But when its part of a proven history of being aforementioned sack of shite they should be hauled over the coals as its obviously not an aberration , its the fact that the president of the US is a sack of shite.

[Orange]

Originally Posted by andy

The fact that he referred to a collection of poor countries as shitholes in a 'private' meeting should be entirely unsurprising.

I suspect this is why it’s proving so damaging. Stories tend to have more traction when they confirm or reinforce pre-existing beliefs.

[Orange]

Has for the naivety point, there weren’t many of us here who thought he was anything other than a misogynistic, racist, ignorant manbaby. I think the uncertainty was whether America’s institutions would constrain him, on which the jury is still out.

[Inertiaman]

Who exactly is expressing surprise anyway?

[andy]

Originally Posted by Orange

Has for the naivety point, there weren’t many of us here who thought he was anything other than a misogynistic, racist, ignorant manbaby. I think the uncertainty was whether America’s institutions would constrain him, on which the jury is still out.

Fair - the interesting test as to whether he's moderated will be after the mid-terms. If he loses control of the House and there's a realistic prospect at that stage of impeachment proceedings then we'll see if he changes.

[Beef~]

People said he would tack to the centre after winning the Republican nomination and then repeated that claim once he won the Presidential election. It's clear that was wishful thinking. I don't know how many more examples anyone needs to reach the blindingly obvious conclusion that he's totally unsuited to be President.

[Scrobbs]

https://theconversation.com/trump-is...-for-him-89675

Along those lines, a timely article from The Conversation

[andy]

Same old guff. The fact some believe he's unfit for office doesn't mean he should be removed. This obsession with his tweets and voluminous faux pas is bordering on compulsion. There's an excellent lead in this week's Economist on this:

ALMOST one year into Donald Trump’s presidency, you have to pinch yourself to make sense of it all. In “Fire and Fury”, Michael Wolff’s gossipy tale of the White House, which did not welcome Mr Trump’s anniversary so much as punch it in the face, the leader of the free world is portrayed as a monstrously selfish toddler-emperor seen by his own staff as unfit for office (see article). America is caught up in a debate about the president’s sanity. Seemingly unable to contain himself, Mr Trump fans the flames by taking to Twitter to crow about his “very stable genius” and, in a threat to North Korea, to boast about the impressive size of his nuclear button.

Trump-watching is compulsive—who hasn’t waited guiltily for the next tweet with horrified anticipation? Given how much rests on the man’s shoulders, and how ill-suited he is to the presidency, the focus on Mr Trump’s character is both reasonable and necessary. But, as a record of his presidency so far, it is also incomplete and a dangerous distraction.

To see why it is incomplete, consider first that the American economy is in fine fettle, growing by an annualised 3.2% in the third quarter (see article). Blue-collar wage growth is outstripping the rest of the economy. Since Barack Obama left, unemployment has continued to fall and the stockmarket to climb. Mr Trump is lucky—the world economy is enjoying its strongest synchronised upswing since 2010. But he has made his luck by convincing corporate America that he is on its side. For many Americans, especially those disillusioned with Washington, a jeremiad over the imminent threat to all of America from Mr Trump simply does not ring true.

Despite his grenade-throwing campaign, Mr Trump has not carried out his worst threats. As a candidate he spoke about slapping 45% tariffs on all Chinese goods and rewriting or ditching the North American Free-Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico. There may soon be trouble on both those fronts, but not on that original scale (see article). He also branded NATO as obsolete and proposed the mass deportation of 11m illegal immigrants. So far, however, the Western alliance holds and the level of deportations in the 12 months to September 2017 was not strikingly different from earlier years.

In office Mr Trump’s legislative accomplishments have been modest, and mixed. A tax reform that cut rates and simplified some of the rules was also regressive and unfunded. His antipathy to regulation has invigorated animal spirits, but at an unknown cost to the environment and human health. His proposed withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement and the fledgling Trans-Pacific Partnership was, in our view, foolish, but hardly beyond the pale of Republican thinking.

His opportunism and lack of principle, while shameful, may yet mean that he is more open to deals than most of his predecessors. Just this week, he combined a harsh plan to deport Salvadoreans who have temporary rights to live and work in America with the suggestion of a broad reform to immigration (see article). He also said that he will be going to Davos, where he will rub shoulders with the globalists.

The danger of the Trump character obsession is that it distracts from deeper changes in America’s system of government. The bureaucracy is so understaffed that it is relying on industry hacks to draft policy. They have shaped deregulation and written clauses into the tax bill that pass costs from shareholders to society. Because Senate Republicans confirmed so few judges in Mr Obama’s last two years, Mr Trump is moving the judiciary dramatically to the right (see article). And non-stop outrage also drowns out Washington’s problem: the power of the swamp and its disconnection from ordinary voters.

Covfefe and other mysteries

As we have written repeatedly over the past year, Mr Trump is a deeply flawed man without the judgment or temperament to lead a great country. America is being damaged by his presidency. But, after a certain point, raking over his unfitness becomes an exercise in wish-fulfilment, because the subtext is so often the desire for his early removal from office.

For the time being that is a fantasy. The Mueller probe into his campaign’s dealings with Russia should run its course. Only then can America hope to gauge whether his conduct meets the test for impeachment. Ousting Mr Trump via the 25th Amendment, as some favour, would be even harder. The type of incapacity its authors had in mind was a comatose John F. Kennedy had he survived his assassination. Mr Trump’s mental state is impossible to diagnose from afar, but he does not appear to be any madder than he was when the voters chose him over Hillary Clinton (see article). Unless he can no longer recognise himself in the mirror (which, in Mr Trump’s case, would surely be one of the last powers to fade) neither his cabinet nor Congress will vote him out.

Neither should they. Alarm at Mr Trump’s vandalism to the dignity and norms of the presidency cuts both ways. Were it easy for a group of Washington insiders to remove a president using the 25th Amendment, American democracy would swerve towards oligarchy. The rush to condemn, or exonerate, Mr Trump before Mr Mueller finishes his inquiry politicises justice. Each time Mr Trump’s critics put their aim of stopping him before their means of doing so, they feed partisanship and help set a precedent that will someday be used against a good president fighting a worthy but unpopular cause.

That logic holds for North Korea, too. Mr Trump is not the first president to raise questions about who is fit to control nuclear weapons—consider Richard Nixon’s drinking or Kennedy’s reliance on painkillers, anti-anxiety drugs and, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, an antipsychotic. Ousting Mr Trump on the gut feeling that he might be mentally unstable smacks of a coup. Would you then remove a hawk for being trigger-happy or an evangelical for believing in the Rapture?

Mr Trump has been a poor president in his first year. In his second he may cause America grave damage. But the presidential telenovela is a diversion. He and his administration need to be held properly to account for what they actually do.

[Goody]

I’m convinced , the economy of that country I don’t live is doing ok , viva la racists.

Oh actually wait that hasn’t worked out for us...

[Orange]

It’s really simple, continue to ridicule him so that his approval ratings continue to fall and the Republican generic ballot with it, try to avoid any material legislation between now and November, hope that they lose the House, block everything for the following two years.

The economy point is hilarious - economy is his strong point, the economy’s doing fine, and he’s still at almost unprecedentedly low levels of public approval. Maybe the longest bull market in history lasts another 3 years, but on the off chance it doesn’t, what then for his popularity?

[Inertiaman]

Originally Posted by andy

Same old guff. The fact some believe he's unfit for office doesn't mean he should be removed. This obsession with his tweets and voluminous faux pas is bordering on compulsion. There's an excellent lead in this week's Economist on this:

I'm not sure that article supports the position you say it does.

[andy]

Well of course not entirely. Although I subscribe, The Economist is far too liberal metropolitan elite for my tastes

[Inertiaman]

It appears to precisely say that he needs to be removed from office because he's unfit for office, but that twitter shouldn't decide. Which noone is saying it should anyway.

[andy]

Removed in the democratically appropriate manner as you say. The subtext of the recent ramblings is that a great many folks would be happy with his removal howsoever simply because he's vehemently disliked and perceived as unfit - to take an example, the recent and semi-serious discussions on invoking the 25th was bonkers. I'm not arguing he's suitable.

[Orange]

Invoking the 25th seems incredibly unlikely, but discussing it continues to undermine his credibility.

[Scrobbs]

Removal is not really an option, because then there's Pence. Just going to have to sit out out for 3 years and hope.

[Orange]

It’s not really for us given we’re Brits, but the answer is not to sit it out but fight a constant resistance.

[Scrobbs]

Yeh considered that, the us bit, but it does have an affect on us. Resistance i can get behind, but there's not a deal else.

My fucking mp refused to consider raising questions in parliament about a state visit, as he said something like, 'They're a good friend to us, and we must support them whenever'. I hardly expected anything else, given his answers on a range of questions, chiefly about gov't attitudes to computer snooping.

[Orange]

Yeah you’re right, and I guess things like the state visit are where British actions could make a difference, but I’m always slightly reminded of the Guardian’s letter writing campaign at the 2004 (?) election to encourage U.K. readers to write letters to US voters asking them not to vote Bush.

[Scrobbs]

Not immediately relevant, just pretty interesting: the history of the Russian consulate in SF and the lack of response to it being closed.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/14/...ampaign=buffer

[cunning-stunt]

Trump says he's not a racist.

"I am not a racist. I'm the least racist person you have ever interviewed."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42685356

[leady]

I'd love to know whether this is deliberate or not - going from a book generating daily headlines, to DACA discussion seeming cordial to the entirety of the US actively having the debate of what countries are shitholes and the merits of lottery and family unification immigration policies is beautiful from a Machiavellian perspective.

[Inertiaman]

No it's not. My pleasure.

[Goody]

America first and MAGA in one tweet ? Shits about to hit the fan somewhere.

[Orange]

Might be as simple as it appears - blaming Democrats for DACA failure. Might work if you have decent approval ratings....

[stepper]

But he’s the biggliest most popular president ever

[Inertiaman]

So if I understand various loose sources correctly Haiti's court have uncorked Baby Doc Duvalier's money laundering indictments, which have some crossover into Trump's estate. Not sure it matters a cock as I'm sure Baby Doc Duvalier was a minor figure that Trump never met etc maga fake news.