The official "let's impeach Trump" thread
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
Jonah
Well-Known Member
There is an excellent article in the current issue of The Atlantic by Adam Serwer on Trump’s corruption and the necessity for his impeachment. I'll quote at some length but it is well worth the ten or fifteen minutes to read the full article here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/trumps-conspiracy-against-democracy/602464/
"Trump and his advisers sought to rig the 2020 election by forcing a foreign country to implicate the then-Democratic front-runner in a crime that did not take place. If the American people could not be trusted to choose Trump on their own, Trump would use his official powers to make the choice for them."
"It was, in short, a conspiracy by Trump and his advisers to keep themselves in power, the exact scenario for which the Framers of the Constitution devised the impeachment clause. This scheme was carried out by Trump-appointed officials, and by the president’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, running a corrupt back channel aimed at, in his words, “meddling in an investigation.” And it came very close to succeeding. As Brian Beutler writes, “Had the whole scheme not come to light in a whistleblower complaint, and Trump not released his hold on aid to Ukraine, we might have awaken [sic] one morning to a blaring CNN exclusive about international corruption allegations against the Democratic presidential frontrunner and his party.”
"As the Trump-appointed U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland testified Wednesday, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky “had to announce the investigations. He didn’t actually have to do them, as I understood it.” And as the U.S. official David Holmes told the House Intelligence Committee, Sondland had told him that Trump was merely concerned about “‘big stuff’ that benefits the president, like the, quote-unquote, ‘Biden investigation’ that Mr. Giuliani was pushing.”
"This point is crucial. Trump was not concerned about “corruption” in Ukraine—his own Pentagon and State Department had certified that Ukraine had taken sufficient steps to root out corruption. Nor was Trump particularly interested in an actual investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden—what he wanted was a public accusation that he could use to cripple a political rival’s aspirations. Trump was not defying the bipartisan war lobby in an effort to extricate the U.S. from foreign entanglements, and he was not engaged in a dispute over policy with unelected bureaucrats pursuing their own agenda, because he was fundamentally uninterested in the policy in question, except in that it might be exploited to benefit him personally."
"Trump saw an opportunity to strong-arm a weaker country into helping him win reelection, he abused his presidential authority to coerce it into doing so, and then he and his advisers sought to hide what they had done in order to maximize the public impact of the conspiracy. This plot, spearheaded by Giuliani, had already drawn credulous coverage from sympathetic reporters, and would likely have succeeded had the anonymous whistle-blower not registered a complaint exposing the scheme on September 9, which forced the Trump administration to release the aid to Ukraine on September 11."
We "should not lose sight of why the president is being impeached, and it is not because of a good-faith dispute over Ukraine policy. Trump and his advisers conspired to rig the 2020 election on his behalf, scheming to defraud the American people of a free and fair election. A genuine republic cannot survive chief executives who utilize their powers to make anyone who might challenge their authority into a criminal by extorting weaker entities into leveling false charges at their political rivals. Indeed, the republic’s Founders foresaw such a circumstance, and created the impeachment clause as a last resort against it. The high crime that the president has committed is not against Ukraine, but against America.”
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/trumps-conspiracy-against-democracy/602464/
"Trump and his advisers sought to rig the 2020 election by forcing a foreign country to implicate the then-Democratic front-runner in a crime that did not take place. If the American people could not be trusted to choose Trump on their own, Trump would use his official powers to make the choice for them."
"It was, in short, a conspiracy by Trump and his advisers to keep themselves in power, the exact scenario for which the Framers of the Constitution devised the impeachment clause. This scheme was carried out by Trump-appointed officials, and by the president’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, running a corrupt back channel aimed at, in his words, “meddling in an investigation.” And it came very close to succeeding. As Brian Beutler writes, “Had the whole scheme not come to light in a whistleblower complaint, and Trump not released his hold on aid to Ukraine, we might have awaken [sic] one morning to a blaring CNN exclusive about international corruption allegations against the Democratic presidential frontrunner and his party.”
"As the Trump-appointed U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland testified Wednesday, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky “had to announce the investigations. He didn’t actually have to do them, as I understood it.” And as the U.S. official David Holmes told the House Intelligence Committee, Sondland had told him that Trump was merely concerned about “‘big stuff’ that benefits the president, like the, quote-unquote, ‘Biden investigation’ that Mr. Giuliani was pushing.”
"This point is crucial. Trump was not concerned about “corruption” in Ukraine—his own Pentagon and State Department had certified that Ukraine had taken sufficient steps to root out corruption. Nor was Trump particularly interested in an actual investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden—what he wanted was a public accusation that he could use to cripple a political rival’s aspirations. Trump was not defying the bipartisan war lobby in an effort to extricate the U.S. from foreign entanglements, and he was not engaged in a dispute over policy with unelected bureaucrats pursuing their own agenda, because he was fundamentally uninterested in the policy in question, except in that it might be exploited to benefit him personally."
"Trump saw an opportunity to strong-arm a weaker country into helping him win reelection, he abused his presidential authority to coerce it into doing so, and then he and his advisers sought to hide what they had done in order to maximize the public impact of the conspiracy. This plot, spearheaded by Giuliani, had already drawn credulous coverage from sympathetic reporters, and would likely have succeeded had the anonymous whistle-blower not registered a complaint exposing the scheme on September 9, which forced the Trump administration to release the aid to Ukraine on September 11."
We "should not lose sight of why the president is being impeached, and it is not because of a good-faith dispute over Ukraine policy. Trump and his advisers conspired to rig the 2020 election on his behalf, scheming to defraud the American people of a free and fair election. A genuine republic cannot survive chief executives who utilize their powers to make anyone who might challenge their authority into a criminal by extorting weaker entities into leveling false charges at their political rivals. Indeed, the republic’s Founders foresaw such a circumstance, and created the impeachment clause as a last resort against it. The high crime that the president has committed is not against Ukraine, but against America.”
Curious that you think this 6th grade civics trivia is some great insight.
Wow, you are so far into an alternate reality that I fear there is no hope for you. Just about everything you say here has already been refuted by others in this very thread. But for the record, "the stupid conspiracy theory that's not even worth mentioning" that I was referring to is the CrowdStrike server thing. It not clear if that is also what you were talking about.
One last attempt at getting through to you, focusing on your last paragraph. Do you think attempted robbery is a crime? Do you think attempted murder is a crime? Do you think attempted bribery is a crime? Do you think attempted extortion is a crime? If the answer to any of those is no, why not?
Last edited:
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
This article from yesterday's New York Times is relevant.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/22/us/politics/ukraine-russia-interference.html
Here are many quotes from the article. Apologies for pasting in sentences and paragraphs without always indicating the cut marks.
-----
Moscow has run a yearslong operation to blame Ukraine for its own 2016 election interference. Republicans have used similar talking points to defend President Trump in impeachment proceedings.
The Republican defense of Mr. Trump became central to the impeachment proceedings when Fiona Hill, a respected Russia scholar and former senior White House official, added a harsh critique during testimony on Thursday. She told some of Mr. Trump’s fiercest defenders in Congress that they were repeating “a fictional narrative.” She said that it likely came from a disinformation campaign by Russian security services, which also propagated it.
In a briefing that closely aligned with Dr. Hill’s testimony, American intelligence officials informed senators and their aides in recent weeks that Russia had engaged in a yearslong campaign to essentially frame Ukraine as responsible for Moscow’s own hacking of the 2016 election, according to three American officials.
The revelations demonstrate Russia’s persistence in trying to sow discord among its adversaries — and show that the Kremlin apparently succeeded, as unfounded claims about Ukrainian interference seeped into Republican talking points.
... the campaign by Russian intelligence in recent years has been... complex as Moscow tries not only to undermine the government in Kyiv but also to use a disinformation campaign there to influence the American political debate.
...President Vladimir V. Putin ordered military and intelligence operatives to mount a broad campaign to sabotage the American election.
Russian intelligence operatives deployed a network of agents to blame Ukraine for its 2016 interference. Starting at least in 2017, the operatives peddled a mixture of now-debunked conspiracy theories along with established facts to leave an impression that the government in Kyiv, not Moscow, was responsible for the hackings of Democrats and its other interference efforts in 2016, senior intelligence officials said.
The Russian intelligence officers conveyed the information to prominent Russians and Ukrainians who then used a range of intermediaries, like oligarchs, businessmen and their associates, to pass the material to American political figures and even some journalists, who were likely unaware of its origin, the officials said.
That muddy brew worked its way into American information ecosystems, sloshing around until parts of it reached Mr. Trump, who has also spoken with Mr. Putin about allegations of Ukrainian interference. Mr. Trump also brought up the assertions of Ukrainian meddling in his July 25 call with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, which is at the heart of the impeachment inquiry into whether he abused his power by asking for a public commitment to investigations he stood to gain from personally.
Russia’s operation to blame Ukraine has become more relevant as Republicans have tried to focus public debate during the impeachment inquiry on any Ukrainian role in the 2016 campaign, American officials said.
Republicans have denounced any suggestion that their concerns about Ukrainian meddling are without merit or that they are ignoring Russia’s broader interference. “Not a single Republican member of this committee said Russia did not meddle in the 2016 elections,” Representative Elise Stefanik, Republican of New York, said Thursday.
Indeed, Ms. Stefanik and her Republican colleagues on the Democratic-led House Intelligence Committee, which is conducting the impeachment hearing, have also steered clear of the fringe notion that Mr. Trump mentioned to Mr. Zelensky, which is pushed by Russian intelligence: the so-called CrowdStrike server conspiracy theory, which falsely suggests Ukraine, not Russia, was behind the breach of Democratic operatives’ servers.
Mr. Trump repeated the baseless claim on Friday in an interview with “Fox & Friends,” laying out the narrative and doubling down after a host gently pressed him on whether he was sure of one aspect of the debunked theory, that the F.B.I. gave a Democratic server to what Mr. Trump had inaccurately described as a Ukrainian-owned company.
“That is what the word is,” Mr. Trump replied.
Moscow has long used its intelligence agencies and propaganda machine to muddy the waters of public debate, casting doubts over established facts. In her testimony, Dr. Hill noted Russia’s pattern of trying to blame other countries for its own actions, like the attempted poisoning last year of a former Russian intelligence officer or the downing of a passenger jet over Ukraine in 2014. Moscow’s goal is to cast doubt on established facts, said current and former officials.
“The strategy is simply to create the impression that it is not really possible to know who was really behind it,” said Laura Rosenberger, the director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy, which tracks Russian disinformation efforts.
Although American intelligence agencies have made no formal classified assessment about the Russian disinformation campaign against Ukraine, officials at several of the agencies have broadly agreed for some time that Russian intelligence services have embraced tactics to shift responsibility for the 2016 interference campaign away from themselves, officials said.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/22/us/politics/ukraine-russia-interference.html
Here are many quotes from the article. Apologies for pasting in sentences and paragraphs without always indicating the cut marks.
-----
Moscow has run a yearslong operation to blame Ukraine for its own 2016 election interference. Republicans have used similar talking points to defend President Trump in impeachment proceedings.
The Republican defense of Mr. Trump became central to the impeachment proceedings when Fiona Hill, a respected Russia scholar and former senior White House official, added a harsh critique during testimony on Thursday. She told some of Mr. Trump’s fiercest defenders in Congress that they were repeating “a fictional narrative.” She said that it likely came from a disinformation campaign by Russian security services, which also propagated it.
In a briefing that closely aligned with Dr. Hill’s testimony, American intelligence officials informed senators and their aides in recent weeks that Russia had engaged in a yearslong campaign to essentially frame Ukraine as responsible for Moscow’s own hacking of the 2016 election, according to three American officials.
The revelations demonstrate Russia’s persistence in trying to sow discord among its adversaries — and show that the Kremlin apparently succeeded, as unfounded claims about Ukrainian interference seeped into Republican talking points.
... the campaign by Russian intelligence in recent years has been... complex as Moscow tries not only to undermine the government in Kyiv but also to use a disinformation campaign there to influence the American political debate.
...President Vladimir V. Putin ordered military and intelligence operatives to mount a broad campaign to sabotage the American election.
Russian intelligence operatives deployed a network of agents to blame Ukraine for its 2016 interference. Starting at least in 2017, the operatives peddled a mixture of now-debunked conspiracy theories along with established facts to leave an impression that the government in Kyiv, not Moscow, was responsible for the hackings of Democrats and its other interference efforts in 2016, senior intelligence officials said.
The Russian intelligence officers conveyed the information to prominent Russians and Ukrainians who then used a range of intermediaries, like oligarchs, businessmen and their associates, to pass the material to American political figures and even some journalists, who were likely unaware of its origin, the officials said.
That muddy brew worked its way into American information ecosystems, sloshing around until parts of it reached Mr. Trump, who has also spoken with Mr. Putin about allegations of Ukrainian interference. Mr. Trump also brought up the assertions of Ukrainian meddling in his July 25 call with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, which is at the heart of the impeachment inquiry into whether he abused his power by asking for a public commitment to investigations he stood to gain from personally.
Russia’s operation to blame Ukraine has become more relevant as Republicans have tried to focus public debate during the impeachment inquiry on any Ukrainian role in the 2016 campaign, American officials said.
Republicans have denounced any suggestion that their concerns about Ukrainian meddling are without merit or that they are ignoring Russia’s broader interference. “Not a single Republican member of this committee said Russia did not meddle in the 2016 elections,” Representative Elise Stefanik, Republican of New York, said Thursday.
Indeed, Ms. Stefanik and her Republican colleagues on the Democratic-led House Intelligence Committee, which is conducting the impeachment hearing, have also steered clear of the fringe notion that Mr. Trump mentioned to Mr. Zelensky, which is pushed by Russian intelligence: the so-called CrowdStrike server conspiracy theory, which falsely suggests Ukraine, not Russia, was behind the breach of Democratic operatives’ servers.
Mr. Trump repeated the baseless claim on Friday in an interview with “Fox & Friends,” laying out the narrative and doubling down after a host gently pressed him on whether he was sure of one aspect of the debunked theory, that the F.B.I. gave a Democratic server to what Mr. Trump had inaccurately described as a Ukrainian-owned company.
“That is what the word is,” Mr. Trump replied.
Moscow has long used its intelligence agencies and propaganda machine to muddy the waters of public debate, casting doubts over established facts. In her testimony, Dr. Hill noted Russia’s pattern of trying to blame other countries for its own actions, like the attempted poisoning last year of a former Russian intelligence officer or the downing of a passenger jet over Ukraine in 2014. Moscow’s goal is to cast doubt on established facts, said current and former officials.
“The strategy is simply to create the impression that it is not really possible to know who was really behind it,” said Laura Rosenberger, the director of the Alliance for Securing Democracy, which tracks Russian disinformation efforts.
Although American intelligence agencies have made no formal classified assessment about the Russian disinformation campaign against Ukraine, officials at several of the agencies have broadly agreed for some time that Russian intelligence services have embraced tactics to shift responsibility for the 2016 interference campaign away from themselves, officials said.
Following up on those questions, what about attempted public corruption?
olden_undercover
Well-Known Member
Great post as usual, colton. This paragraph in particular really struck me as a good generalization of Trumpian strategy: To leave enough ambiguity-- ethical, factual, etc.-- that apologists can dismiss claims of corruption, and those inclined to connect the dots will fall just short of their purpose. Trump supporters label his unabashed scummy behavior as status quo-- that past and present politicians were just as corrupt, that he's merely fighting fire with fire, and that his brilliance lies in the fact he is honest about his lying because he does it publicly. And this is exactly why his claim that he could kill someone in broad daylight and get away with it is 100% true. (The genius, incidentally, of saying something so outlandish, is that it creates a scenario in the imaginations of his supporters that makes what he is now accused of far more palatable: It's not like he killed someone, after all!)
To be really blunt, what makes his behavior especially disgusting is his complete disregard for the American people. He knows exactly how easily his voters will forgive his reprehensible words and actions, and has a laser-accurate understanding of the amount of moral wiggle-room that gives him to operate within... which is, unfortunately, nearly infinite. That he and Putin are so similar in their philosophy, and that philosophy being precisely why he is untouchable, is a disheartening thing to consider. Term limits would be the big difference, of course; if this impeachment inquiry fails, riding it out as concerned citizens may be the only thing to look forward to.
Red
Well-Known Member
Yes, actually, I know I for one am aware of the things you are emphasizing here. For me, personally, I have felt it is important to do what's right when it is called for. I've always expected to see Trump acquitted in the Senate. Prefer not to count those chickens before they hatch, but, for the moment, I expect the Senate will acquit.
But, while I would prefer a conviction, the most important thing is that Americans who understood right from wrong where their current president is concerned, simply do the right thing. And that's impeachment.
As a student of history, I want future generations of Americans, when they read the history of this age, to see that some Americans stood up for American values and simply acted to protect the republic. And I am proud to be counted among those Americans.
Should I need to live through five more years of this guy, well, that's a shame, but I will take my country's history one day at a time, either way.
when the leading sentence of an article is whole-cloth fabrication, it is hardly going to be a fruitful consideration.
Calling Biden "the then-Democratic front runner" is second fiddle to asserting "a crime that did not take place". And the fact is, there have been rather obvious disingenuities by his critics for almost three years running.
I did not believe he really cared to win the Presidency then, nor am I sure he cares now, in terms of holding office. He is competitive, but not obsessed. He realized then, as now, that quite a few of the political class don't care much for him, but I believe he is committed to finding out and proving some truths, including the facts of what the DNC, Hillary, Obama, and a significant number of partisans have done using their offices and government employment in establishing a kind of illegitimate power withing the establishment of the federal system.
Trump, as the Chief Exectutive charged constitutionally and by his oath of office to uphold the nation's laws and fundamental institutions, is not only personally affected by those crimes, which are undeniable by any except the morally corrupt proponents of the overthrow of our constitutional and legal system, which must include most of his his critics in this forum, some of whom have declared sithin these discussions an open determination to subvert our electoral process as the rule and mode of transfers of power from one Executive elected to the next.
However you believe this to be a moral duty, or some kind of necessary thing, Trump has never done anything comparable, and has no notion in his schemes of doing so. If not elected again, he will go home, and do his business if he can.
So far as I'm concerned, or ever will be, he should work with, encourage, and make American taxpayer expenses dependent on willingness to help enforce not only American law, but American treaty agreements that pertain to cooperating to investigate international crime, such as election interference.
It is so shameful for all of you, including otherwise nice folks like Colton and yourself who have sorta loved America's role in implementing some kind of better world through the UN schema, to deny the need to enforce established laws, whoever may be or must be investigated for cause.
I know Biden's boast.... the video taken I believe against the Council of Foreign Relation's internal covenants of "non-attribution", and put out onto some media platforms.... is because of that fact, something some major media platforms cannot broadcast because of their "covenant" of their owner' and their talents' shared responsibility of non-attribution. But that fact only means others must publish it, to the shame of the Council on Foreign Relations.
But sometimes, the CFR leadership or public relations folks release videos of some speeches, and publish others in various ways. You can go online to see some, and I don't know exactly the facts of who published the Biden speech, but I'm sure Biden is insisting they make amends and squash the video now. Somehow, it doesn't seem impossible to me that the CFR just did not even realize the implications of Biden's boast. They are institutionally just that crooked.
We even have a member in here sporting a bald abusive boast as his "handle" who is capable of endless litigation against the obvious truth of Biden's abuse of power in Ukraine.
It proves, it plainly demonstrates, the corruption within the Council on Foreign Relations, which any honest human must now resign from, if they wish to be considered honorable persons with a worthy project for political discussions or advocacies.
The prosecution in the house hearings, has brought in members of the CFR, former fully-committed members of George Soro's communist open borders/American national dissolution team, and John Brennan's agents implanted in the NSC taking direction from him, or Obama, in making Trump's administration ineffective, through illegal disclosures of internal national classified materials. But even this determined prosecution has found nothing that can stand as an impeachable offense.
Of course, Nobody should assume that another administration, known to be compliant with the "right" objectives, would not criminally prosecute anyone who so behaved with them. The "law" is here, with whole-cloth fabrications and lies constituting a shameless arrogance of power, being made applicable only to the offending non-compliant administration. Trumps associates who have been abusively prosecuted include an amazing clean associate in Flynn, where criminal abuses are now coming out in court. Other's, like the flagrantly outspoken Stone, who perhaps never said anything that could be proven by the NY Times "news", or Manafort.... who had operated for decades as an international "fixer" for the worst regimes on the face of this planet.... well except for the even worse regimes he helped un-do, who had nothing Wiesman cared to publish about Ukranian corruption..... leaving the "Mueller" investigation with nothing but old tax issues to prosecute. It cost Trump a pretty penny to have someone around for about three months who could actually talk with informed notions about international intrigues. People like many of those who frequent the CFR dens of knowing players. But Trump's associates all had to be viciously prosecuted, and none of HIllary's or Obama's or Brennan's, or Bidens'.
Trump has clearly seen how these malicious prosecutions are aimed at him, and he has rightly seen the need for bringing out public disclosures of his opponents' misconduct. He has stated that "No President should be treated this way". He has declared that any administration, any President, who cannot have secure control of time-sensitive national security information, cannot be effective. We have the FOIA laws, which Obama and Hillary flagrantly broke to protect themselves, which in some ways help American citizens to protect themselves from being abused by governance. We may need more of this open information for the public, not less.... but even Trump is letting the Assange prosecutions play out. I think we could use more such talent in getting things out to the voting public, because the balance is clearly out of the people's hands now.
We need more people like Alex Jones or Roger Stone out in the news talking about whatever they can learn outside of "official channels", not less. The folks who continually campaign to shut down free speech only out themselves as "interested" wonks with stinky asses, well-kicked by authority, willing to do their best to effect their own way in the dark.
It can be a "Wild West" sort of world with free speech, but it is a better world than any "effective managers" can achieve.
Orange Man Bad is the unmannerly outsider dumping the china on the floor while shoveling the poop of polite society, perhaps, but we have needed him for a long time. And we will always need such leadership every now and then to shake things up and reset our priorities.
Trump believed the Presidency could be a legitimate office effective in making changes the American people voted for. That belief has to be the rule of our system of governance, or we actually have no system of governance. We actually have to have laws which can be enforced without partiality for who is who in the player's little black books. Without an independent executive branch that can effectively check the legislative and judicial branches, and manage its own agencies, we actually have have no democracy, no way the people can have a voice in their government.
The Council of Foreign Relations has a duty to promote this democracy, or be known for it's fascist organizational proclivities.
It is a veritable den of thieves, a band of Gadianton Robbers if there ever were one, or could ever be any association of humans placed under an oath of secrecy that punishes snitches in any way, for any reason. Losing membership in the CFR is probably a minor price to pay for most, but for some it is their whole network for having standing in the community and a place at the guvmint trough for whatever swill they can hog, for any suck they can get on the corporate or government teats.
Anyone who wants to be honest will just see the incongruity of their association with such an outfit. And their critical failure in judgement for believing media that is morally compromised on issues dealing with their fellow membership.
And, for Jonah, everything argued as the reason we must impeach Trump is pretty nearly exactly the reason we need to exclude folks bound by "oaths of non-attribution" or organizations devoted to supplanting our Constitutional system with another, from the eligibility to serve in American public service or elective offices requiring the oath to uphold the Constitution.
The reason for the oath to uphold the Constitution, a provision of the Constitution itself, is precisely the determination to maintain our democracy, or better stated, our "constitutional republic" that is of the people, by the people, and for the people, as Lincoln described it.
Last edited:
olden_undercover
Well-Known Member
And please realize, despite the polling numbers, this has nothing to do with party politics for many of us. I am not a Democrat. Neither is colton, nor others posting in this thread in various positions not supporting Trump. Don't let party or polling numbers tell you how to think-- you have far more power than that as an American citizen, if you want it.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
I'm not a Democrat either. Just hate Trump. Got no problem with other republican politicians.
Voted for mitt Romney for the Senate.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app