American Impeachment/25th Amendment Watch 2021 - If, at first, you don't convict, try, try again

[Krokodil Overdose]

It'll happen if the GOP continues to walk into every obvious pitfall humanly possible at best, but the Whigs also did that and weren't truly irrelevant.

Yes, THIS is the problem that the GOP has, not the fact that every major corporation and institution has combined into a single consensus-manufacturing machine controlled by people who want to throw them in the gulag.

How long can it go? Until the Chinese Communist Party comes in and declares the US a constituent republic/administrative unit. Or until Iran gets a nuke, the launching capabilities, and blasts us into oblivion. Whichever comes first.

I disagree. As others have noted elsewhere, even parties that were notionally committed to the Global Workers' Revolution became nationalist (after a fashion) once they took power, simply because once they were running the show, they had a vested interest in keeping the show running. Our ruling class... doesn't have that problem. If SHTF, they'll just fuck off to Switzerland or Israel or Dubai and keep living like kings, while the favelas they turned America into descend into Venezuela.

Ancient Rome comparisons are tiresome, but we are at a very similar point to the late Republic- specifically the part where the ruling class has decided that they don't really need the commons anymore, and prefer their own slaves and clients to the plebs.

It's kind of their job to cover it, as boring as many will find it.

It was also their job to cover Hunter Biden's laptop. How did that turn out?

On a separate note, it occurred to me the best outcome for the Republicans would be if another 5-6 senators vote to convict Trump. Going from 5 senators voting to debate the constitutionality of this impeachment trial, to 6 senators voting for the constitutionality, to 10-12 senators voting to convict Trump would look a lot better for them. Not only would it make it not a party lines vote, but Republicans can point to the increasing number of Republican senators voting against Trump as "proof" that they did abide by the constitutionality vote, and that they did fairly consider the case against him - it's just that not enough of them found it convincing enough to convict him. Sure the Democrats wouldn't believe them, but it'd still make it harder for the Democrats to use it against the Republicans.

So... Senators are supposed to vote to convict under a process that they've already declared unconstitutional? That's a take, I suppose.

 

[FunPosting101]

It's a kiss of death for anything being done legislatively, an arrangement that suits Democrat politicians just fine but unfortunately not many Democrat voters.

The Fraudulent Administration is already acting like this is the case, if the sheer number of executive orders the Dementia Patient in Chief has issued already is any indication.

 

[A_throwaway_name62919]

They do that and large portions of their voter base abandon them en masse. I know that means fucking nothing on the federal level, but they need them if they want to maintain any regional control.

Yeah, that's why I said people giving a fuck is one of the main things keeping more than a few Republican senators from being willing to vote against Trump. I'd wager at least half of the Republican senators would be personally happy to vote to convict Trump so they don't have to deal with him as president again and can boot him out of the circles of Republican power all the sooner. The main reason they don't is that it'd piss off too many of their personal constituents who voted them into office, and that's a line they aren't willing to cross. Which to be fair is not an unreasonable way of going about their job. But if their constituents are apathetic about what happens to Trump in this, enough senators might decide the positives outweigh the negatives for them and vote to convict Trump.

So... Senators are supposed to vote to convict under a process that they've already declared unconstitutional? That's a take, I suppose.

Umm, yes?
1) Hold a vote.
2) Abide by the result even if you're on the losing side and disagree with it.

That's just how voting is supposed to work. The Senate declared the process constitutional after holding a vote on it and more senators voted it was constitutional than voted it wasn't constitutional. The senators that voted against it should be abiding by the result even if they don't like it. To put it another way, the vote established who was right and who was wrong about the constitutionality, and the people who declared it unconstitutional were wrong. As such they should be listening to the case against Trump and making their decision based on that evidence.

So to clarify the point I was making, if the Senate votes 56-44 to convict Trump, the Republicans will be accused of not abiding by the results of the constitutionality vote, and accused of not giving a fair hearing to the evidence against Trump. In essence they'll look like sore losers who made up their minds ahead of time and are simply lucky the two votes have different majority requirements. If the Senate votes 60-40 to convict Trump, their obvious defense from that accusation that they did abide by the result but found the impeachment managers case mostly unconvincing gets a lot stronger. They'll have irrefutable proof that at least some of their number did abide by the constitutionality vote and had their minds changed by the case against Trump, forcing that line of attack to be crippled with qualifiers or disarmed entirely if they're lucky. Instead they can more easily make the ensuing arguments about the actual case against Trump and the faults they found with it.

 

[Krokodil Overdose]

Umm, yes?
1) Hold a vote.
2) Abide by the result even if you're on the losing side and disagree with it.

That's just how voting is supposed to work. The Senate declared the process constitutional after holding a vote on it and more senators voted it was constitutional than voted it wasn't constitutional. The senators that voted against it should be abiding by the result even if they don't like it. To put it another way, the vote established who was right and who was wrong about the constitutionality, and the people who declared it unconstitutional were wrong.

Constitutionality is a special case under US law- the Senate declaring something Constitutional does not make it so. We have an entire other branch for that (one that's less reliable on the plain text of the Constitution than fucking astrology, but that's not really the point.) This isn't Parliament, where the law is quite literally whatever they say it is. Saying "you lost the vote, you have have to treat it as valid" in the case of, I dunno, forcibly quartering soldiers in private homes would be transparently absurd, and this is no different. Hell, Rand Paul said as much after the initial constitutionality vote: there are nowhere near enough Senators who believe that this is Constitutional to convict, so the "case" is DOA and only going forward for the sake of political theater.

So to clarify the point I was making, if the Senate votes 56-44 to convict Trump, the Republicans will be accused of not abiding by the results of the constitutionality vote, and accused of not giving a fair hearing to the evidence against Trump.

Have you met the MSM? They're going to be accused of that no matter what they do. Trying 3000 IQ plays to try and make the press not talk shit about the GOP is how they got to be such cucked losers in the first place.

 

[Random Internet Person]

Constitutionality is a special case under US law- the Senate declaring something Constitutional does not make it so. We have an entire other branch for that (one that's less reliable on the plain text of the Constitution than fucking astrology, but that's not really the point.) This isn't Parliament, where the law is quite literally whatever they say it is. Saying "you lost the vote, you have have to treat it as valid" in the case of, I dunno, forcibly quartering soldiers in private homes would be transparently absurd, and this is no different. Hell, Rand Paul said as much after the initial constitutionality vote: there are nowhere near enough Senators who believe that this is Constitutional to convict, so the "case" is DOA and only going forward for the sake of political theater.

Aren't Democrats trying to change...all of that just so they can get their way and force their pet projects through that much more easily?

Have you met the MSM? They're going to be accused of that no matter what they do. Trying 3000 IQ plays to try and make the press not talk shit about the GOP is how they got to be such cucked losers in the first place.

I mean, Trump's thing was all about not giving a shit. And while his supporters took that message on whole hog, nobody else wanted to learn, so they didn't.

 

[BenisinbaginaII]

The Constitutionality debate is itself a form of weakness since it saves them from addressing what actually happened. The argument is correct, but like Bannon says, it isn't made for TV. If the GOP didn't consist of castrati the defense would be nothing but clips from last summer of old ladies being beaten by ladders with the voice over from Kamala going on about how the riots shouldn't and won't stop, then a party line vote to exonerate. But then again, a party willing to do that wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

 

[Meat Target]

So what do you think the next Minecraft build will be that the left will unleash from the right, either from politicians or supporters? Reeducation camps? Tribunals to old Trumpists accountable? Reporting MAGA people to camps with people bragging about being collaborators?

I wouldn't rule any of that out, but I also don't think they'd realistically follow through with or get way with such things. Unless they're accelerationists themselves and really want a civil war, I feel like they're gonna go for more passive-aggressive approaches; deplatforming, social credit systems, agitprop in entertainment, Lugenpresse smears, frivolous lawfare, etc.

 

[Random Internet Person]

I wouldn't rule any of that out, but I also don't think they'd realistically follow through with or get way with such things. Unless they're accelerationists themselves and really want a civil war, I feel like they're gonna go for more passive-aggressive approaches; deplatforming, social credit systems, agitprop in entertainment, Lugenpresse smears, frivolous lawfare, etc.

Except they’re already doing those things. Now they have the confidence to do them more brazenly. It’s just that the left is a combination of dedicated to their cause and a feral hatred of their enemies, and a sense of emboldenment over the last few months that I feel absolutely nothing is off the table, including and especially the most demented things aimed at the MAGA crowd. I’d be more surprised if they DON’T end up going after and attempting to kill Trump supporters. Or succeed in their other plans of driving them to kill themselves to get away from their harassment and witch hunts.

 

[Meat Target]

Except they’re already doing those things. Now they have the confidence to do them more brazenly. It’s just that the left is a combination of dedicated to their cause and a feral hatred of their enemies, and a sense of emboldenment over the last few months that I feel absolutely nothing is off the table, including and especially the most demented things aimed at the MAGA crowd. I’d be more surprised if they DON’T end up going after and attempting to kill Trump supporters. Or succeed in their other plans of driving them to kill themselves to get away from their harassment and witch hunts.

Like I said, I wouldn't put anything past them. But I do agree, they're turning up the heat on the pot containing the frog.

 

[Random Internet Person]

Like I said, I wouldn't put anything past them. But I do agree, they're turning up the heat on the pot containing the frog.

So....where does this end? The Dems ain’t gonna stop until everyone MAGA is in a grave or cremated and thrown in the garbage and everything MAGA is seen as akin to Nazi Germany. Or worse than Nazi Germany for that matter.

 

[Oats12345]

So I haven't been paying attention yesterday. So are there still only 6 Republicans that surpport impeachment?

Also I hear Marco Rubio is supporting a gun control bill. Another Rino, Florida is in the works of becoming a solid red state, way does the guy feel like acting like a coward.

 

[Random Internet Person]

So I haven't been paying attention yesterday. So are there still only 6 Republicans that surpport impeachment?

Also I hear Marco Rubio is supporting a gun control bill. Another Rino, Florida is in the works of becoming a solid red state, way does the guy feel like acting like a coward.

Because he knows the knives are out for every single Republican. He thinks by disavowing MAGA, he’ll drop lower on the list.

 

[Meat Target]

So....where does this end?

I have no idea. But liberals are colossally stupid if they think the Right (the rank and file, I mean, not the GOPe) is not currently in full "Go ahead, make my day" mode. Dems wouldn't be cowering being Nasty Girls and barbed-wire fences if they thought they were loved by the masses.

 

[Oats12345]

Because he knows the knives are out for every single Republican. He thinks by disavowing MAGA, he’ll drop lower on the list.

Have course. But seriously I hope someone primaries him hard. Also is it still 6 Republicans for impeachment

 

[Random Internet Person]

I have no idea. But liberals are colossally stupif if they think the Right (the rank and file, I mean, not the GOPe) is not currently in full "Go ahead, make my day" mode. Dems wouldn't be cowering being Nasty Girls and barbed-wire fences if they thought they were loved by the masses.

Honestly, you talk of Clint Eastwood types on the right, and I just see people posturing and talking mad shit behind keyboards on /pol/. And when they do go offline, it’s usually clusterfucks like 1/6 where it looked like a bunch of drunk frat boys moseyed around the same places that’d be shown to visiting middle schoolers.

 

[Meat Target]

Honestly, you talk of Clint Eastwood types on the right, and I just see people posturing and talking mad shit behind keyboards on /pol/. And when they do go offline, it’s usually clusterfucks like 1/6 where it looked like a bunch of drunk frat boys moseyed around the same places that’d be shown to visiting middle schoolers.

You can only fuck with people so much before they flip their lids. The ones that are talking aren't doing, and the ones that are doing aren't talking.

If the situation were hopeless for the Right, and we're all one stroke of a pen away from the gas chambers, all their propaganda would be unnecessary.

Journoslime whining about how the Trumpies next door shoveled their driveway for them (and assuming such an act of goodwill hides an ulterior motive) shows they are more scared of us than we are of them.

Power is not only what you have, but also what your enemy thinks you have.

 

[Rich Evans Apologist]

Yes, THIS is the problem that the GOP has, not the fact that every major corporation and institution has combined into a single consensus-manufacturing machine controlled by people who want to throw them in the gulag.

You're right, fags and women and brownies and pastafuckers and potatoniggers never managed to get anywhere because they were locked out of the major businesses and institutions at periods in history. Or you're a bunch of whiny retards who can't take the fact that you slipped out of cultural hegemony and you don't get to say whatever you feel like without blowback anymore.
You know the rules of the game, and they've been pretty clear for close to a decade now; you could play two steps ahead of your opponents, but instead you'd rather tantrum and walk right into the pitfalls. As you cry about how oppressed you are and how hard you've got it. Yes, truly, no one in the history of the US has ever had it worse, and no-one's ever grit their teeth and kept their head down through cultural turbulence to come out on top; you're much too superior of people to do that.

I've seen more people here beating off to the idea of civil war than to the idea of outplaying their autistically-screeching opponents. A year of riots that managed to get almost everyone agitated and annoyed with them, and you managed to be so obnoxious and ineffective in seizing the moment that now it's completely lost. Top job.

 

[Meat Target]

You're right, fags and women and brownies and pastafuckers and potatoniggers never managed to get anywhere because they were locked out of the major businesses and institutions at periods in history. Or you're a bunch of whiny retards who can't take the fact that you slipped out of cultural hegemony and you don't get to say whatever you feel like without blowback anymore.
You know the rules of the game, and they've been pretty clear for close to a decade now; you could play two steps ahead of your opponents, but instead you'd rather tantrum and walk right into the pitfalls. As you cry about how oppressed you are and how hard you've got it. Yes, truly, no one in the history of the US has ever had it worse, and no-one's ever grit their teeth and kept their head down through cultural turbulence to come out on top; you're much too superior of people to do that.

I've seen more people here beating off to the idea of civil war than to the idea of outplaying their autistically-screeching opponents. A year of riots that managed to get almost everyone agitated and annoyed with them, and you managed to be so obnoxious and ineffective in seizing the moment that now it's completely lost. Top job.

Please fuck off back to Reddit.

 

[Rich Evans Apologist]

Please fuck off back to Reddit.

Only if you return to facebook.

Seriously though, if you're still working your first real job and you can't keep your head down, you don't know shit. Caterwauling isn't going to get you anywhere, so diversify.

 

[Extreme Aneurysm]

Trump's Lawyers must have gotten scolded by Daddy Trump because they're being straight forward today with clarity.