It’s telling that there’s no Impeachment thread on VS...

[HorsCat]

One is welcome to question anything, and should. What I'm questioning here is the motivation for doing so.

“Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He's weak and he's ineffective. So the only way he figures that he's going to get reelected — and as sure as you're sitting there — is to start a war with Iran.”
--DJT, 11/16/11

"Don't let Obama play the Iran card in order to start a war in order to get elected--be careful Republicans!"
-- DJT, 10/22/12

"I predict that President Obama will at some point attack Iran in order to save face!"
-- DJT, 9/16/13

[Dallas Tex]

“Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He's weak and he's ineffective. So the only way he figures that he's going to get reelected — and as sure as you're sitting there — is to start a war with Iran.”
--DJT, 11/16/11

"Don't let Obama play the Iran card in order to start a war in order to get elected--be careful Republicans!"
-- DJT, 10/22/12

"I predict that President Obama will at some point attack Iran in order to save face!"
-- DJT, 9/16/13

That’s exactly the type of motivation I was talking about.

And it carries no more weight when he said it than when you say it today.

[HorsCat]

That’s exactly the type of motivation I was talking about.

And it carries no more weight when he said it than when you say it today.

On the contrary, Mr. Thompson, it's a window into his mind, in 4K resolution, containing more projection than an IMAX and more irony than devout Evangelicals hailing him as the second coming.

[theflashunc]

One is welcome to question anything, and should. What I'm questioning here is the motivation for doing so.

The motivation is avoiding another needless, protracted, messy war in a far off land with specious objectives that will lead to any tangible benefits back here. This is all exacerbated by even a cursory reading of the United States' relations with Iran dating back to the early 1950s, which is to say whenever there's been a choice to make a bad decision, we've done it.

And, in the micro, in three years we've gone from engaging with the regime for the first time in four decades in a tangible way to being closer to war than ever before. Instead of continued dialogue where we begin making headway on issues that, to your point, ultimately may have led to some discussion on human rights. This also began driving a wedge between the religious hardliners in the regime and the moderates who were pushing aggressively for greater engagement with the rest of the world. Diplomacy was working, but the arc of history is long and people don't have the patience for it, and the Master Deal Maker wants to undo everything the prior guy ever did cuz racism.

And of course, if human rights is your concern, then you should be far more worried about our ties to Saudi Arabia, but I'm not presuming you threw this out as some horseshit fig leaf to distract the conversation.

tl;dr: You can disagree with the move from a foreign policy standpoint without providing any kind of tacit endorsement for how "good" the other guy is.

[Cookietruck]

whoops, wrong thread..

[mzilliox]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ry-cagey-game/

[nmrt]

+1
You are correct. When Trump said that it carried no weight. And that I think is the point.
Based on Trump's history of saying things that carry no weight, many now think that most of what he says carries no weight. I would like to think that more than half the country has ceased to believe him. At least I hope they do.
Boy who cried wolf and all that.

That’s exactly the type of motivation I was talking about.

And it carries no more weight when he said it than when you say it today.

[jclay]

Interesting podcast on the Trump and Kushner family histories.

Trump, Inc. : NPR

[guido]

Trump Furious at Iran for Distracting People from Impeachment for Only Two Days | The New Yorker

[jclay]

Trump Furious at Iran for Distracting People from Impeachment for Only Two Days | The New Yorker

Pretty funny and yet likely accurate; but I'll raise you this reply I got on a FB post: "Thank God (the Living God) that Trump has made the USA the leader in oil and gas. We went to Vietnam to protect the French interest in oil. They had a peaceful life until the Religious sect took over."

Who knew....but if He wanted us to be the "leader in oil and gas", wouldn't it have been easier to just put all of under the lower 48?

Granted, I'm down here in the Bible Belt but when I see that sort of nonsense I find myself speechless; attempts at pithy retorts, even pretty good ones, fall way short and I just end up shaking my head in astonishment.

[mzilliox]

I have a question so we know if a conversation about impeachment with certain folks is even relevant.

it has been mentioned today that the substance of the impeachment inquiry is based on hearsay.
1. can we agree that we have moved passed hearsay when the president has been filmed saying he expected the tradeoff to be a public investigation into the bidens affairs, a trump appointed sonderlund corroborated this and said yes, we were expecting him to smear the bidens in exchange for a meeting and aid. we are no longer in the realm of whistelbower hearsay. can we all agree on this point? would somebody like to present an alternate reality?

if so,

2. Is it ok for a sitting president or even presidential candidate to use any sort of influence or power to help affect the outcome of an election by asking a foreign country for help in smearing a political opponent, or any other sort of help that may aid in an election win for one side?

[mzilliox]

Trump impeachment: Susan Collins working with "small group" of GOP senators to allow witnesses in impeachment trial - CBS News

and this, trying to make deals at his own trial... and they will probably let him...
Trump would support witnesses testifying in Senate trial if Bidens were called
but what relevance to the Bidens have with Trumps impeachable actions other than being the target of them?? what would any testimony pertaining to the events from a Biden prove in regards to Trump's inappropriate attempt to sway the next election? this is more deflection, more attempts to be sure Biden is not a relevant opponent in the 2020 election. its boorish, base, and a mckery of the process and seriousness of the moment. And its effective, shame on this type of behavior, this is beneath us, we should all know better.

[thollandpe]

My point is that he should still be treated like any other American: Innocent until proven guilty.

This conversation should move to the impeachment thread, but here goes:

Trying that.

Under what system of justice would the accused be allowed complete non-cooperation with the investigation, and even to extend that non-cooperation as an order to other witnesses?

Even if one elects to plead the 5th Amendment, they still have to take the stand.

And under Miranda, one is not required to say anything, but what they do say can and will be used against them in a court of law. It’s not as if he’s been quiet. Just that he’s trying to adjudicate this in a different forum.

[jclay]

Mitch McConnell is sewage pond scum.

Mitch McConnell is cynically undermining any notion of an honest impeachment trial | Lawrence Douglas | Opinion | The Guardian

[HorsCat]

At this juncture it’s hard to tell who has done more lasting damage to American democracy, McConnell or Trump???

[theflashunc]

We now have evidence of discussions between associates of Trump's personal attorney and a GOP candidate for Congress in Connecticut discussing surveilling a US ambassador to another country, and claiming she's some agent for Russian intelligence services. And a May 10 letter from Guiliani to Zelensky requesting a meeting with the knowledge and consent of the President about all of this, predating the withholding of critical military aid.

No wonder the administration doesn't want anyone near this thing testifying. There was a coordinated effort by his personal legal and political support apparatus to knuckle the Ukrainian government to perpetuate a conspiracy theory to aid him in the 2020 election.

Robert Hyde: Giuliani associate discussed surveilling Marie Yovanovitch - CNNPolitics

[mzilliox]

We now have evidence of discussions between associates of Trump's personal attorney and a GOP candidate for Congress in Connecticut discussing surveilling a US ambassador to another country, and claiming she's some agent for Russian intelligence services. And a May 10 letter from Guiliani to Zelensky requesting a meeting with the knowledge and consent of the President about all of this, predating the withholding of critical military aid.

No wonder the administration doesn't want anyone near this thing testifying. There was a coordinated effort by his personal legal and political support apparatus to knuckle the Ukrainian government to perpetuate a conspiracy theory to aid him in the 2020 election.

Robert Hyde: Giuliani associate discussed surveilling Marie Yovanovitch - CNNPolitics

at the very least, it seems there will be a trial, because the optics require it. now will they actually call witnesses and consider evidence? well, the country is watching. There are at least 4 witnesses who have not been heard who should be heard. theres Guiliani doijg all kinds of weird stuff, and if you watch the weird OANN news network joke, Giuliani gets paid by them to do this stuff, and is telling all kinds of stories on there that go gainst what the guys are saying to the cameras on real news networks, its weird wild stuff. Why does the American public still accept this? its insanity. the amount of lies that are going into talking about a perfect phone call are baffling. its perfect, why lie about it so much?

[vertical_doug]

The Fog of Rudy

The Fog of Rudy - The New York Times

I think he was always a scammer. It's just now he is in cognitive decline and the bad traits are becoming more dominant.

[guido]

Democrats Demand That Giuliani Be Trump’s Lawyer at Impeachment Trial | The New Yorker

[Corso]

If Trumps being impeached over the Ukraine phone call, then why did Nancy talk about Putin & Russia today while announcing the Impeachment team?

Last I looked, these are 2 separate issues.

...Yeah, the Dem team wants a fair trial.