President Donald J. Trump

[MM_Dandy]

What the actual fuck?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/02/worl ... ttack.html

And then this tweet - "Iran never won a war, but they never lost a negotiation!"

And the Senate Republicans are just going to let this mf'er slide. Add one more to the number of times I have to say that I've never been more ashamed to be an American today.

[Arneb]

The tweet and the American flag are testament to the fact that the Donald isn't up to the task, not professionally, not morally, not temperamentally.

I am not sure the killing was such a bad move, though. This was an extremely capable man who had knitted a web of influence between the Mediterranean and the horn of Africa. A web that served Iranian/Shi'ite dreams of domination, not peaceful co-existence in the Middle East. He will be hard to replace at And very easy to see what his business in Bagdad, of all places, was.

I mean, drone-shootings are undoubtedly immoral acts, but among the many, many shootings that have been taken place, this one may at least have been useful. And one somewhat balanced by a LOT of counter-immorality.

[MM_Dandy]

Time will tell if the world is indeed safer without Soleimani, but this Administration just told American citizens in Iran to get the hell out and sent another 3,500 troops to the region. I read the tweet as Trump inviting Iran to declare war. Trump wants a war. Maybe he won't find one with Iran, but maybe he'll find one somewhere else. I do not find that at all comforting.

[Enzo]

Once again, do something big to distract us from the impeachment.

[Lance]

I was watching The Pirates of Penzance (1983) and did a little research into the Major-General's Song because I thoroughly enjoy it. But in doing so, I also ran across this little ditty. I think it's absolutely brilliant!

Watch on youtube.com

[Lance]

And another.

Watch on youtube.com

[Arneb]

Once again, do something big to distract us from the impeachment.

I'm not sure he wants to divert attention away from impeachment: He is safe in the Senate, and he knows it. Procedures are set by one of his favourite bootlickers, who will do enything and everything to make it a smooth ride. Throw in a few "Democrat coup d'etat", "against the will of the people", "establishment trying to bring down the outsider because voters won't" etc., and there is nothing Trump wouldn't relish having in the spotlight.

But of course, struggling head of government instigating a war to become more popular, that is quite an old story.

[Enzo]

Oh he isn't afraid of getting tossed out. He is all about the boasting and accolades, and having "impeached" stamped on his file forever wounds him. He is also about getting re-elected, and pushing the Senate trial back puts it closer to the election so he can bray about coup this, and bad old democrats that.

[Arneb]

That, I think, we can agree on.

[Мастер]

Sounds like US forces may be kicked out of Iraq.

That is hardly surprising after something like this.

Perhaps Iranian forces will take their places.

It looks like the end result of US policy in Iraq since the 1991 war has been to turn Iraq and Iran into allies.

[Arneb]

"If I'd listened to him, we'd be having the Sixth World War by now" (The Donald about John Bolton).

Now for all my deep disgust at the current U.S. President, this is one top-notch remark. I still have a small hope, totally in vain, I suppose, that Bolton's testimony might bring him down. If not at the Impeachment trial, then at the ballot box. There must be a limit to what even the iron-stomached Merkins can take.

[Lance]

There must be a limit to what even the iron-stomached Merkins can take.

I don't know... Some of us are pretty stupid.

[Arneb]

Aaand the Senate determines no further witnesses will be heard. As one (Republican) Senator put it: Why hear more witnesses to prove someting that has already been proven?

Of course, that won't keeping from voting to let the Donald remain in office. The Donald is right about one thing: You'll have to stick it to him at the ballott box. Unfortunately, that just became a lot hardedr. Why again did the Democrats push for impeachment?

[Мастер]

I learned something I didn't know, and that also doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. From the Wikipedia article, here are the US constitutional provisions on impeachment:

There are several provisions in the United States Constitution relating to impeachment:

Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 provides:

The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7 provide:

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Article II, Section 2 provides:

[The President] ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

Article II, Section 4 provides:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.[3]

But from the same article:

Conviction immediately removes the defendant from office. Following conviction, the Senate may vote to further punish the individual by barring him or her from holding future federal office, elected or appointed. As the threshold for disqualification is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the Senate has taken the position that disqualification votes only require a simple majority rather than a two-thirds supermajority.

Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 states that two-thirds is required for "conviction", with no mention of the penalty that follows from the conviction. The next clause mentions the two penalties, removal from office and disqualification from holding future office, without mentioning the vote threshold.

So if you don't have two-thirds, you don't have a conviction. But you can disqualify with a simple majority, apparently. This strikes me as odd - I always thought "conviction" was a prerequisite for a punishment.

[MM_Dandy]

Aaand the Senate determines no further witnesses will be heard. As one (Republican) Senator put it: Why hear more witnesses to prove someting that has already been proven?

Of course, that won't keeping from voting to let the Donald remain in office. The Donald is right about one thing: You'll have to stick it to him at the ballott box. Unfortunately, that just became a lot hardedr. Why again did the Democrats push for impeachment?

Pelosi drug her feet for about as long as she could. They could have impeached Trump on emoluments violations the day they seated a majority in the House of Representatives. Still, they could impeach him again on new charges if they like, or even the same charges, since impeachment is not a criminal process and the 5th amendment could be found not to apply. Even so, the best way to remove Trump is and was defeating him in the electoral college. This Senate will not ever convict Trump.

I don't think the impeachment and the inevitable acquittal have made it harder at all. It probably didn't move the needle among regular voters, but it may be enough to prompt inactive voters to vote this year, and for the most part, inactive voters tend to skew to the left. I don't know if it will be enough, but the 2016 election was decided on, what some 20,000 votes or so? We don't need much.

[Arneb]

I follow 538.com 'spopularity tracker maniacally. It was positive for Trump for a few days after the inauguration. It has held steady, more or less, at about -12%, roughly 53 % unfavourable, 41 favourable. During the last few weeks it has gone above -10 for the first time in mny months (43/51). So, I do have my fears Dems just shot themselves in the foot.

[g-one]

Neil Young just told the greatest Bass player joke of all time and no one caught it.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6570219/neil ... en-letter/

[MM_Dandy]

I'm afraid that it's another one that went over my head. Is he insulting Trump, bass players, or both?

[g-one]

I took it to be a jab at bass players. Bass player and drummer jokes are usually about making fun of their (lack of) intelligence.

[MM_Dandy]

Awesome. Back in 2014, Trump tweeted that vaccines cause autism. Now, he's going to have a press conference today to tell us all about it.

EDIT: Nevermind - the press conference is all about how the coronavirus is just a big hoax to make us all lose bigly in the markets. One person on Twitter implied that the press conference was related to vaccines (specifically using that 2014 tweet), and I jumped the gun.

[Enzo]

One of his minions reports that they have it totally contained in the USA, and pretty much sealed off. Of course they don't even have a real Test for it yet. And he had fired the whole epidemic outbreak department a year or two ago.

[MM_Dandy]

Yeah, who needs experts when you have Mike Pence? I hear he stopped an HIV outbreak in Indiana with just his cold-hard stare. Or was it a nonchalant shrug of his shoulders?

Anyway, the NYSE responded by falling another 1,100 points.

[Enzo]

Well TRumpy set up old Mike. SO I am watching the road for an incoming bus.

[Arneb]

This is Corona stuff, but I think the right place for it is here:

There is a small German biotech company, Curevac, which is working on the development of a Corona vaccine. Now Donald Trump invited the company's CEO to the White House in order to negotiate a takeover of the entire firm, or at least, a complete re-hiring of the entire scientific staff in the US in order to develop a vaccine that would be distributed to U.S. citizens exclusively.

The principal investor in Curevac happens to be Dietmar Hopp, the co-founder of SAP, a multi-billionaire against whom Donald Trump is small fry (the same Dietmar Hopp football idiots are calling a son of a whore because he sponsored his home football club into the Bundesliga). He said, no, we'll try to develop the vaccine for all humankind, thank you very much. No takeover, no sell-out of development results, no cangeover of staff.

Just when you thought the Orange One couldn't sink any lower, he proves you wrong.

[Enzo]

Just when you thought the Orange One couldn't sink any lower, he proves you wrong.

Oh no, I gave up trying to lower the bar for him. I just put the bar on the ground, so he can ooze under it like the slime he is.