The Shrine

/throws a grenade in a room, runs out, closes the door, hides

CAPS and a low quality shitpost. Other forums/social media have ruined you.

It was a partisan impeachment inquiry vote, with zero bi-partisan support; historic nonsense that will go nowhere and is intended only to help in Dems 2020. This is peak dishonesty.

The theory here, it seems, is Trumps desire to investigate into 2016 election interference amounts to election interference, because a) the federal government can't investigate an active candidate (wait what? Explain 2016 then) and/or b) government can't request investigation from a foreign government (wait what? Explain the threat of withholding aid if Ukraine didn't comply with the investigation into Trump).

You had the Election finance investigation. Fluff and failed. You have the SDNY targeting Trump looking for crimes (illegal). You had the Mueller report (which the Dems used to gain midterm seats, knowing it was a lie), which ended with nothing but insinuated Trump "obstructed" by exercising his duties and questioning his motives. Russiagate was a lie peddled on the public. Now we have this nonsense, which is destined to also go nowhere but is intentionally timed. This is ignoring the multitude of lesser nonsense (judicial activism, slow walking nominees, strategic leaks, Kavanaugh smearing).

After these three years, if you don't agree with me (this is just obstructionist bullshit, supported by bias media), based on the results of these endless manufactured outrages and scandals, then nothing I say here will change your mind. But the Dems (and Americans in general) better hope these tactics finally fail and Trump is re-elected. If the tactics the Dems employed the 3 years have payoff, expect the other side to adopt them too - and look forward to a decade+ of your government being completely unworkable.

I'm 51% sure he's getting Impeached, but he won't be convicted by the Senate.

2020 will largely be decided by whoever runs against him, and even as a filthy liberal I have to say the Dem's current field is fuckin weird lol.

If the tactics the Dems employed the 3 years have payoff, expect the other side to adopt them too - and look forward to a decade+ of your government being completely unworkable.

So what else is new.

Eric wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:33 am

So what else is new.

While the dirtiness isn't new (Dems have labelled every republican candidate a racist, stupid and evil for decades and tried to impeach like the six last Republican presidents), it was brought to a new level. Mostly due to media, imo.

The effect on your population (hysteria) and the divisions it creates are not sustainable.

Democrats and Republicans have labeled the other side as x y & z since the dawn of time, that's nothing new.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dems- ... residents/ kinda misleading on your impeachment claim.

Also Pelosi's hand was pretty much forced on Impeaching Trump, do a google search of any left leaning forum or news outlet for the last 6 months before the whole Ukraine blow-up, nothing but liberals frothing at the mouth that Pelosi wouldn't impeach him(over got knows what) and her saying she wouldn't(because there was nothing they had enough evidence of to do so). Her hands were basically tied once the whistle-blower situation happened, she had to act.

Lastly the US has always been divided, it's more out in the open because of the internet and social media, still not as bad as it could be, at least public lynchings aren't a thing anymore!

Eric wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:36 pm

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dems- ... residents/ kinda misleading on your impeachment claim.

"Articles of impeachment were introduced against five of the six Republican presidents who have served since President Dwight D. Eisenhower"

Dude...come on. 5 outta 6 and my claim is "misleading"? That's from the biased Snopes too.

Also Pelosi's hand was pretty much forced on Impeaching Trump, do a google search of any left leaning forum or news outlet for the last 6 months before the whole Ukraine blow-up, nothing but liberals frothing at the mouth that Pelosi wouldn't impeach him(over got knows what) and her saying she wouldn't(because there was nothing they had enough evidence of to do so).

No, Nancy has been stoking this for 3 years, with her words, her lack of control of the extreme crew (AOC, Ilmar, etc) and her actions. If Dems wanted to Impeach, frothing extreme wing or otherwise, they would have done so on the Obstruction portion of the Mueller report. I mean, that would have failed too, but it would have had more justification than this Ukraine silliness. This is timed, for 2020, and when it fails in the senate, the Dems will paint the GOP as traitors protecting a traitor during the election lead up.

Lastly the US has always been divided, it's more out in the open because of the internet and social media,

Never like this. It different now and think the media is mostly to blame (stirring up hysteria over everything). Social media is making people retarded, on both sides, especially since social media are little echo chambers, with updoots, likes, hearts when you post an opinion acceptable in your echo chamber.

still not as bad as it could be, at least public lynchings aren't a thing anymore!

Well, the last lynching was what? 40 years ago? Cancel culture is the new public lynchings; not for race, but for having the wrong opinion. Is that better? If so, is that a good thing? *shrug*

Eric wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 13, 2019 9:33 am

2020 will largely be decided by whoever runs against him, and even as a filthy liberal I have to say the Dem's current field is fuckin weird lol.

I meant to address this but forgot.

"Weird"? Diplomatic word choice. That's what happens when the entire field is pandering to the new extreme Left, and it's going to bite them in the ass when they are out of the primaries. Unless the American public isn't paying attention, its going to lead to Trump re-election (I'm 50/50 on people paying attention vs apathy).

Gabbard is probably the only one not pandering to the crazies at this point -- and while I think she is probably the Dems best choice, it looks like the DNC is looking to crush her.

And for the record, I differentiate between liberal and Leftists. Leftists are fucking crazies. I lean liberal and have many traditional liberal values.

I found it amusing that Ann Coulter jumped onto the "Trump must go!" bandwagon. Especially when I heard her reasoning: it was that he implied in one of his tweets that orphaned children in the internment camps might actually be allowed to stay in the US.

The extreme hyperbole that she pushes that right-wing New York/LA elitist character of hers is amusing in a black comedic way.

Julius Seeker wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 14, 2019 12:40 pm

I found it amusing that Ann Coulter jumped onto the "Trump must go!" bandwagon. Especially when I heard her reasoning: it was that he implied in one of his tweets that orphaned children in the internment camps might actually be allowed to stay in the US.

The extreme hyperbole that she pushes that right-wing New York/LA elitist character of hers is amusing in a black comedic way.

Ann has been anti-Trump for nearly a year now, I think, and it's all about DACA. While I agree with her, in some respect, she is being incredibly inflexible. Decades of inaction by both parties have created the DACA problem and, to be fair, it needs to be addressed in a one-time way that is fair to the DACA recipients (and, yes, unfair to every other legal immigrant).

For his part, Trump has been willing to negotiate here. His position is that he is willing to solve this issue, but the Dems need to work with him to ensure this exact same thing doesn't again become an issue (in other words, pass legislation to ensures no future illegal migrant is entitled to citizenship just because they stayed long enough). Dems have been unwilling to do so, proving they are full of shit in the vocal support on the DACA issue. I hope they come to the table, but if there is no public pressure -- why should they? It puts the pressure on Trump to simply solve the issue without fixing the underlying problem.

As to orphans -- while I didn't see that tweet, that sounds like her. Totally inflexible. The worst part of this issue is the rampant exploitation of children due to current loopholes.

kali o. wrote:CAPS and a low quality shitpost. Other forums/social media have ruined you.

Yet you took the bait, ran with it, and a forum that's been dead since August 30th has a bit of discussion on it :p

/mission accomplished

Oh, and I don't do social media.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:41 pm

And for the record, I differentiate between liberal and Leftists. Leftists are fucking crazies. I lean liberal and have many traditional liberal values.

Political labels are pretty much meaningless now. Every comment section (which I'm dumb enough to get sucked into reading) on any news story I've read has people throwing around liberal/leftist/alt-left(wtf?)/right-winger/conservative/CON/commie/fascist, and based on their comments, they truly have no idea what the words they use mean - it just sounds like a pejorative to fling against the "other side", so it must be right.

Anyway...

Oracle wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:01 am

Oh, and I don't do social media.

Really? What else is there to do in Saskatchewan? Farm? Tip cows? Good for you though.

Political labels are pretty much meaningless now. Every comment section (which I'm dumb enough to get sucked into reading) on any news story I've read has people throwing around liberal/leftist/alt-left(wtf?)/right-winger/conservative/CON/commie/fascist, and based on their comments, they truly have no idea what the words they use mean - it just sounds like a pejorative to fling against the "other side", so it must be right.

Anyway...

I'm going to assume you mean "labels as a pejorative in the midst of arguing" are meaningless...because labels are pretty important for communication. I have conservative values (which share ground with traditional liberal values) and I am libertarian leaning on most individual issues. Those labels communicate an idea to you (a summary of my beliefs).

If I tell you I am commie, or progressive/left, I am communicating to you that I am a retard.

As for alt-left, since you seem confused about it, apparently it means the anarcho-commie-antifag types.

Alt-right is also a relatively new term. Despite the media deciding alt-right belong to Richard Spencer (he coined it, he coined it!) and Nazi's around 2016, it was freely used by those on the right that simply didn't want to lump themselves in with the traditional right (Ron Paul / Trump types) in order to self describe / label. It was fascinating to watch that term change and evolve based on MSM declarations.

PS - How the FUCK, does Trudeau get voted back in after all his scandals and idiocy? Stupid damn Canadians.

Trump's political career may or may not survive the impeachment process. What it is increasingly unlikely to survive is the next election.

Let's recall - partially as a result of these scandals, and apparently the national Trump Fatigue in general, Republicans just lost governor's races in *Kentucky* and *Louisiana*. That should be a bright red warning sign in these bright red states to a party increasingly losing its humanity and involved in the worship of money over humanity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammon

Note that I am not particularly defending Biden or even the impeachment process here. Trump's done a lot worse than the Ukraine call, and the things he deserves impeachment for - his Russian-mob connections to Felix Sater and et cetera - he's not actually being impeached for. And as the liberal-leaning independent I am - I'm quite tired of Uncle Joe and his family's quiet secrets. He had one son who died of a hard-drug overdose and his other son's all-American job at a Ukranian natgas company - which the Democrats are bizarrely trying fervently to defend - smacks deeply of CIA shenanigans, as anyone who understands the situation in Ukraine knows that the CIA is all over the place trying to stop Russia from taking it back over again, and I hope I don't have to explain to anyone here how tired I am of CIA manipulation of the world - America's reputation internationally is in tatters. I *do* do social media, and have many international connections and friends these days -and America is *reviled* internationally now because the CIA can't practice honesty or integrity on a bet these days, if it ever could.

I won't defend Trump either, though. This whole diplomacy-via-Twitter, President-Shitpost thing needs to go. I spent several years waiting for him to body his promise to be "so Presidential everyone would get bored", and he's not going to do it - so, happy trails to him. He's doing a shitty job at a job he never wanted but is too puffed up on vanity to resign - so, he can enjoy being the victim of the same garbage he's been engaged in himself for years. He became President via exactly this kind of nonsense; so having it thrown back at him couldn't happen to a nicer real estate mobster as far as I'm concerned at this point. I gave him more of a chance than most liberals ever would.

I'm quite happy to watch Biden and Trump savage themselves to pieces over this scandal in the hopes that it will open up the field next year for people who still have a soul. Not loving all the Democratic options generally - Warren's universal medical care plan is making even me wince at the cost, and Sanders had a heart attack just *running* this year - but, still, it's important to have someone who still has some semblance of a heart left up there. What I really want is someone with Warren's priority set, *minus* the $70-trillion dollar megaprogram.

I'd take Williamson myself if I could, though I probably won't be given the chance to.

Replay wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 18, 2019 8:28 am

Let's recall - partially as a result of these scandals, and apparently the national Trump Fatigue in general, Republicans just lost governor's races in *Kentucky* and *Louisiana*. That should be a bright red warning sign in these bright red states to a party increasingly losing its humanity and involved in the worship of money over humanity.

Well, two things:

Trump fatigue. That's what the Dems are hoping for, but throwing a public tantrum (and misleading the public) for years is not a tactic that either the Dems or Media should be rewarded for. In fact, they should be utterly castigated (in a perfect world) as that is far more dangerous than an uncouth President that likes twitter and being a braggart.

With respect to Kentucky and Louisiana (which I understand was the media narrative), folks fail to mention they also won more seats in the Louisiana House. The governor in Louisiana was an incumbent (with pro gun / abortion stances) and barely squeeked through; meanwhile it was red results for Secretary of State, 4:1 in the Senate and 14:9 in the House. I don't think we should read too much into it.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:08 pm

Well, two things:

Trump fatigue. That's what the Dems are hoping for, but throwing a public tantrum (and misleading the public) for years is not a tactic that either the Dems or Media should be rewarded for. In fact, they should be utterly castigated (in a perfect world) as that is far more dangerous than an uncouth President that likes twitter and being a braggart.

Oh my god, we're actually going to have a civil discussion for once?

The reason I can't agree is that they all do this. I absolutely agree that this particular impeachment call is an overblown mess - particularly without substantive evidence that the Bidens are *not* engaged in espionage-related wrongdoing in Ukraine - but it seems to be standing in for all the stuff the Dems *wish* they could actually impeach for, much of which is quite real. (See again, under - Felix Sater, longstanding Trump friend/business associate and convicted member of the Russian mob.)

The Republican tantrums are just as loud in the other direction - remember when Clinton got impeached not because of Whitewater or any of the actual shit he did that hurt the nation, but for having an affair with his hot intern in the Oval Office?

Washington is a bunch of...I don't want to say huge babies, but I kind of want to. People who want to govern aren't always the most mature. And they will all take any excuse to drag the other side to pieces. The crab-bucket syndrome is real.

kali o. wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:08 pm

With respect to Kentucky and Louisiana (which I understand was the media narrative), folks fail to mention they also won more seats in the Louisiana House. The governor in Louisiana was an incumbent (with pro gun / abortion stances) and barely squeeked through; meanwhile it was red results for Secretary of State, 4:1 in the Senate and 14:9 in the House. I don't think we should read too much into it.

I think we should. Red states don't elect blue governors all that often.

Trump Fatigue is real. I know countless people who are pretty fatigued by the man. They are all liberal, but you had better bet they're not missing a beat on Election Day next year - and that's usually a problem for liberalism, which does not get out its vote as reliably as conservatives do.

Trump Fatigue hasn't been real for Republicans up to this point, but several high-profile Republicans are now feeling after these races that he's a liability and have been speaking out, saying he's anathema to the middle because of all the shitposting, basically.

For what it's worth - Lord knows I am no one to criticize anyone for poorly regarded Internet posts. I'm not the *President*, though. You'd think he could muster a certain level of "I ascended to the highest post in the land and am important enough not to have to listen to these people." It's really important for the job.

As another thought on this entire sorry series of scandals:

If the President would like to stop getting snakebitten, then he needs to stop filling his Cabinet and Administration with snakes.

I am among the liberals *most* willing to listen to the current right-wing theories that the Russia smears are just that - a hoax perpetuated essentially by rogue elements in FBI/CIA in order to smear anyone not in the Clinton-Bush-Rockefeller crime syndicate and/or not loyal to their aims.

Watching this contingent smear Tulsi Gabbard because she is a genuinely anti-war candidate, for instance, has been repellent on the extreme. I have very few concerns that Congresswoman Gabbard is a Russian asset.

But this hoax, if it exists, is being perpetuated not by a secret cabal of "liberal pedophile Democrats" but by a highly *bipartisan* cabal of post-Iran-Contra neoconservatives and neoliberals, centered primarily around the Rockefeller Foundation, who profited highly from the PNAC's "Revolution in Military Affairs" - and who need the public not to question anything about that particular doubling of the U.S. Defense budget. Rudolph Giuliani is almost certainly that cabal's main man in Washington right now - and Trump can't seem to see it, and if he does he doesn't seem to care, because Rudy's *his* pet snake - or so he thinks, anyway.

As best I am aware, there is indeed corruption at FBI/CIA, and bad corruption at that. It is the kind of corruption that is very, very skilled at making up a lot of sleazy bullshit to wreck anyone who might challenge it; that's what many of these folks do for a living, after all. They're supposed to be doing it to America's enemies - but America's enemies seem to have co-opted many of these folks through bribery these days, as Americans - particularly corrupt intelligent personal - love mammon and corrupt wealth and will sell their own country and their own mothers to the devil to get it.

Thus far, despite his rhetoric, Donald Trump has *not* significantly made a dent in that corruption. And I have my increasing fears that he is up to that task, because he doesn't understand the shape of the problem.

Eric wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 19, 2019 1:52 pm

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/im ... id=rrpromo

Nearly 48% support among Americans for impeachment as of this post's writing.

That's rough for Mr. Trump.

Clinton's impeachment poll support never got that high, and he generally had 60%+ approval ratings even *during* his impeachment proceedings.

News of the morning: Sondberg seems to be flipping on Trump like he works at a burger joint in between patronage ambassadorships.

I guess the five Trump staffers already in jail are not improving his fortitude?

Also, Trump apparently can't even read a prepared denial of quid pro quo without a handwritten set of notes in Sharpie.

Welcome to amateur night at the Apollo. Zelenskiy's name is also badly misspelled.

Can someone at least get this man a competent set of handlers who can hand him a fountain pen from time to time?

Two further developments in the case:

- Republican Congressmen are increasingly targeting Hunter Biden, filing a formal request to Treasury for any and all documents relating to "suspicious activity" regarding Hunter's stint on the Burisma board:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1XW254

-Lev Parnas, indicted former associate of Trump and Giuliani, is flipping on the Trump Administration as well, claiming to have hard evidence of a quid pro quo regarding Devin Nunes' role in the Ukraine scandal:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/lev-parna ... ission-cnn

Analysis on where it's all going:

With evidence that Hunter has fathered a child out of wedlock in Arkansas with Lunden Alexis Roberts, I expect him to become a serious focus of investigations in the case shortly, as Republicans seek to establish that Trump's request for investigation on the Bidens was legitimate. A lot is probably going to come down to how much wrongdoing, if any, is uncovered on Hunter's part - if evidence of serious quid pro quo is established for the Bidens, and/or evidence that Hunter's position there was connected to CIA manipulations of the region, the entire impeachment process probably collapses. If, by contrast, Hunter is mostly cleared of wrongdoing, Trump's position becomes extremely weak and impeachment is likely to continue.

https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/201 ... as-womans/

Pretty serious allegations from WSJ:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-en ... 1574652499

Two associates of Rudy Giuliani tried to recruit a top Ukrainian energy official in March in a proposed takeover of the state oil-and-gas company, describing the company’s chief executive and the then-U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch as part of “this Soros cartel” working against President Trump.

“You’re a Republican, right?” Andrew Favorov, the head of natural gas for state-run Naftogaz, recalled the men, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, asking him, after their reference to investor and Democratic donor George Soros. “We want you to be our guy.”...

Mr. Favorov said he was bewildered by Messrs. Parnas and Fruman’s pitch to stage a takeover of Naftogaz and put Mr. Favorov in place as CEO. On one hand, the pair appeared to know little about the natural gas business; on the other it was clear to him they had significant political connections.

“They don’t teach you how to deal with this in business school,” Mr. Favorov said.

This weakens the Trump Administration's position significantly at this point - even if the Bidens are subsequently exposed for their own quid pro quo or political scheming - because it's now clear that the Trump Administration has been quietly maneuvering for a potentially illegal and certainly unethical Republican takeover of Naftogaz in much the same way that others are concerned that Hunter Biden's position on the Burisma board may have to do with a Democratic coup there.

And, Hunter's position so far has had no establishing evidence of that kind of political maneuvering - which is not to say it didn't happen, in fact I'd be relatively surprised if it *wasn't* the same kind of maneuver - still, the nation is still waiting on hard evidence of that, whereas the evidence is now exposed in Giuliani's case.

All this means Trump and Giuliani's credibility to attack the Bidens on it all just took a big hit. If Giuliani and Trump insist that their own actions were defensible, then Hunter Biden's would be as well; if Hunter's actions are not defensible, then Giuliani and Trump's aren't either - and this is the POTUS and his chief lawyer we're talking about, not the son of a former VP who currently holds no elected office in America.

It's all starting to feel very "All The President's Men"; and one way or another, Trump's fate is starting to look very Nixonian - impeachment proceedings, certainly, though unlike Nixon he's arguably far too combative and prideful to resign. As many analysts are saying - the most likely outcome is that Trump's impeachment process does begin in earnest and passes the Democrat-controlled House, before failing in the Senate - but that the amount of information exposed, including his tax returns if his appeals on that fail, leaves him in a terrible position regarding next year's election.